Orion Revamp.

I thought we already had the Ursa and the Flare for long-range low-ROF super-accuracy?

True, we don't know what instrumentation they have employed to achieve the damage it does.
We just assume that it all works out.
Even still, the physics of plasma and high velocity impacts remain.

You simply cannot impart the amount of energy implyed by "230 damage", which is nearly the damage of a 20 mm anti tank round, the ones that the Basilisk (250 dmg) fires.
The biggest bullet in this image is the ones were talking about.


A potmark of surface damage caused by energy convection through the watery tissues of a living human simply cannot do that much damage.
Not unless the rounds are either the size of basket balls, or are so powerful that they'd be causing nuclear fission with the air immediately after contact with a solid object (both of which we know they do not, as we can see their size, and the entire surface of auraxis is not a desolate wasteland. Also, VS would have won long ago if their soldiers were out there with point and click nuclear devices, so we know they are not capable of generating solar level heat in their plasma).

So yeah, long story short, VS are not taking the NC's faction trait of high damage.
It has no basis in science, or in balance (As if it wasn't obvious from the start).


The example with the lighter flame was a hands on experiment showing how plasma doesn't impart much of it's energy.
If even 10% of the heat from that flame were directed into your skin, you'd get 3rd degree burns.
Even if you passed your whole hand through a cloud of loose plasma the size of a softball, it would still be fine.

Without either prolonged exposure (like what would happen if you were to jump in a fire pit and sit there) or literally astronomically high temperatures (temps high enough that it causes nuclear fission from the sheer energy alone, such as those seen in atom crushing self sustaining stars that can burn gasses like helium to ash) there simply isn't a way to transfer the energy implied in the suggestion I was responding to.


Lastly, you're correct.
All 155 damage would do is extend the range that it would take the same number of shots to kill from the current 143 damage.
And we already have a way to dictate where max damage begins to drop, so doing this would be quite pointless indeed.

1) Weird use of underline fyi. And I'm afraid you stand rather alone on VS guns being about controllability and rate of fire, as I tried to adress in my post. For starting accuracy, none of the VS weapons are above the accuracy of TR or NC LMG's of the respective damage categories. The majority of VS weapons are the 143 dmg category, the less accurate one. VS has one more 167 dmg LMG than TR. Huzzah? Anyway, Vanu weaponry have more horizontal 'jitter'/recoil than NC LMG's, and at a higher rate of fire too.
I agree with another poster that Vanu's 'style' is about having a slightly faster reload, in general for infantry arms.

2) I looked at the GD-22-S and Anchor for NC because (this may come as a shock, get ready) those are pretty much CQC weapons of the NC. Like the Orion currently is for the VS. What Vanu LMG has the shortest TTK of all VS weapons inside 10m (body shots)? High RoF for 'spray and pray'? etc.
Also: asking whether we are even playing the same game is an insult to you. O-kay.

What is the above then, a compliment?
Sure, I felt I 'sledgehammered' your suggestion, but honestly it felt deserved; I thought you needed a wake up call, firstly for the wrong assumption that Vanu=control & accuracy; second about what the effects of your suggestion could be.

3)You can't 'only' talk about the Orion. I could suggest changing the Orion into a Gaus Saw. But then, what weapon for VS would fill the role of the current Orion? Weapons also need to be balanced against each other, for different roles.
The Bull is about faction balance: it is the '143 dmg controllable' LMG for the TR (with the T16 Rhino).
Per your suggestion, it would have the same rate of fire as your new Orion, but deal less damage, be less accurate, have more recoil, and take longer to reload. All for having 20 more bullets. Does that sound balanced?

4) Exactly. Hence, why I posted about the 15+m range (beyond soft point range for other LMG's).
Which is also a range where I'd argue the Bull, Rhino, Polaris etc should be effective.
To put it in another perspective: the VS has one LMG that is more controllable and more accurate than the current Orion:
the Ursa. In the 10+m range, your new Orion needs the same amount of bullets to kill against standard infantry, but fires at a 102 RPM advantage. And recoil and accuracy are supposedly excellent..

5) 45 rounds@155 dmg is not a puny magazine. Eridani SMG: 25 rounds@ 143 dmg. 3575 dmg in the mag. On a short range weapon. Where running out of bullets is extremely bad for health. Your Orion is more an assault rifle than LMG. Assault rifles are the only weapon class that I'd trade LMG's for.

