I've seen a lot of negative threads about this gun, and decided to try going for the auraxium, and was surprised to say the least. Even got myself a good number of 15+ streaks during my auraxium. Gun feels a lot like the gauss saw, and keeps that nice 3 headshots to kill at any range 167-143 dam. I got the auraxium in a somewhat decent time (8.5h -> 2.26 kpm) and had a blast using the gun while I was auraxing it. What's the reason most people seem to dislike this gun? Is it because of the way it handles? Do people confuse it with the flare in terms of how the weapon is used? Or is it simply because of the lower DPS compared to the gauss saw?
Its a mixture of things. The Ursa has an operational sweet spot where it can out perform most VS LMGs due to its excellent control. The problem is that it loses this advantage further out due to the recoil characteristics, and the low DPS up close is hard to compensate for. People also don't understand what makes the Flare so good, when in reality its actually a slightly below-par LMG. But the way it handles tends to mesh up with most people's behaviors. The Pulsar LSW actually outperforms the the Flare in control, but since the 167 dmg tier requires fewer hits, it sort of masks the DPS difference. I've used the Ursa pretty extensively, but I've stopped using it recently due to a subtle change in how I can use it. I'm not sure if its a stealth twek, or if players are just better at shooting back, but I can't get nearly the kind of crazy range I used to with it.
The Ursa is sort of the Razor/Cougar of LMGs. Extremely good handling, below-average DPS. It has a noticeable handling edge over the Flare and pretty much any other VS LMG really. People may also hate it for the price. 1000 certs where the Flare/Polaris are 250 and the LSW is 100.
8.5hours to Auraxium!? It took me a full 24 to knock out the EM6. Are you just diving into big crowds and taking as many people out as possible every life?
Ursa is better than any 143/652 weapons: it is as stable, but it damage tier makes it even more interesting at range and don't needs adv. foregrip to be competitive. A nice mid-long range weapons. It doesn't have the skill ceiling of the TMG & Gauss saw, but the skill floor is lower. It's a friendly user and effective mid-long range weapon. The VS version of the T16/T5AMC/Cougar/Razor for HA.
My personal gripe w/ the Ursa has not so much to do with the weapon itself as it does with the weapons that straddle its effective range on either side. It's not a bad weapon on its own, but it's just not distinct enough compared to the Flare and Eidolon to stick out and take ownership of its role on the battlefield. With practice, the Flare is almost as good at long range but significantly better at short-medium range. And it's 750 certs cheaper. You get maybe an extra 25m or so effective range with the Ursa. But its RoF is so low for a 167-damage weapon that you'll lose the flinch war much of the time against most of the other automatic weapons out there at short-medium range. It turns the Ursa into a niche, long range weapon since if you want anything else you should just go with the Flare. But even in its niche it's not so special because at long range it gets bested by the Eidolon. Sure, The Eidolon has a higher skill floor, but once you put in the legwork and learn how to use it the Ursa just can't compete with it at long range. And like the Flare, the Eidolon is only 250 certs.
EVERYTHING else is better then the 143/652 weapons. Those weapons are the lowest DPS by a wide margin, and require exceptional control at long range the make up that difference (particularly the AMC, NS-11A, and Bull). Weapons in that damage model that aren't designed for long range are all crap.... the Rhino, NS-11C, EM1, Polaris, and to a lesser extent, the Auto Scout rifles. 143/750 and 167/650 are considered the base line DPS for the majority of weapons in the game. Note that no 167 tier weapon fires that fast, which means any of these weapons without the control factor is well below average.
I personally love the Polaris for it's handling, and the NS-15M isn't bad either with even worse DPS. So that's apparently not everything. The URSA is actually a pretty decent gun in it's element, but it's weakness close in and the unusual damage model (from a VS pow) make it less liked that it may deserve. What it deserves is another matter.
Because from what I can tell, it doesn't do anything that Flare doesn't do better. Flare has more DPS, less recoil, and more attachments. It has lower bullet velocity but 600 is still decent enough for it to hardly be a problem. Urse has faster reload, but who needs fast reload on a 167 damage gun with 75 bullets in the mag?
Weird had never heard anyone say anything bad about the ursa until this thread - I see it used and reccomended fairly commonly, and auraxed it a looooong time ago in a relatively short period of time. It does admittedly have a learning curve, which is likely where any criticism would come from, and the rewards are not as black and white as most people are capable of handling, but it's very solid in midrange even if you're fairly incompetent, so likely that's where the praise comes from. I haven't used it in awhile though, least not since the hva buffs, so it may even better than I remember. The ns-15 is my usual go-to atm for where I'd normally use the ursa.
