[Suggestion] A small buff for the T5-AMC Carbine?

Discussion in 'Light Assault' started by TheArchetype, Mar 2, 2013.

  1. Iridar51

    And this happens how often?..
    Let's do some napkin math.
    1000 health and shileds (let's assume no infiltrators or heavies with shields and no nanite boosts or nanoweave)
    143 damage per shot.
    GD-7F, ROF 845: DPS = (845 / 60) * 143 = 2014. TTK = 1000 / 2014 = 0,497 seconds.
    Lynx, ROF 800: DPS = 1907. TTK = 0,524
    OH LOOK, Lynx's TTK is 0,027 seconds longer. What a waste of a weapon.
    So, GD-7F User will have 0,027 reaction time to kill Lynx user before Lynx's inferior DPS will finally kill the GD-7F user.

    Let them have their 0,027 seconds faster TTK and give me 10 more bullets (which is 1430 potential damage, not counting headshots) anytime, LOL.
  2. x13urst

    Way to take it litterally. Point was that the GDF7 has higher DPS. I'll happily trade you my lynx for your GD. Lynx also has more recoil. The ooooooonly thing the lynx has over the GDF7 (ALL TR carbines have this advantage) is 10 extra bullets.
  3. Iridar51

    And my point was that difference in DPS is so miniscule that it can be safely ignored. In a wolrd where life and death separated by half a second additional 5% dps don't mean a thing.

    You underestimate those 10 bullets. So did I, until I actually used the Lynx.
    All other TR carbines (except Jaguar) don't have advanced laser sight and 75% ADS movespeed multiplier.

    I have to admit I haven't actually used GD-7F, but I've seen videos with players using it, and I've often seen the following picture - player would kill one enemy with around 20 bullets, and then he has to reload to engage second target. With Lynx you have additional ammo to help in such situations (I know it helped me).
    GD-7F reminds me recent arsenal addition - the pump shotguns. They are similar in a way - if you spend half a second firing past the target, then you won't have enough time/ammo to take it down afterwards.

    Also, keep in mind that Lynx not only has 10 bullets bigger clip, but also it's total ammo pool is 240 vs 180, assuming no ammo belt.
  4. DuckSauce

    Off-topic: I'll gladly trade my GD7F for a Lynx. Too bad there's no locker system to hook that up. ;)

    On-topic: From my experience using them, what the AMC/T16 need is a sizeable first shot recoil multiplier decrease to make them better at bursting. Alternately, they could get a slight reduction to CoF increase per shot to make them better at sustained fire. I wouldn't hold my breath on the second one because 0.05 for 143 damage weapons, 0.06 for 167 damage weapons, and 0.07 for 200 damage weapons seems to be some kind of PS2 law of nature. But the GD-7F seems to defy this logic by having 143 damage per shot and 0.06 CoF increase, so in theory the AMC/T16 could be lowered to 0.045 or 0.04...
  5. Achmed20

    if you encouter ans1 with a lynx or gdf, it hardly matters if it has 50 rpm more or not. human reaction is ~200ms. your 50 rpm wont mater.
    also, unless you are an utter useless LA, you will be moving arround like crazy forcing your enemy to waste his bullets. 10 bullets extra usualy mean the upper hand here.
    hmmm felt way faster, anyway, it still has more rounds which justify that long reload. not tell me wha justifys in on the GDF? also the ADS movement of the lynx is way heigher. that alone makes it superior to the GDF.

    people realy should stop playing papercraft. im shredding people to pieces with the AC-X11 in CQC even if they have a high RPM gun.
  6. MrIDoK

    I agree that a lower CoF increase could make them much more useful. I hate when my T16 sprays all over the place... it's made for sustained accurate fire, ffs! it's its only advantage a carv. Also the AMC would benefit a lot from it.

    After testing a bit the AMC compared to a TRAC-5S, i saw that there isn't that much of a difference. Yeah, the AMC is a bit better at range, but bursting with the TRAC-5S is not that far away in terms of time to kill, so... yeah. I'm a bit perplexed.

    One thing i noticed is that carbines get a higher damage degradation than assault rifles. So the T5 goes from 143 to 112 while the T1 goes from 143 to 125, which means that at range carbines need an additional bullet to kill compared to assault rifles.
    While that is a good rule of thumb, the T5 could be an exception. After all, it has already the bullet speed of an assault rifle, why not give it the lower damage degradation of one? Instead of pure damage like the other carbines, we get lower initial damage with lower degradation. Seems balanced to me. :)
  7. irishroy

  8. DuckSauce

    Wut.
  9. irishroy

    this meme says:
    NO.
    ^_^
  10. DuckSauce

    TR isn't allowed to have a good long-range carbine? :|
  11. irishroy

    well, look at their overall high RoF and the low recoil...
    i just don't like the idea of buffing a faction (with bunnyhopping HAs with shieldON and hipfiring) that is really decent at CQC.
    but if it's a buff of +5 points of dmg, it would be ok...^^

    and BTW: there is nearly every day a prowlerzerg that just mowes everything down, no matter how many tankmines you prepare, how fast you try to react, how much effort you put in holding a base.

    you really gamble away your soul, if you think there is a "prowler-zerg-free" eveing.
  12. Marked4Death

    Given the NC get the GD-7F, all empires should get a carbine with a possible 167 damage at range.
  13. Wolfwood82

    You are claiming that an mount of time which is faster then a human eye blink makes a weapon better then another weapon that does 1430 more damage in a single clip.

    You are nuts.

    Maybe a translation is in order. .027 seconds is = to 2.7 HUNDREDTHS of a second. 3 hundredths of a second dude. The one who is taking it literally is you mr "I want my Lynx to be way moar powahful".

