[Suggestion] TR is in desperate need of a .75 ADS LMG...

IMO the 0.75x speed advantage is an illusion, but a very effective one.

It comes from the fact that we're playing Planetside 2, a game where gunplay and performance are sold seperatly.
This game is a technical mess and sometimes players PC can run 96+ vs 96+ fluently and sometimes it combusts during 12-24 vs 12-24, pure infantry, nothing flashy, battle. This is a rather unfriedly environment and 0.75x benefits the most from it. With all the lag, wonky hitboxes, hit registration issues, the gun, that can throw off the opponents aim, benefits the most.

That's why in my opinion VS is somewhat rewarded for unstable perfomance and NC (where each bullet is measured in ounces of gold) is shafted the most. Still, don't take that last point too seriously, as we all lose when the game breaks.

I'm convinced that, if this game were to run at constant 60+ (or at least 45-60) FPS, double digit (or at least below 150) ping, even during the biggest of fights, the 0.75x speed would be but a small faction gimmick. Of course it'd retain its potential to screw over the enemy, but only the really good shooters (20%+ accuracy and big headshot count guys) would be able to do it.

You have below 1 kdr....a .75 ads isn't going to help you. In fact, you have a worse KD on the VS.

Because like everyone else, SOE hates the TR. That's why you dont get a 0.75 ADS LMG.

I addressed this in another thread, but a new faction LMG is on the horizon with the TR on all but confirmed to be a 125/857 one with the only question being if it has 0.75 ADS. If it does expect it to be the most inaccurate TR LMG by a good margin like the Orion and SVA-88, or if it doesn't it will akin to the GD-22s which is very accurate but with a small magazine but fast reload time.

Well, I remember your post but this is nothing but a rumour afaik.

As a player who plays a VS HA 80% of the time I can say when a TR or NC HA does crouch mid CQC battle it does throw my aim off. It doesn't happen often but when it does i'm dead for sure. The thing with VS guns is the extra vertical climb. In most cases we aim for the body and allow the climb to go up to the head making it so we finish our targets with a head shot. When your cursor is already trained on the head and the target suddenly crouches it throws you off and leaves you in a bad aiming position for that 1.3 seconds that it takes for it all to go down.

Not to sound antagonistic but we (VS) do know what its like to fight against the Orion. The CARV, before you get mad just listen. When the game came out the Orion was intended as a lower mag, faster reloading version of the CARV. Although i'm sure the CARV has changed a fair bit by now but it was still a devastating thing to go against. ADS speed is an advantage but against hardened players it doesnt do much for you. The real danger is having a 750 rpm or higher weapon with standard damage (143).

NC do get the awesome AF4-Bandit smg which although it lacks the range of an LMG, in the ranges where fancy footwork helps it really does the business.

I personally hope that the new TR LMG is like the TORQ but with a bit lower fire rate and a higher mag size

You're pretty sure, yet you're pretty wrong. The MSW-R has better move+stand ADS CoF (Orion: 0.4; MSW-R: 0.35), better vertical recoil (Orion: 0.4; MSW-R: 0.3), better reload (Orion is 8% longer for short, 10% longer for long), way better horizontal tolerance (Orion: 0.9; MSW-5: 0.55), and if you want to hipfire, better when both bear a laser sight (Orion: 2. 345; MSW-R: 2.28) .

The things that are worse off on the MSW-R are in fact very few:

- default hipfire (no laser sight): Orion: 3.5 ; MSW-R: 3.75 (do you really want to hipfire with a sight-less LMG anywa?)
- an angle on the vertical recoil (none on the Orion)
- a very small difference on minimal horizontal recoil (Orion does 0.2~0.225, the MSW-R is a strict 0.225)

The Orion, as the SVA has a very wide angle due to high horizontal recoil tolerance, which is basically the stat that makes your bursts shorter or longer. If both Orion and MSW-R have a foregrip, the angle is a maximum 2.0373 wide for the Orion/SVA (6 shots wide from the origin), the MSW-R has 1.0125 (3 shots wide). For reference, grip on CARV makes it 2.025 (6 shots wide).
As a consequence, the MSW-R may fire longer bursts while avoiding stray shots.


