[Suggestion] A better approach to the Orion/Betelgeuse than the nerfhammer

To start off, I do not think much of either gun as OP. From my experience 0.75 ADS on LMGs is not as big of a deal as people make it out to be. However, a drop in my headshot accuracy when I use the Anchor, as well as a recent thread on the gun, got me researching into what makes up a gun's recoil. Moreover, the Orion tends to have higher BR100 headshot accuracy over the Anchor and MSW-R, while Betelgeuse has higher BR100 KPU (not sure if that stat is relevant though) while all other performance and usage stats for the 4 guns are pretty much equal, which got me thinking...

Preface:

As most of you know, some amazing players in the game have managed to compile all the weapon stats, including hidden ones, into a giant spreadsheet. You can find it here, and I will base my argument on the numbers found here.

Each faction has access to two LMGs with small hipfire CoF. For the NC, they are the GD-22S and LA1 Anchor; for the TR, they are the T32 Bull and MSW-R; and for the VS, they are the Orion/Betelgeuse and the VX29 Polaris. I will classify them as being CQC oriented for their improved hipfire ability. Keep in mind that CQC oriented and CQC viable are two different things.

Now to get into recoil mechanics. First of all, Erendil posted a very useful link in the aforementioned thread which explains the basics of the numbers you see in game or the spreadsheet.

This is for your one of your shots. The min/max angle determines the true bias of the weapon; a positive value here means it has a right bias, and so on.
Angle variance is the difference between min/max angle; in the above picture, it is 2°. The angle of the bullet is determined to be a random value between the min and max angle. Angle variance thus introduces random recoil to the gun. This thread has more information on succeeding shots.

Also consider the effect of vertical recoil value on the angle variance. Higher the vertical recoil, greater the effect of the angle variance. Think of it like a swing: the longer the rope, the more distance the chair will travel with the same angle. Horizontal recoil, on the other hand, contributes minimally to this effect.

Horizontal tolerance is how much of your shots will land on the intended horizontal mark. Its effect seemingly increases with the bloom over time. I will explain this later.

The issue:

Now, I will present the data for the guns in question. This has been compiled from the spreadsheet and formatted for the purpose of this thread.


We can see here that the VS tends to have higher horizontal tolerance and bigger ADS strafe CoF, and NC has smaller horizontal recoil. Also notable is that the Orion's horizontal recoil is not constant, which introduces some randomness in the recoil, albeit very small. The Orion's vertical recoil value is the same as the NC guns, while TR tends to have lower values.

You might also notice why I included the Pulsar LSW.

The CQC oriented guns from above mostly have a right bias (positive min/max angle) and some randomness (2-3° angle variance) in recoil. In practice, this does not adversely affect CQC performance much, but drastically affects midrange combat by making the gun unpredictable.

The thing is, the Pulsar LSW has the disadvantage of the angle variance and bias, but is not the CQC oriented weapon that the others are. Instead, the Orion has 0° horizontal variance and no bias. On the other hand, the T32 Bull gives up 100 RPM for the same benefit of no horizontal variance and bias. The Polaris takes the 100 RPM hit for the double ammo capacity, which isn't very relevant in this thread.

Then what's the disadvantage of the VS LMGs? The obvious answer from the numbers would be the horizontal tolerance. However, take a look at this video. ~1:50 mark.


You will notice that the horizontal tolerance's effect takes place and increases after some sustained fire. The bigger the value, the faster and harder the accuracy deficit will hit you. The difference between 0 and 1 horizontal tolerance takes place after around 20 rounds. That is more than enough to kill anyone in CQC.

Moreover, the effect of horizontal tolerance can practically be negated through managed burst fire. This is the source of the claims that say the Orion loses controllability due to its RoF in sustained fire, and you're better off shooting in bursts.

So what does this all mean?

The Orion is a CQC weapon, supposed to be in the same class as the Anchor and MSW-R, but with the accuracy of normal LMGs, making it also effective in midrange combat. Thus it satisfies both categories of LMGs without compromising anything but the clip size. Even this is made insignificant with the Betelgeuse, which has no need to reload.



The Suggestion:
I assume SOE/DBG gave the Orion no horizontal bias to give new players an easier time with the default LMG. I agree with this decision, and I don't think we should give the Orion any horizontal bias. The same reasoning also unfortunately applies for the high RoF, which otherwise would make new players unable to compete with anyone else.

Therefore I think we should give the Orion -1°/1° horizontal min/max angle, i.e. 2° angle variance, while keeping everything else the same. This will truly orient the Orion as a CQC LMG which, by all other stats in the game, it should be along with the MSW-R and the Anchor.

