Battlerifles Accuracy ?

I assume those stats are a mistake ? Looks like somebody forgot to add another 0 at the battlerifles accuracy stats. There is no reason most LMG's or even carbines have better ADS accuracy than the quote "accurate [ES BR] semi-automatic battle rifle etc ...".



Not sure if it was always like that, but somewhere around the latest patches I noticed some laughable accuracy at range with this thing which I cannot remember before.

The merc has 50% less vertical recoil too...

I wouldn't go so far as to say 'most'. I agree it's a little silly that accurate carbines and LMG's have better CoF than BR's or even on par with sniper rifles (I'm looking at you Gauss SAW) but when you factor in damage profile, rate of fire and recoil you will find that the BR's still dominate at longer ranges.

There's also no reason why there should be pistols that do twice the damage of battle rifles either. Battle rifles are pretty useless in this game.

What the tooltip says is true, the battle rifle is more accurate than carbines and most LMGs.

You don't just look into those stats alone, the most important stat that matters about weapons' accuracy is rate of fire, moving CoF accuracy and if the weapon is semi auto, the time it takes to reset back to the original position. The rate of fire is low, so you deal less with CoF bloom, meaning you have more consistent accuracy, the moving accuracy (The only accuracy that matters) is superior to the Mercenary and the reset time is solid.

It's still superior at range and has better accuracy than a carbine/LMG both in VR and in practice. If the other accuracy modifiers got buffed more, it would be pretty damn OP because it would be a legal aimbot.

Exuse me, what the hell was that ? The mercenary was just a random example for a carbine, it is not even considerable accurate compared to say the SAW or the AC X11 or the reaper DMR. All the important stats you listed as in reset time, rate of fire, recoil on top of the accuracy are actually BETTER for the LMG, carbine and AS I just mentioned.

On top of that, of course not only the ADS stand moving acc is important, the other ones are as well. If you see an enemy from behind, there is no reason to A D A D like you would when facing somebody directly after rushing around a corner.

As it stands, a SAW is magnitudes better at long distance than a BR. I would even go as far as saying that an AC X11 is better at long distance than a BR. Long distance fighting may not happen much in PS2 but at least give a dedicated range rifle better ranged capabilities than dedicated close-midrange weapons. Still, I can only imagine somebody forgot a 0 at the accuracy stats. Should have been 0.01 instead of 0.1

If it were up to me, the Aim Accuracy across the board for all weapons would be 0.0, then adjust recoil to compensate.

But we have a bunch of roleplayers in PS2 that want Sanctuaries to get their wizard hat and robe on. And would prefer the game to be more based on dice rolls than skill.

A little luck factor is ok with me

I dont ropleplay

The BR are not okay

The recoil between shots is surprisingly nasty for distance shots

They dont really do that much more damage are are essentially a handicap up close

No seriously

When im using my warden i switch to the Desperado when im going to be close to enemies because the battle rifle will be a failure

UNDERBARREL SHOTGUN

and grenade launcher

I love being an arty scumbag

Wot players will know what im talking about

Depends.. if we're going for something a little bit realistic, the amount would be so minuscule that it wouldn't be a factor at the engagement ranges. I'm not a heavy advocate of realism in sci-fi games. I'm usually on the level of believability. I can deal with gravity dropping us at a rounded at 9m/s or 10m/s (its actually 9.8m/s in PS2 and Landmark.. I've tested it). But 5m or 15m /s would make everyone go "wat?"

The CoF while ADSing does this to me everytime I fire. I've fired a variety of firearms.. and it feels like blunderbusses are more accurate than many PS2 weapons. I don't expect that firearms in PS2 mimic RL firearms exactly. Its a scifi game, things are going to be different. But I expect the basic behaviors to be similar. Just like we expect our characters to drop off a 10m ledge and expect to hit the ground in about a second.. not instantly, and not in 3 seconds.

I agree. Its not just recoil though. I mean truth be told, I don't mind the recoil of the BR's that much. But the issue I have with BR's in CQC is that I'm not hitting. The issue BR should have in CQC is that they don't have the same TTK's as CQC based weapons. Not inaccuracy.

But removing CoF is a pipe-dream. People like the idea that a diceroll will make or break a situation. Its an 'equalizer' against better players (so is a coin flip deciding an alert, but I'll leave it alone). So one idea I have is adding a three round burst to BR's. This would give them a bit of flexibility in CQC without getting an advantage.