    You are also nuts as you have no effing clue what 5 damage can do to the balance of the game.

    And do I detect a hint of whining in this post? I get this aroma... a feeling if you will... that you don't seem to like being soundly beaten by tactics.
  14. vaxx

    Pretty much this. The corssover of choices is not there for the TR carbines.

    Not asking for a super gun, but like I said eariler, change the mag to 30, and the damage to 167. Lower the RoF even, but give the TR a freekin choice.
  15. MrIDoK

    Then why do you have an incredibly good close-range carbine (the GD-7F) a good mid-range carbine (the Mercenary and its variants) and a very viable long-range carbine (the AC-X11)?
    I understand that you don't want to give up any advantage, but try to be realistic and not blinded by your "loyalty" to the NC.


    There are 2 roads that can be used to balance this gun:
    1- make it into a gun similar to the SABR. High damage (167/125 instead of 143/112), low rof (600 instead of 652), same bullet speed (570), low-capacity magazine (30 shots instead of 40), low first shot recoil multiplier (1.7x instead of 2.5x), slightly higher recoil (0.35 instead of 0.3).
    2- keep the low base damage, buff its minimum damage and reduce the cone of fire increase per-shot.

    The second one is more in line with the TR philosophy of "moar bullets" and would be pretty balanced: it would perform worse than every other carbine at close range, but would have an advantage over standard carbines at range.
  16. irishroy

    well, that's right, i don't really want to give up the LAs advantages. yes, the NC is good at CQC, but the TR also has its strengths.
    they have pretty good vehicles, like the prowler and the mosquito. they also have some good guns, but they are better at short-medium range (just my impression)

    to be honest, maybe i have overreacted a bit.
    i haven't tried the T5-AMC, so i don't know how "bad" it acutally is.
    if it's as "bad" as you say, it could use a buff.

    but the NC should still have a certain advantage at CQC ^^
  17. vaxx

    And this is why it bugs me when people comment on something based on un-informed opinions like yours. When people have only played one or two factions, then comment on somethig they have not used/played, it makes the opinion worthless.

    Then you bring Prowlers/Mossies into a discussion about a certain carbine? Come on...
  18. Verenz

    First off, I do agree that the carbine feels pretty meh for a long range carbine. You do get a super high velocity and a double foregrip/compensator/HV ammo but you are indeed stuck with a lower damage and stationary accuracy than every other long range carbine.

    However upping the damge by a "tier" (to 167) even if you lower the clip size to 30 would make it superior by a significant margin to the entire NC arsenal - NC do not have a gun that fires those bullets faster than 600rpm (not until the first carbine that is, but that is a pure dedicated fast TTK CQC weapon).

    So it would probably need its rpm lowered to 577 and obviously it would need an increased recoil from 0.3 to bring it up to the likes of the mercenary(0.4)/pulsar compact(0.42), whilst lowering the initial recoil. But then it has a 60-70ms velocity advantage with no downside (other than reload but the reload would prob be reduced when it lost the 40 round mag), so then it would have to sacrifice something to keep that stat (or lose that edge).

    My point being that "just increasing its damage" would essentially require completely remaking the weapon - it would not in any way resemble the original.

    I played only TR in beta, so I created my TR on miller on release but due to queue's i ended up playing NC more and more and now I am 40 levels higher on NC that TR.

    The reason I kept NC was for the variety of guns the race had (though at launch most of them were total crap) and I was stunned at how boring the TR and VS guns were in comparison, so I can understand why many TR would prob be happy with a totally reworked T5, but I understand that SOE are trying to make it have a kind of "TR" feel.
  19. C1PHER

    Alright, having studied the carbines of all three empires, I have come to the conclusion that all variants of each empire's carbines follow the same basic paradigm, but each empire has 1 variant that is "missing." The T5 AMC is kind of part of this, so I figured I'll post it here.

    Here's the carbines for each empire, placed into a "role" that I think they're designed for, based upon how each weapon's stats compares to the "standard" carbine for each empire.

    • Weapon role
      • TR weapon
      • NC weapon
      • VS weapon
    I should point out that I'm colorblind, so I'm not sure if VS is the right color, but you get the idea

    • Standard (medium range)
      • TRAC-5
      • AF-19 Mercenary
      • Solstice
    • S-suffix (under-barrel attachments)
      • TRAC-5 S
      • Gauss Compact S
      • Solstice SF
    • Burst
      • TRAC-5 Burst
      • Gauss Compact Burst
      • Solstice Burst
    • Medium-long range
      • T5 AMC
      • Razor GD-23
      • [--missing--]
    • Long range / high damage per shot
      • [--missing--]
      • AC-X11
      • Pulsar C
    • close range, high rate of fire
      • LC2 Lynx
      • GD-7F
      • Serpent
    • close range, improved hip accuracy
      • LC3 Jaguar
      • [--missing--]
      • VX6-7
    Based on all of this, it looks like the TR doesn't get to have a gun with an increased damage-per-shot. Just the same, the NC lack a carbine with better hipfire accuracy and the VS lack a gun that is designed for slightly longer ranges than their standard. So I doubt the T5 AMC will be getting any sort of buff; it's already set in a role determined by its stats relative to the standard carbine.

    However, as I mentioned before, the T5 AMC shares its list of attachments with the AC-X11 and Pulsar C and not the Razor GD-23. That's a bit of an odd issue, but not exactly the substance of this thread.
  20. XRIST0

    I hipfire the gd7 all the time with good results , its useless at shooting anything at a range .. it fires way too fast its stupid , i really wanted to like that gun but i went back to using the mercinary instead .. its a better all round gun