I don't really think the Orion is OP. However, I do think the classification of the Orion should be cleared up to match that of other factions.


Thank you for taking your time to read this Comments and discussion would be appreciated, but please don't "QQ OP nerf pls" or "NC/TR scum cry some more" or anything of the sort.

That spread sheet is not accurate for Auraxium weapons.

Use the wiki for auraxium weapons. (Yes i saw you did not post the betelguise's stats but do double check them on the wiki)

Betelgeuse's stats are identical to the Orion.

LOL nice way to dodge the "75% ADS on LMGs is OP" argument by bringing a completely irrelevant scapegoat. Recoil angle variance is a very small part of gun's recoil pattern, and something at all noticeable only on weapons like Serpent and VX6-7, which have variance of 7 and 10 degrees respectively.

Difference between 0 degrees and 2 degrees is not something easily noticed. Horizontal recoil will come into play much sooner.

I definitely feel the difference between 0° and 2°. It's subtle, but it's definitely there. It's why it took a bit of time for me to adjust to the GD-22S and Anchor.

0.75x ADS is not OP IMO, and I notice it much less so than the angle variance.

Don't know why everyone keeps banging on about the Orion being OP. I find it underwhelming and much prefer the Flare.

Bull ****. 2 degree recoil angle variance changes vertical recoil from 0.4 - 0.4 to 0.3975 - 04025 and horizontal recoil* from 0.15 - 0.16875 to 0.1426 - 0.17615 (drawn and measured in Corel), increasing horizontal recoil variance window from 0.01875 to 0.03355. The total difference introduced by recoil angle variance is 0.0148 degrees.

* - This assumes Forward Grip on Orion, since nobody good uses it without one.

At 1920 x 1080 resolution and 74 degrees vertical FoV, horizontal FoV will equal 106 degrees (calculator).
One horizontal degree of FoV equals to 18.1 pixels, and one vertical degree to 14.6 pixels.

The difference of 0.0148 horizontal degrees would mean the difference of 0.268 pixels. 1/4 of a pixel.
And difference of 0.0025 vertical degrees means 0.0365 pixels. 3% of a pixel.

Even in a long sequence of many shots, the accumulated difference would barely exceed a few pixels, and even potentially cancel itself out.

You have been "seeing" something that your monitor isn't even capable of showing. Placebo effect is strong with you.

The Orion has one of the highest skillcaps of any LMG in the game due to versatility. Alot of ppl play Vanu because of this. If you reroll from NC to Vanu you will immediately fall in love with the weapon as you are used to compensating the vertical kick. DPS on it is also really high, in a nutshell that means you can go for eighter head or body. To give the counter example the NS15M trades DPS for the accuracy => Headshot dependant weapon in gunfights.

About the 75% move spd. It is a CQC weapon trademark that should be present in all the weapons designed for that specific cathegory. Rather than nerfing a working Vanu LMG I say that the counterparts for the role be ranked up to its level. That means movespd on the Faction CQC weapons. When I play Combat-Medic I will outgun a Orion user as long as he does not pop his shield (I need to get the drop also) simply because the damage profile is identical that being 750 RPM + 147 dmg + respective dmg drop offs (talking CQC here)

Also please note that orion is a close-mid LMG. It is not in the ADV Laser + softpoint category but in the more all rounder one like the GD-22S for example. It is not a CQC dedicated beast.

And to be completely honest. I would like to see some horizontal drift added to most Vanu weapons.

0.75 ADS is OP.

Contrary to all the VS players who Zerg threads telling people who say so its not true & that 0.75 ADS doesn't matter, which intern by them doing what they do, proves it does matter.

Even I can be spiteful towards the VS from time to time but I don't hate them that much.

TR/NC need to receive a .75x LMG or two or the threads will never stop. VS has 3.

Don't mention the NS-15m

I'd rather .75x be on the point defense lower ROF weapons '>'

It's definitely not placebo because I noticed the accuracy deficit first with both the GD-22S and Anchor and assumed it was just right bias, but found out 3 weeks later that they had angle variance.

My math with figures for the Anchor are in agreement with your calculations, so you're right about that.

However, the recoil values do not calculate from where the bullet will fire. Rather, it calculates the next possible position of the crosshairs, from which the CoF will determine the actual bullet's projection; otherwise, the CoF values would be useless! Thus I have rather incorporated those values into the figure for bloom per shot.