Shot-for-shot, the Battle Rifle's accuracy stats are horrible for what's supposed to be a med/long range weapon.

• All 200- and 167-damage automatics have better standing ADS COF (0 and .03)
• All Burst ARs and Carbines have better moving ADS COF (.15 for NC/TR, .125 for VS)
• Almost all ARs have better recoil recovery (18)
• All 200- and 167-damage automatics have better horizontal recoil
• About half of all automatic weapons have better Tolerance.
• All automatics have lower bloom per shot. Even the SAW is only .07 (compared to the BR's .1)

So on paper, the BR's accuracy looks like total crap.

The BR's saving grace is its semi-auto nature. Almost all of the above disadvantages can be overcome by letting the weapon settle between shots. The problem is, doing so noticeably lowers your DPS, and the BR's DPS is crap to begin with. At 1387, it's one of the worst in the game. To my knowledge, of all primary AI weapons, only the Lasher and Phasshift in SA mode are lower.

The only real accuracy buff it needs is its moving ADS COF. It's just slightly too big for the range it otherwise seems to work best at (75-125m). Buff that and give them a slight damage boost and BRs might actually become competitive weapons.

This guy^

What do you think of a damage increase to 334 within its max damage range?

Ive actually got alot to question on those stats as well but thats not really important

I think 334 damage would be perfect.

I'd be a little concerned about Infils complaining that it'd make BRs outright better weapons than SA Scout Rifles. But 334 damage on a BR would only give a 2-headshot kill out to 60m, whereas SA Scouts can 2-HSK out to any range.

Plus, the Infil's cloak is a huge advantage when it comes to med/long range combat.

All you have to do is look at how much better SA Scouts and SA Snipers perform now to realize BRs have a lot of catching up to do.

The below graphs compare the Nyx (VS SA Scout), Phantom (VS CQC SA Sniper), and Eidolon (VS BR). Both the Nyx and Phantom absolutely destroy the Eidolon's performance. Even after the January BR buffs, it's not even close.


http://ps2oraclestats.com/?stat=kph&weapon1=26007&weapon2=26002&weapon3=26008


http://ps2oraclestats.com/?stat=kpu&weapon1=26007&weapon2=26002&weapon3=26008

Could someone explain KPU for me. I know it is kills per unique, I know uniques are 'unique killers of the particular weapon', I just don't understand what this means. For instance, if the Nyx has around 20KPU and Eidolon 8KPU, what exactly is that showing?

if 100 people use a particular weapon and get at least one kill and collectively net 2000 kills, dividing kills by users (2000 divided by 100 = 20) then the KPU is 20.

KPU is essentially a measure of average kills per user of a specific weapon.

That's what I guessed, but it seems a weird stat. Mostly it is to do with how long someone played for presumably. Yes, that might even out to an extent for high usage weapons, but not necessarily (e.g. maybe dedicated snipers will play with their SR for a long time whereas LMG/Carbine/AR users switch regularly depending on situation). I'm struggling to see why you would want to look at KPU rather than KPM which intrinsically corrects for how long someone played. I'd find KDR (kills per death for people using the weapon) a more useful complement to KPM since it gives you a different kind of information. KPU just seems like a poor man's KPM.

0.0 ADS stand/crouch acc + Max DMG 300 @ 15m to Min DMG 225 @ 75m and this weapon would be viable.

300 max dmg might be an odd number considering most other dmg numbers are divisible by 1000 or 900, but then again we have odd exceptions like the 280 min dmg of semi auto scout rifles ( which should have the same acc buff as well ). This damage model would make it a 2 headhit kill up to 55 meters, which sounds reasonable for the role of the weapon.

Keep it cumbersome with it high recoil and low recover time, it is not supposed to be a tapfire-lmg copy with more damage afterall.

That´s fine, they must nerf it before they can give it to Light Assaults

334 damage is for 3 shot kills close up as well as 2 shot head shots

The recoil is the primary reason why this weapon is still bad at a distance. Its not efficient for killing at long distances and can be rivaled at medium ranges to auto weapons

Bringing the damage up to 334 would set it on par with semi-auto scout rifles though, which have to pay for the high damage with slower firerate and more bloom than BR's. Giving this thing 334 max damage would be too much IMO.