If anything the Orion may even be UP compared to what is done on comparable ARs: looking at the equivalents (750-ish rpm/143) among ARs, the Carnage is a bit like the Orion (not very controllable+.75ads), while the Terminus is more like the MSW-R (low horizontal tolerance, lower CoF).
The MSW-R has the same attachment selection as the Terminus -which is fine-, yet the Orion has default attachment selection (Carnage has advanced laser sight+compensator+advanced foregrip available).

From that it's pretty easy to deducace that what makes the Orion perceived as OP is other factors. Mainly that it's an excellent default weapon on a very common class, which happens to be the most powerful standard class too.
If you think you're performing better with the Orion due to its accuracy, it's just placebo mentality. The way i see it, you, as many others, have decided that VS had more accurate weapons for some reason, while that is very rarely verified with weapon stats : Pulsar C, Corvus, CME, yes, all weapons designed for accuracy rather than range. The rest isn't particularly accurate, and some TR/NC weapons emphasize on accuracy just the same if not better.

Im not pretty wrong then am I? 0.05 of a difference. Sue me.

Going back to the topic. TR still need a 0.75 Ms weapon? My point is this. VS and TR have the same damage models coz apparently our trait of higher fire rates is only on some select weapons, none of which are LMGs.

Infact why not put your theory to the test. Go use an MSWR against a proficient Orion user and see how you go.

The fact that it's the default on a common class should make the stats bad then shouldn't it? The most common class used by noobs should upset it's performance logically, yet it's still the best performing (again I don't have the reference but I have seen the graph before). By the stats you have shown and the MSWR only costing 100certs to buy. Maybe TR need a revelation?

Given the stats you suggest, what is that makes the Orion stand out more? Notice I don't think its OP on live due to the amount of people who can't aim that well and noobs using it. 12v12 scrims are a different matter as the better players tend to lean towards the competitive side,still not OP but exceedingly powerful compared to anything TR have on the LMG front. Maybe that 0.75 Ms is more useful than you think then on both live and in scrims.

As for ARs all ARs are in a pretty good place. They need to be in order to combat heavies with orions, carvs, anchors etc.

RANT INCOMING*
I don't think the heavy assault shield is too strong either. I have no issue beating heavies as a medic. It's learn to play in my eyes but that's just my opinion and shouldn't be balanced around what I think. Nor should it be balanced around players who can't aim for toffee or don't even look at the map. Basically don't pander to bad players cos the good players get better and things get nerfed for being OP.

0.05 in relative value is about 14% difference, and as an angle, can represent a significant distance on target depending on the range travelled.
I doubt my testing of the MSW-R would prove anything by the way, nor can yours or any other person in particular, really! Same for your rant over my HA statement. My record as medic is usually positive against HAs. It's just that if i pick a HA myself (which i rarely do), it's significantly more positive.
Though i do think the HAs too resistant in their current form, i'm only stating a fact, not an opinion when i say that HAs are the most powerful standard class available.
I don't know what 12vs12 scrims look like, but have watched a good portion of the farmer's league (6v6), which was a lot about winning 1v1s and it was mostly HAs against HAs, as those are designed in a way that favours 1v1s.
But let's not extend on the HAs anymore:

From the stats, the Orion has a higher skill floor+ceiling than the MSW-R, because 1.less experienced players will tend to go full auto or on longer bursts more, 2.the MSW-R remains more accurate overall in these conditions in ADS at least.
When you look at Q4 KPU over 6 months, you can but witness that Orion and MSW-R are in the same waters at higher level of play nowadays, while the MSW-R seemed ailing about 6 months ago, Anchor and Orion being about even back then. Now the Anchor seems very dominating despite its dps disadvantage and its only challenger seems to be the SVA-88. Maybe the directives had something to do with that? I honestly don't know.
Taking KPH into the equation doesn't show anything toward that assumption on the Orion's and MSW-R's performance either, and it's really hard to compare a starter weapon and even a 100 certs weapon with that anyway.

