Why 0.75ADS is so bad for the game

So you want to nerf heat mechanic?
if yes,how?

Way to make stuff up.

Links to the massive outcry? I recall this day....the outcry(maybe three or four threads) was from NC/TR who were upset the devs recalled it. It wasn't from the vs. One thread on the forum doesn't account for every VS(or the NC or TR for that matter) in game. Most people didn't even notice the difference. This idea that the VS wept and threw their hands up and the Dev swooped in to save them is pretty hilarious. You may want to talk to someone about that victim complex you have....I'm going to guess you are one of those people who think there is some VS conspiracy to keep the TR and NC down.

You get infinite ammo as well as almost the same amount of ammo per "magazine" (49 shots) and no reload. In fact, your "reload" starts immediately after you stop firing and can be interrupted at any time.
You could balance this by reducing the amount of ammo per burst for instance. That reduces the weapons continuous effectiveness and will put it more on balance. Start with small changes. Reduce it to 45 ammo per magazine. Then 40, then 35, keep doing this until the Betelguese gets similar results as the Orion/other Auraxium weapons. That is how you balance things.

This is also how you should approach asymetrical balance, or balance other features against eachother. So Hover Frame is the most used for aircraft? Improve the speed on Racer Frame with small increments until it's equally used as the Hover Frame, then do the same for Dogfighting frame by improving it's agility, acceleration and deceleration until it's also equally used to Hover Frame.

You could do the same for LMG's or any other weapon, ability or utility. But seeing that LMG's have a far larger spread, it's better to start at both ends: put small nerfs in the top weapons, and put small buffs into the bottom weapons. Don't make them equal in stats, but improve different stats until they perform equally overall. This will cause a high specialization to appear where weapons will fill a niche much better, but the overall actual statistics in terms of kills and effectiveness should approach 1 for every weapon.

Mobility is not an LMG behaving like an SMG. it is related to ALL the VS weapons having very fast reload times.

actually reload times tend to be a function of the mag size, its not a mobility thing at all. VS has the smaller mags which usual y translates to faster reload.

I am referring to you, because you're implying that you are and you think youre not biased confirms it. how can you, with a straight face, say that you dont like to be biased given your willfully ignorant perceptions of this game?

Because it's from a consumer standpoint and basis. I don't like twitch shooters, hell I barely like FPS's, but I know what type of twitch shooter the average kid likes. And it's far from what Planetside is. If it attracts SALES, which is the point of making a game not your fruity *** "because it's fun" perception, then daybreak needs to do it. And what that is, is make it more like CoD. Kids like games like that, the games may be stupid and repetitive but they like them, so unless you want this game shutting down in a couple years they need to become a "CoD MMO".

First off. Nerf wars aren't started by factions, they are started by players. And I guarantee that you have no proof that TR started the "nerf war". And I could really care less about the OP ness of .75. What I do care about is balance, it doesn't belong on ANY lmg, period. And I think it's silly how vehemently something that "doesn't matter" is defended.

Second. Why should you get compensated for the removal of a trait that;
a) the other factions do not have. Except via NS LMG (iirc).
b) is not a faction specific trait.
Why should you be compensated for the removal of something that would only put you on a level setting with the other HA's. That makes no sense. VS HA already have the ADVANTAGE (however small it IS an advantage) of .75 ADS. Removing an advantage does not require compensation.

Third. I totally agree, the issue is that the baseline LMG for VS is to good compared to the other baselines. Orion should cost Certs. But again, in my opinion, no LMG, should have .75 ads, it does not make sense. LMG's are the largest hand carried guns in this game, they should simply NOT have the option of .75 ads, period. Keep in mind everyone carrying an LMG is also carrying a rocket launcher/lancer (the largest hand carried weapons in game) yet for some illogical reason they have access to the fastest ADS multiplier when carrying all that ****? Just doesn't make any logical sense, for any heavy, to have .75 on there LMG.


And at Takara, the outcry, in game, and on forums, was massive. I don't feel it necessary to give you "proof". It happened. So much so that when the server started randomly crashing there was some idiot, no, not me, that accused the vs of being "terrorists" and actively crashing the servers until they got there .75 back. As silly as that sounds, it happened. People crying on both sides.