The Anchor's figures for ∆x (your "vertical degrees") is 0.0284 for the first shot and 0.0152 for subsequent shots; ∆y is 0.0091 and 0.0045455 respectively. I then found the "radial component" of the arc by approximating with the tangential distance from the base point to the arc tangent to the outer two points. This "radial value" is 0.0086 and 0.00432 respectively. Divide this by two to account for the fact that this is the location of the center of the CoF, and you have a noncircular CoF. Thing of a an oval-ish shape with its "major" axis at the azimuthal angle (18°-20° in this case). To be exact, the normal circular CoF is swept along the arc created by the angle variance.

The "horizontal" bloom per shot can be considered the semiminor bloom per shot, and this is unaffected by the angle variance and remains at 0.05. However, the semimajor bloom per shot is 0.0543 (8.6% increase) and 0.0516 (3.2% increase) for the first shot and subsequent shots respectively. I believe this is what I am observing in my gameplay. In CQC it's not noticeable, but longer ranges this should affect the aim more.

Edit: Adding the angular component to the CoF introduces a probability distribution across the CoF sweep. (The more the CoFs overlap, the more likely it is for the bullet to be there) It is unlikely that the bullet will hit the very edge of this oval-ish shape, but it is not impossible.

I haven't done geometry in 5 years so my vocabulary in that area is murky at best...calculus is where it's at It's also fun to meet people in the game who know their stuff with the math side of the game.

No LMG should have .75 ADS speed, period.

And horizontal recoil needs to be toned down in general, not more added in. It's a terrible feature. It's literally the reason (combined with excessive reload speeds) I won't play TR.

I whipped up some graphs to visualize what I'm talking about. First, here's the recoil pattern of the Anchor for the first two shots:



Here's two of the Orion. The yellow/orange represent the current stats for the weapon; the variable horizontal recoil has been accounted for. The purple is my proposed change. The first is all wireframe, but the second has hatches so you can see the areas better.
For any gun with angular variance, the probability of the bullet's trajectory being in a point would have an almost normal distribution along the major axis and constant distribution across the minor axis. The graph below is an example of what it would look like:



In hindsight these are also inaccurate because they're technically 2nd and 3rd shots and the CoF should be 0.05 higher, but you get the point.

1) The devs have stated that there are no plans to change the Orion / Betelgeuce
2) The Orion, the Gauss and the T9 Carv have been balanced to some extent around each other (the T9 Carv's stats are virtually identical to the Orion other then the reload speed, the clip size and the ADS), so to change one all three would have to be rebalanced (read nerfed) against each other.
3) The reason that the Orion is so popular might be due to the other LMG's being so unpopular (ie not so good for some other reason than the 0.75 ADS
4) Also shouldn't the following weapons get the 0.75 ADS removed

NS15M2
Jackhammer (hey its a heavy gun with 0.75 ADS, same argument can be made against it along with the Orion)?, in fact all shotguns.
SMG's have 0.75 ADS and similar ranges and TTK's as LMG's should they be nerfed on heavies alone or for all classes?
Burst Fire Pistols?

Should we then look at the Carbines as NC have 2 with 0.75 ADS whilst the TR and VS only have the 1, then there's the assault rifles.

So in summery should we now drop this subject before it hits 17 pages of the same old same old NC/TR nerf the VS, VS err hang on we are left with only knives, NC/TR NERF THE KNIVES etc etc.

Yes there are things that over perform, like the following

Vulcan on the Harassers
Prowler main guns
Empire specific sniper rifles (Railjack).
Liberators vs everything.
MCG (kills 10561 vs Jackhammers 8920 or the lashers paltry 6721) with the highest KPU unlike the lasher which has always been in one place the bottom and its KPH has been in between the Jackhammer and the Lasher, so by this metric the MCG needs to be nerfed and the Lasher buffed, yet how many threads about that do we see?
Or how about making the AI weapons on tanks and harassers equal as the PPA is somewhat laking in everything so how about nerfing the Marauder and Canister to its level (lower damage, worse CoF, worse splash damage anyone (but as a trade off it will fire faster)?

no, there needs to be NO 0.75 ADS LMG.

People could just.. I dunno.. adapt? Seriously, nothing is wrong with the Orion or its directive clone.

Remove .75x ADS on the Orion and increase the clip size to 75?

I'm sure those who rock with this weapon will still continue to do so if any changes were ever made so I say let it be removed!

0.75 ADS is standing in the way of alot of weapons being improved.

Afterall the guns with 0.75 ADS had to be balanced around/with the move speed.

Please give a .75x to the Bull because IMO the Bull is total bull when we start talking damage output compared to its corresponding brethren from the VS and NC