HOWEVER: your comment about worse damage drop off got me to re-read your original post:

HOLY ****. I thought you wanted to extend the drop off range.
Congratulations, you may have succeeded in conceiving the worst weapon in PlanetSide.
Some numbers: with drop off of 155 to 80 dmg over 60m, every 10m 12.5dmg is lost.
At 20m we are at 142.5 dmg, so one more bullet to kill.
Now the 'new' Orion has the same theoretical TTK as the Bull/Rhino/Polaris at this range.
30m: 130dmg.
35m: 123.75 dmg. One more bullet to kill.
40: 117.5
50: 105; one more bullet to kill past 45m.
55: 98.75: yep, one more bullet to kill.
60: 92.5
65: 86.25 one more bullet to kill
70: 80; one more bullet to kill.
In total, we go from needing 7 bullets to kill out to 20m, to 13.
In that case, disregard earlier statements; this 'Orion' will have TTK advantage over Rhino from 10+ to 20m. A recoil/accuracy advantage over say, the Rhino in the grand range of 20+m to below 35m.
However: in that range, IMO the competition is not only with 652 rpm weapons. Burst fired 698/700 weapons would be effective here too, as would 577/600 rpm weapons. The Gauss Saw says Hi too, tri-headshotting you and mocking you.

Past 35m, the required number of bullets piles up. (where the low recoil, accuracy etc would come really handy btw)
To give an idea: in TTK calculations, it is 'customary' to subtract the first bullet (fired at time zero).
In that perspective, the TTK doubles from 20m to 70m, assuming the same accuracy at both ranges.
Also: at the end you drop two damage tiers in less than 10 meters. How do you expect me to get any feel of how many hits I need to kill my target?
Just FYI: at 70meters, against a nanoweave target, you need 16 bodyshots.

Not even the Vanu carbines have such a damage dropoff.



6) Oh noes, I hurt someone over the internet.
You yourself posted :

I find 'brainwashed' to be offensive. Furthermore, I would like to explicitly inform everyone that I am in no way related to you. Also, my unfortunately dead cat used to hunt, and I find your use of the word 'hunt' disrespectful. 'Calling for your head' was a figure of speech, just like 'hunting' (I presume?) However: I'll retract my statement. You're right, it'll only be Vanu players hunting you with such a horrible change, on the VS starter weapon of all things. Way to go turning even more new players away.



Anyway, congrats on the troll post.

Hah, it wasn't meant to be mean spirited or anything. The idea for a 155 damage tier (assuming you are basing the idea off of having better damage fall off than a 143 tier but less kick and bloom per shot than a 167 tier) isn't a bad one. It is similar to what the TORQ-9 is based off of though going in a different direction to obtain good accuracy / controllability.

What I said is there to help you make better suggestions that will gain you more traction with the community and have a better chance of said ideas being noticed. The longer you play the game and the more weapons you use, you will end up with a better picture of weapon balance and where each weapon fits in with an empires arsenal. With that, you will also likely drop the popular myths associated with each empire like the VS being the hyper accurate faction.

But... But the lore... It says that the VS IS the accuracy faction. What am I doing wrong? Am I not taking the "Not ES" weapons into consideration? Like the V-45? Because those are the weapons I WANT to change.

I'm aware of that. Thing is, it'll deal JUST A BIT more damage at close quarters than other 652 weapons, but will drop off more damage far more easily.

The Polaris is far better than the Orion. I love it, and I am NOT crying for nerfs. I'm Vanu, you blasted fool, and I do hope my name suggests that.

SOE didn't listen to lore when they designed weapons.

Why else does NC have the GD-7F and the desperado and the Carnage etc?

Why do TR and VS have shotguns or the Commissioner/Underboss?

Why do NC have 100 mag LMG's.... surely that should be a TR thing.... or TR should have 200 rounds LMGs

etc etc etc

It is a bad idea to take quotes from lore and try to force them into in game balancing points. Cross faction, weapons with similar traits often share similar stats despite the lore behind the three empires because this makes for good balance in a PvP oriented game

When you mention you want the HV-45 and Orion to change, your changes have tried to move them completely out of their intended role. All factions have close, close/mid, mid, mid long and long range weapons in each category. You don't simply say "I want to get rid of a factions CQC options because somewhere in the lore it says VS take alien stuff and make their weapons more deadly and accurate"

There is a balancing act between effectiveness and flavor when it comes to weapon balance and right now your focus is too hung up on the latter.