I honestly could care less about the OP factor around heavies with .75. I just think it makes no sense for an LMG to have .75. If a heavy wants .75 take an smg, if they want mag size and damage per round, take an LMG

it has 40 rounds before you overheat,i bet you didn't play with the weapon before.and i'm going to assume you meant "can't" in your last sentence but that's whats makes it unique,actually that's the ONLY thing that declare it as an auraxium weapon

again,its actually 40 rounds before you overheat

I don't know who's the misguided one that taught you that meaning of asymmetrical balance but lemme tell you something

everyone got his own playstyle especially when it comes air fights,some people like hovering so they can be as stable as possible to be accurate against ground targets with rocket pods.the racer frame is more important if you like the "flanking" style,meaning that you like shooting then escape quickly if anything happened,this increases survivability on the cost of farming.as for dogfighting airframe,its designed for fights with at least 4 ESFs (2 vs 2) to be able to lead your target less while shooting which is my playstyle

overall,it makes zero sense to use ESF frames as an example to how balance LMGs

balancing weapons asymmetrically to make them all performing on equal levels is something that is almostly impossible to do and even if it succeeded,it will confuse people so much to choose their favourite weapon,each faction simply get an LMG which is considered to be the ganglord of its LMG arsenal while the others get interesting features e.g the bull is low dps weapon,but its deadly accurate.the same could be said for the ursa and the GD-22.the LSW is moderate dps weapon,but reloads pretty fast.
the ganglord LMGs are simply a combination of the features that most of the other LMGs has access to

I would have agreed on this if they didn't nerf the orion's short reload 2 times before to balance it around .75 ads

before anything,I want an instant response to these questions
how did you say that you don't care while speaking "OPnes" in the same time?
concerning your logic,if care about balance,then how you don't care about the "OPness" of .75?
how do you it matters when you don't care about its "OPness"?

nerf wars were started by a stupid but good TR player who was trolling the forums by saying that prowler needs a serious nerf.I can show you more if you want
https://forums.daybreakgames.com/ps2/index.php?threads/prowlers-need-a-serious-nerf.47034/

this is coming from the dude who care LESS about the OPness of .75 ads

if we are going to talk about logic then:
1.how can infinite number of players can supply ammo from a polygon with the size of a baby toy
2.how can vehicles and aircraft can move more than 50 kilometres without needing to refuel
3.how can someone die from at least 3 HEADshots from a full auto riftle,if you live in earth,a simple sidearm can instakill anyone with just a headshot,right?

and EVEN if they made all the VS LMGs with .5 ads,it STILL won't make sense,you know why?becouse you will be moving with SAME speed of a carbine/AR

I can pull out at least 5 more illogical features in the game but if you are hoping for a complete logical game so I'm sorry ps2 isn't the one you are looking for

but you know what?i totally appreciate your views because you said in my last quote "in my opinion" and not saying "they should"

LOL,see how some immature .75 complainers are?

again,if .75 ads isn't OP for you,then what are you going to get when you apply logic?it's a game after all

Are you really trying to explain this to Scorpion? You fool!

as this is considered a hidden insult to me,i'm going to go straight and tell you that logic isn't a main theme in videogames,i already explained above

I was simply talking about nerf cries in general, I feel it's wrong to,blame the entire faction for one players opinions. And he might of been the first to cry about this, but he did not start all the nerf wars as you originally stated.

I made a statement about the general silliness of the argument about .75 ads, my original post.

You responded, stating some points about why you should have it.

I responded to your argument. Regardless of my personal opinions on the topic. I was merely responding to your arguments. That's how I can say "I don't care about the OP'ness of .75 ads" (I don't). But can still argue about it.

What I do care about is those that say it's not an advantage (it is, regardless of how small/little it comes into play, it's an advantage. And again, I feel it's small enough that I don't blame me dieing 1v1 against a heavy on .75 ads... Ever...I'm not that good at this game, I die for a lot of reasons.)
And like I said, I simply don't think it makes sense for what is arguably the heaviest line of hand held weapons to have the fastest ADS multiplier. That should be reserved for pistols and smgs only.

And in response to your other questions.

1. Do you really want to argue ammo packs? Because I don't.
2. Many ground and air vehicles can travel more then fifty kilometers without refueling.... Many ground and air vehicles get more than fifty kilometers off a single gallon of gas.... In real life... I'm really confused by your point here and think you might of miss typed.
3. You are right, the only explanation I have is the shield literally stopping those shots cold until it's depleted. (But I don't believe this is how they work. Iirc, they let the bullet impact you, the damage is just taken by the shield.) But once shields are gone, headshot with anything should kill IMO.

And 4. You are right, it still wouldn't make sense, AR/carbine should have higher multiplier. Heavy assault, logically, should move slower than all infantry, in all situations. The exception being maxes. But it would make more sense.

And of course this game is filled with illogicalness (new word, look it up). But that doesn't mean that some things shouldn't be changed.

Actually...it does make sense. If a weapon was created with a set of stats....and you as a person want to change one of them. Then you need to balance out the fact you are taking something away by giving it something some where else.

For example....High rate of fire weapons typically do less damage per bullet. SO if you want to reduce the RoF you add more Damage or more bullets to the weapon. OR if you were going to remove Accuracy you may add damage. It's a give and take. I'm more then happy to see .75ADS go so long as the gun gets some kind of bump in another stat to make up for it.

The reason you can't and won't provide proof is because it doesn't exist. It happened on a workday...around noon. Most people weren't even around to see it happen. In fact after searching for about 20 minutes through the forums the only thread I found was this one I know there was one or two more which were complaining that the changes were reverted. But there wasn't any mass outcry from VS about how the .75 disappeared. From all reports of people who played it actually felt the same or better with the changes.

