SOE why so much HATE vs. TR?

Especially when the patch was a buff for the weapon to do it's intended role.

Not a single word out of this wall of text is valid evidence of an imbalance. Your entire argument is "we deserve a buff because we haven't gotten one". Again, you forgot to bring any actual evidence to back up your argument.

I must have missed something big. To those that claim the NC were buffed, if you would link the patch notes please. I really only recall the vanguard projectile velocity buff, which the prowler also received in addition to a damage buff, and the flinch change which was a balancing change, not a buff.

I really want to know why did they nerf the t7 chain gun?
Nobody ever complained about it, it was already bad, everyone could kill better with the t9 carv.
But in gu 07 they nerfed it so bad that the weapon become useless to do what it was supposed to do, give suppression fire.
With the huge nerf on the fire from the hip mode, you must allways aim before firing.
So, 1 second spin up time was already bad, but now you must spend 0,6 second more to aim down the sights!?!?!?
I think it is the only weapon that got double nerfed in this game, had already received a -20% dps nerf on the game release.

Can you blame them? Every week there is another QQ thread about how under power their specific faction is. If they needed to pay attention to all of these (small but vocal minority).. they wouldn't get anything done. Some people even suggest the SOE buff one faction over another because of personal preferences...like they would risk their job for something that trivial. These patch notes expert need to spend a little less time on the forum and more in the game. SOE got all the statistic, if there was a glaring imbalance its much easier for them to spot than the average player.

Yup .. I'm also sure a lot of the same people also spam their nerf/buff calls on Reddit, PSU, Twitter, Facebook, personal emails to SOE Dev's etc ..

< Clearly uses a Gauss Saw :3

I agree with you to some degree, the thing is, some very obvious things in the past throughout beta and up until now have gotten through QA, through logical thinking and several other community driven sources.

I'm also pretty sure that the devs only read a very very small fraction of these forums, they got mods and PR guys to filter out most of the nonesense and stupide QQ, though those guys are never mentioned.

Right now on live, are 2 features I have been pointing out since introduction of them to the PTS ... something that someone with some logic can easily reproduce and is imbalanced.

Those 2 features are actually still not even mentioned in any form in any patch notes what so ever.

Lock on missile facing checks for the missile instead of the shooter(unlike all other weapons), this with the addition of the now latest patch to curve lock ons allows to bypass frontal armor from almost any angle within 80-250m towards a Tank.



The next one is Reverse Steering for Tanks, they now have a option to invert Reverse Steering for Tanks, which by the way unchecks itselves every time you log in.

Unchecked it makes reverse steering consistent for Tanks, but you lose a lot of agility while doing so! If you check, which you have to do every time you log in. You gain a significant boost over anybody that does not know about this ...



Both of those are still on live if you want to test them out ...

I have faith in SOE that they check everything before making those changes and think about all the possible effects of what could happen ... yet I way to often come across that, even with constructive feedback given from us(I also did ingame reports on the PTS) those things occur.

During beta I understand the idea behind them over nerfing and over buffing stuff to get a rough idea. But we are long past beta ... they now should have a more rough idea of what is to strong and what not.

Proof that the TR get the shaft;

When it comes to basic weapons, I always enjoy putting forth a comparison of heavy assault guns, the iconic LMG behind that pesky shield.

Maximum potential damage in a stock TR LMG; 50,100

Maximum potential damage in a stock NC LMG; 80,000

Add any modifiers to these values as you may see fit :3

13% noob level accuracy?

TR - 6,513 Damage - 5 kills in a full loadout ; NC - 10,400 Damage - 9 Kills in a full loadout

20% Adept level accuracy?

TR - 8 Kills in a full loadout ; NC - 14 Kills in a full loadout

BuzzCutPsycho Level of Accuracy?

TR - 13 Kills in a full loadout ; NC - 21 Kills in a full loadout


Don't even get started on how this gets disproportionately DISGUSTING when you consider head-shots.

That's paid for in reload speeds for you guys.

You agreed with the OP.