Rush and play aggressively, it's all about killing things. However, you also have to make sure you don't die, so striking the balance between killing things and staying alive can be tough. Normally 1kpm is not very difficult, 2 gets a bit harder, but it really starts to get hard at 2.5kpm +, very hard to position flawlessly so you can stay alive very long and kill a lot of things.
Ursa has faster reload, better horizontal recoil, better horizontal tolerance, lower vertical recoil, lower FSRM, and better velocity. The better question is what the Flare does better, and the answer to that appears to be "27 RPM and SPA" because the Ursa wins everything else. Oh and the Flare is way cheaper, that does actually matter.
That I do. But I can't ******* get to your MLG Score: 11556 . Hell your heashot ratio is insane :/ Heck even your "Power" stat is 4 times mine. I wonder how much does being on different servers and different faction and different game starts count to that. Your stats only probably worse than BigIronRanger's alt's on Connery.
The real problem with the Ursa is that it's complete trash. It looks reasonably okay in paper when you compare it to the Flare, better recoil stats for slightly lower RPM, but that only works if you don't take in to account that the Flare is also awful. VS 167 damage LMGs suck, plain and simple. The Flare is in every way worse then the SAW S and the TMG. Higher first shot recoil, worse horizontal, higher tolerance, lower velocity. You get a tiny buff on vertical recoil but it's just not enough. It's also a massive downgrade compared to the GD-22S which combines predictable recoil with the smallest first shot multiplier, the best COF stats, and the fastest reload in class. Then you've got the Anchor which outclasses the Flare in damage in addition to being better in every stat except mag size. The FSRM is higher but the base recoil is lower to begin with, so all things considered the NC CQC LMG outclasses the Flare at range. The Flare would be a shoe-in for the worst 167 LMG if it weren't for the other contender, the Ursa. The Ursa starts on a bad foot when you consider the fact that it has more horizontal recoil than all other factions' 167 LMGs while also having the lowest damage output. In return for that kick in the pants you get nothing. FSRM shared with other NC guns, vertical recoil only the lowest by 0.005, nothing special in the COF department, and velocity that only beats out other options by a few percent. If they bumped it to 577 RPM today it would still only be comparable to the SAW S and TMG, maybe a tiny bit better. Long story short VS loses in the 167 category. All is not lost, though. We've still got the Orion for CQC, the SVA88 for mid ranges, and best of all, the NS15M, which completely outclasses the Ursa in its role as the low damage, super accurate LMG. You get similar DPS, lightning fast reload, 0.75 ADS speed, lowest moving COF, the same velocity, significantly lower vertical recoil (which negates the higher FSRM), and to top it all off, directional pull which makes it predictable instead of random. In game this works out to a gun that's much more mobile (and as a result, viable in CQC) and also just as likely to land short bursts at range. To the Ursa's credit it's better at landing two- or three- round bursts at extreme ranges, but to that I say "so what?" It's an LMG and you're a heavy. If you're having to tap fire you're already out of your element. Heck, if you're using 167 as VS then you're already going for suboptimal at best. Stats-wise, good job with the Ursa. For me it was a big downgrade to the usual. I got the NS15M and Ursa back to back and the difference was very clear. I took 7 hours for the NS15 compared to 10 for the Ursa, ran a 7 KD compared to 3, and had a few percentage points higher accuracy.
Ursa is one of my favorite LMGs, not that I like LMGs in general (I'm one of those SMG Heavies), but it's got a niche (mostly shooting at ESF from 300m and actually landing enough hits to annoy them).
Auraxiuming it now. 270-something kills to go, I'm seriously considering taking a break and using another weapon. It's just so lackluster it's astonishing. The most success I've had with this weapon has been with burst-hipfiring in CQC, which gives you some idea as to how bad it is at its intended role. Seriously, it's outclassed at any range by the NC's EM1 (which I love, by the way, but since so many people hate it it's worth mentioning). I have no idea why I spent 1000 certs on it. I was under some misguided impression that it was more accurate than the Flare, and that the lower RPM couldn't possibly hurt. I guess sometimes I make bad decisions. However I have learned something extremely important which is that if you use reflex sights on it you won't be able to hit the broad side of a barn. Ironsights have made it a solid 40% more accurate at range
You just need to realize that the bullet goes toward the bottom edge of the circle on the reflex sights, and that the circle itself shifts side to side when you strafe, but the aim point doesn't. Once these things are compensated for, it's just as accurate as any other sight of the same magnification, but with a less cluttered view.
It's supposed to be the VS's method of fighting at 250 M , and 300m where the enemy is at the edge of render range and is taking potshots at you with his LMG, either semi auto or bursting from auto or even full auto It doesn't provide the best option at extreme range?