All I'm saying is...there was literally like four threads and most of them were people upset the accidental introduction of the LMG changes got reverted. From the people I read and talked to they said the guns that got changed actually were better! They were upset the changes went back to normal

Orion has been in the game since launch..amazingly it was only in the last six months or so it suddenly became OP because .75 is ruining the game! I still scratch my head...the guns have been around for two years now all of a sudden people have an issue with it.

Actually it doesn't make sense.... .75 ads dropping down to .5 does not disadvantage the weapon in any way compared to the other factions LMG's.... It does not affect its rof... Or damage per shot... Or any other stat that actually matters. And it is not a faction trait. Why are the VS the only ones who get it? Does it not make more sense for no one to have it? The fact you require compensation if .75 gets removed makes me feel, that you feel, it's an advantage.

And I don't understand why everyone is coming at me like I'm the one with the issue. I've said multiple times, I don't think .75 ads on a heavy assault is OP. I think .75 ads on a LMG is stupid and makes no sense.

And they day of the "accident" there was plenty of outcry, consider yourself lucky you were at work and missed it. I really don't see why this is an issue for you.... Why the **** do you care....

I took the stats from the planetside 2 wiki, and yes I haven't played with it before.
I also do mean "can", as you can start firing at any point as long as your Heat bar isn't full and you didn't overheat it, otherwise what would be the point?

Rather than replying to just the statistics I named, can you give a reply to what I'm actually proposing?

Overall, you seem to have no idea about the ESF frames? Hover frame is better for the Reverse Maneuver, Hover fighting, A2G combat and good enough for most "ordinary" air maneuvers, which is why it's far better than the other two frames since from what i've seen racer is mostly used for infantry farming at places with enemy ESF's that you don't want to engage and dogfighting frame isn't used at all.
Also, how the hell do you know what these frames are "designed" for? Dogfighting frame for 2v2? And Leading means the distance you need to aim in front of your enemy to hit despite his movement, does dogfighting frame suddenly improve your bullet speed? And Hover Frame was designed for RM and Hover Fighting as well was it?

... "will confuse people so much to choose their favourite weapon"...
That's an argument here? That's a reason to say "weapons should not be balanced"?

Anyway it is possible. Let's just say that there's a long-range weapon that is underperforming compared to a CQC weapon. You can look at where the stats are different, such as the long-range weapon having better accuracy when ADS, higher muzzle velocity etc. Then you can start improving these stats little by little, and as you do the weapons performance will increase until it becomes on par with the CQC weapon.
Allright, now imagine the Betelgeuse which is currently at the top of all LMG's by far. Imagine if we started improving the weakest and least used LMG's out there, their performance would start improving, and the Betelgeuse and all weapons that used to be better will get indirect nerfs and their performance will be lower. Now you can put all weapons at the extreme power of the Betelgeuse and reduce the time it takes to kill someone etc, or you can pick a weapon in between somewhere if that's better for the game balance and try to emulate those statistics. That means you make that weapon your baseline and start small nerfs to all weapons better than it until they are equally good, while you start buffing all weapons below it slightly until they are equally good, despite different stats. That's asymentrical balance.

I always like to look at Renegade for this. One team's best vehicle is a 1200 health, Heavy Armored, armed with dual barrel canon with the biggest damage out there along with anti-infantry rockets, regenerates below 600 health vehicle but with drawbacks of slow speed and massive size that blocks vision and attack routes of friendly vehicles. Costs 1500 credits
The Other team has a 400 health, Light Armored, dual-rocket system stealth vehicle that's small and fast. Costs 900 credits

And this is balanced. The Stealth vehicles require more skill to use in a 1v1, but the Mammoth tank is so slow and so big that it is both a blessing and a curse on the battlefield. The Stealth vehicles are also excellent for the goal of the game: surprising your enemy and destroying their buildings before they repair it, but if you are discovered you are easily stomped into the ground. The Mammoth tank is mostly useful for controlling the battlefield so you can stage an assault, so they are perfect for the first stages into completing the game's goal but not the last stage of attacking head-on.

You know what's faster than .75 ads? 1.0 hipfire. Should we nerf that too?

Because the gun is balanced around it's stats....part of the reason it's other metrics are the way they are is because it has .75ADS. YES .75ADS IS a small advantage. I've never said it isn't...it does add something to the gun. BUT it isn't the game destroying monster so many people whine about. The extra speed is so tiny it really doesn't effect much. It's just a crutch number people whine about.

The reason it's an issue is...you are lying. YOU brought it up...so it's obviously some big issue to you. You claimed the whole VS community was crying. They weren't...it just speaks at how bias you are by throwing around disinformation to try and hold up your false point.

What weapon allows Infantry to move sideways moves sideways as fast as he moves forward?