You'd probably be right in assuming the Betelgeuse is OP from the same data though, as long reload, or lack thereof is a major balance point for LMGs.
That TR/NC don't get a .75ADS LMG is unfair in my opinion, but the belief that the Orion is overperforming is both false at this point in time as no proof can be drawn from the available data, and then the weapon's stats, as i exposed in my previous reply, tend to depict a weapon which is overall slightly weaker in everything but that specific .75ads trait than the MSW-R.

Honestly i'd question the Anchor/SVA supremacy more, both because the gap between them and Orion/MSW-R at similar experience level is very wide, and beacause those 2 weapons are really different from one another.

On competitive scrims there's actually almost no difference between using the Orion or the Anchor (can't say anything about the MSW-R because I didn't have the chance to play TR on that environment), in fact, in the match where I felt I played the best I was playing NC using the Anchor (and for reference, I have more than 50k kills with the Orion on live, against a grand total of ZERO with the Anchor).

The only reason the Orion's performance is not stellar in the stats is because every new VS player gets it, and apparently a lot of them stick with it. You can clearly see the difference in more widely used by high BR weapons such as the Anchor. So the stats you draw upon paints a very incomplete image.

Also, some comments on number crunching.

Orion; vertical recoil: 0.4(straight up) / 2 FSM.
MSW-R: vertical recoil: 0.35(up and to the right) / 2.5 FSM.

The latter is harder to control, despite having a slightly smaller vertical recoil, because of its FSM and angular recoil. Angular recoil isn't an inherantly bad thing but the MSW-R bias is very inconsistent and the FSM makes bursting more difficult. A Forward grip is pretty much the only attachment worth getting. Orion only has to pull down and burst fire at mid range which makes a huge difference for these two weapons. Then there is the 0.75x movement speed which just blows the MSW-R out into the water(and best left deep down into the depths).

Point is, you can't just view individual stats while not providing context. This goes for both weapons and player stats.

I play all factions(though after BR88 on my VS I put more time in NC/TR) and anyone who tells you they'd want the MSW-R over the Orion is either a VS player pretending to love his/her TR alt above all else or a VS player who must have hurt his or her's head real bad. There is no contest here, Orion beats the MSW-R, and everything beyond this is nothing but forumside arguments, egos, and individual bias.

It wasn't just you! In the last games at some point i made a remark to myself that each time i saw a HA dominate a game, it was a NC HA with either Anchor or Cyclone. Not that the Orions HAs weren't doing good, but none "shining" like those.

FSRM means nothing by itself and Orion has 2.25 FSRM, which effectively gives it a very slightly higher first shot recoil (0.9 vs 0.875) than MSW-R. I can see how it would mess up with the angular recoil at that high level of first shot recoil though i'm used to worst guns myself.


I actually took your advice to try in VR training to see how i did with all both LMGs, because i do know that angular recoil is a problem for me with the battle rifle even at 2x sights (stable 25° bias), and slaughtered dummies en masse for maybe 45mn changing often and strafing in ADS all the way.
My first conclusions were that 2x reflex is a clear no-no on the MSW-R as angular recoil is too brutal for that, and the Orion was smoother to handle with it.
When i switched to 1x reflex, while it was much easier i still did not quite as good, trying to play as i do with unstable weapons usually (auraxed Serpent and Vx6-7 lately) with short bursts. I got perplex until it occurred to me i should take my own theorycraft into account (holding the trigger longer), and it was very much better. In effect it feels like i can do bursts of the same length about 10 to 15m farther (depending on range) than i would with the 1x Orion.

The 'unfortunate' thing as i said previously: that's just me. Maybe for some persons the angled bias kills the weapon, and given my first impression on the 2x sights and initial improductive 1x burst-tapping, it's not hard to imagine. But in the end i feel i could make it work as well, if not better than the Orion as long as my own shooting ability is concerned. It's tough to fathom how much the .75ads is hindering the other guy's shots though.
Not that it doesn't help, but in my opinion it's not an advantage as big as those regular topics make it out to be (i play mostly .5 ads weapons on engineer/medic for reference), particularly on HA: with overshield activated, 75% or not is sluggish anyway.