It is statements like this that really suggest that you aren't ready to tackle weapon balance, not because everyone knows the Orion is amazing, it is that you believe one weapon is "better" than the other.

Weapons are sidegrades in that they offer advantages in certain situations in exchange for disadvantages in others. The Polaris for example lacks the raw DPS to be a powerhouse in cqc, but because of a lower RoF gains stability at range, this is not a VS trait as all factions have an LMG in this category.

I want you to explain to me how the Polaris is "far better" than the Orion.

The Flare is not a long range LMG in any way other some dev thought it would be a good idea to put HVA as an option. Our two long range LMG's are the Ursa and Polaris since they have great recoil stats (for LMG's) great attachments that improve their recoil stats, and great velocity.

I'm dead serious when I say that the Flare is an absolute monster when you treat it like a high damage per shot forever firing Orion and equip it with SPA/Comp/Exmags.

Throwing it out there controversially, the Orion shouldn't be the default weapon as it's way too good.

Just look at the Gauss SAW, imagine a new player trying to control that compared to an Orion. I don't know what weapon should replace it, but I just think the weapon is a bit too good for absolutely everybody to have access to.

I know it sounds like a money-grab kinda idea, but the three starter weapons aren't all equal to each other.

Far more accurate, more bullets, less recoil, and that's pretty much it. I simply FEEL better with it, and I consider it to be the basic VS weapon that follows the traits of Vanu. Entirely preferential.

The gun isn't actually more accurate. All LMGs share the same ADS accuracy. More bullets doesn't really matter. If you want more bullets you use the SVA-88. Less recoil only matters if you are bad are recoil compensation. The TTK of the Orion in CQC to slight mid range is amazing. The 0.75 ADS is just an icing on the cake. Preference is one thing. But if you can learn to use the Orion it is a much better weapon.

1. I do realize that. It's just that TOO many weapons in the game have THE EXACT. SAME. STATS. Example:
Serpent, GD7, H-V45, and the TAR. All battle rifles, all bolt action rifles and sniper rifles (In terms of tier, of course), and a good amount of pistols (Beamer= TX2, The first two NC pistols= The two VS pistols that came before the Skunker. Actually, the Skunker could be considered as a WORSE Desperado.
So, what I would LIKE to see, or do, is change these weapons to be more leaning to their faction. Maybe the TAR gets an extra ten rounds and a bit more rounds per minute, but it deals 132 damage. The GD7 has slightly decreased RoF, but damage and velocity increase to 155 and to 600, respectively. The Serpent loses some RoF, gets a bit more damage, but receives more drop off and more accuracy. Just PURE. IDEAS. They aren't going to be implemented, so I tell myself,"Ah, they're just ideas. What, is someone going to kill you if she/he dislikes them?". Turns out that that's the case
2. You do know MANY people favor a weapon over others, right? As I love the Polaris more than the Orion, Delf loves his Orion more than his Betelgeuse, or Wrel and his SVA to his LSW.

BRO. I have Auraxiamed the Orion. Not that that matters, considering you must have done so months or even years ago, but I JUST FEEL that the Polaris is a better weapon. It feels more Vanu, it has a smaller CoF, it has more rounds, it FEELS more accurate, has less recoil (And I don't care what you say about the Orion being better if I learned to use it, because I HAVE), and has more attachments to choose from. Plus, I like the audio.

http://ps2oraclestats.com/?stat=uniques&weapon1=7276&weapon2=7278&weapon3=7274
I guess most people disagree. Hell..even the ursa has more uniques.

The Polaris is an amazing gun. Not as good as pre-nerf, but then nearly all VS LMGs got hit hard.
I'm not going to judge suggestions as it's not going to happen anyways, but I would love to have some more unique weapons in the future. Maybe even change one or two, though it's not going to be the starting weapons.
Oh, and Heat Mags instead of Ex-Mags. You know you want it.
As for VS traits, well, there's none around. Though short reload times does overtime to be of some use.

Okay, the Ursa and SVA have more kills than the Polaris. How will that affect my love for it?

Its better. It doesn't matter what you feel, Polaris is NOT better than Orion,