I thought the reaver was the best ESF, fastest and most maneuverable.

And now it's broken in a new way, so do nothing?

NC max is happy you think so.

Unintentional balance mechanics that are unwanted are in fact analogous to bugs. So do we presume that everything is as intended?

Actually the EM6 because it's a better weapon. But you wouldn't know anything about that, seeing as how your opinion is probably entirely based off of word of mouth and forum whining.

Please read two posts up as I have done my homework :3

Also I should of went for the more obvious statement of "Clearly Uses a Dual Hacksaw MAX"

I also agree with you that the EM6 is a superior weapon over the stock Gauss-saw.

While it does not boast much more DPS in raw BPM it does bring to the table a lower unmodified vertical recoil, lower first shot recoil, comparable clip size of 100 shots, faster reload speed, and the bullet speed is only slightly lower.

The only "Flaw" I can think of, is that you don't get quite as strong of a headshot.


...Not that I would know about that.

but they didn't get much of the buff part into the update. not everything in the patch notes was released

Just for throwing out numbers to the point of ad nauseum.

While it is unrealistic to expect a person to maintain the exact same accuracy with a Gauss SAW as they would when operating the EM6, the variation in stopping power is amusing. Fully stocked an EM6 would kill 10 players with 20% accuracy, this is accounting for 25% more HP as well which I forgot to mention in the previous numbers. Therefore it still outperforms TR weaponry when it comes to packing the punches. :3


Trying to consider just how exactly TR weapons could be brought into a more competitive role is not as simple as just rattling off the numbers. Any and every change will have a heavy impact and knowing what would appropriately balance them baffles me.

I certainly do not agree with TR weapons needing to pack a harder punch, that wouldn't make sense according to their thematic design. Small changes I would be happy with would include number of bullets per clip, and certain weapons having their rate of fire reviewed as the T9 CARV and MSW-R only boast a meager 750 RPM (This is the TR, not the VS), and the TMG-50 is an appalling 577 RPM making it no better then a GD-22S with a slower reload speed, and harder recoil, but at least it has 50% more ammo to make up for all the time you will miss more often.

Keeping the numbers realistic, I wouldn't bawk at a small and I do mean small decline in bullet damage, but compensated with enough rate of fire with manageable recoil that it still applies a competitive DPS. This would accomplish that "Suppression Fire" style I keep hearing about.

Drastic changes I would love to see... TR weapon with an adv.forward grip on an LMG, how about some compensation? Our options for mitigating vertical recoil are appalling. TR with adv.grip and comp? I can hear the screams of "Hell No" before I can even post.

Did someone just really complain about the mossie? Really?
Whenever I think these forums become boring a gem like that pops up and surprises me.

The problem with TR is that they think that if they're not the best at something that means that they are underpowered. The readjustments to balance over the past few months has brought the factions mostly in line. Losing ammo reserves is apparently the biggest "buff" you can muster up to complain about? It's a non-issue in most combat situations.

The TR have a low skill ceiling on most weapons, extra magazine size, very good accuracy even during sustained fire, and a good AI tank, and a fast and maneuverable ESF.

This is by far one of the worst attempts at numbers on this forum so far. It's so laughably bad, it borders on satire. Kudos, I laffed.

TR is fine- still on the top in most metrics.

If weapons or vehicles were underperforming they would be underperforming.

As a TR player HE needed a nerf, How ever for farming infantry it is still the best choice. It seems pretty balanced to me, still getting used to the VS changes i seem to get mowed down by them every time but probably cos i am still assuming they have the other damage drop off.

The only thing that really baffles me is why both NC and VS get a 167 Damage Carbine and a 845 ROF Carbine yet the TR are missing both and the carbines for us are almost identical to each other =/

Jeez so the TR are a bunch of skilless whiners? Puleease.

NC and VS whine incessantly about how up they are because the skilless guys are klliing them?

The problem with the TR is that they are fighting a bunch of dudes that look like transformers and the other from some kind of kinky purple spandex party....