As for the stats you are right about KPH as a bad means of comparison between Orion and MSW-R, as i stated, but i did use Q4 KPU (so BR75+) which is where both come about even.

Orion is amazing, I love it to death :>

Basically stopped playing my NC/TR because of SVA and Orion. It's not the same anymore, feels so sluggish when you come back to 0.5 ads.

Simply brilliant!

https://www.planetside2.com/players/#!/5428229842957113633/killboard/?view=timeline

PS.

I keep saying 1 thing - If 0.75 is NOT AN ISSUE/NOT A BIG FACTOR why not add it to TR/NC weapons

hi nehlyn i did reply yesterday but it didnt come up apparently. Anyway thank you for the graph i did a lot of digging comparing lots of weapons with the Q4 KPU (not sure what Q4 is) and something became very apparent. the MSW-R is really under-performing compared to both the Orion and Anchor (and SVA-88). I also did this across the entire time duration of the planetside 2. Even the Polaris which I hear many VS dislike, is performing better than the MSW-R.

I may have been wrong on the stats of the weapons themselves but you have to admit it, when looking at the MSW-R compared to most of the VS LMG's it is definitely being out classed for one reason or another.

According to the Q4 KPU the Bull performs better than the MSW-R lol although the bull does require a different playstyle.

I would absolutely say the betelguese is "OP" lol. No just the others need to be brough in line with it. Perhaps the Butcher could have a Forward grip because lets be honest, it would probably need it to bring its KPU up a bit. the GODSAW give it a compensator. TR struggles with Horizontal recoil, NC "struggle" with vertical recoil.

I will keep looking for comparative weapons but the MSW-R in actually performing worse than the CARV-S lol

FSM determines if a weapon is burst friendly or not.

The angular recoil of 0.35, in addition to the 2,5 FSM is what makes this weapon a very poor choice overall. ALS is a complete waste on the MSW-R as it has such a horrible hipfire not even the ALS makes enough of a difference. The forward grip is the only worthy option but it is a band aid more than anything else. SPA is nice though.

I wouldn't advice VR for anything other than learning recoil patterns because of:
1. The target stand still(moving targets are particularly annoying for the MSW-R due to its heavy angular recoil).
2. You know where they are(position, height, and what direction to aim)
3. They do not fire back.
4. Every weapon feels great in VR.

Having used the weapons in practice, I see absolutely no point in using the MSW-R over the CARV because ever since the LMG hipfire nerf the MSW-R is just a less accurate CARV. I'd never ever recommend the MSW-R to any TR player whereas if you're VS I'd say you should stay with the Orion(unless your aim is to unlock the beetlgeuse, I'm only 250 or so kills away!). Can't wait to get back to the Orion and try out the Beetle.

I find it strange that it is so hard for certain players to grasp as to why the 0.75x is so good on the Orion and SVA. You keep hearing the "just use the NS-15." The problem with that suggestion is that the NS-15 would be terrible on its own, ie, objectively worse than the Polaris, Bull, Rhino, and EM1. All of these weapons would become much better with a 0.75x movement modifier. The thing is... Both the Orion and SVA are better than all of the weapons I just mentioned AND they got the movement modifier.

The Bull is my highest performing TR LMG. Comp/grip/SPA turns it into a very accurate LMG which is quite good up close as well.

And it's still not a very good LMG anyways.

I have no idea why Vanu are the only ones that get a 0.75ADS. So of course, most of their playerbase just activate their shield, and spam ADADAD for a cheesy win. I tend to rage log after dying to a few of these in a row, with less and less inclination to log back in.

Simple fix to even the playing field would be to match the other empire speeds. People already ****** about HAs enough without having to fire at a side-warping, shielded purple dude.