No, you stated x is changing because of y... which is complete hogwash. The added maneuverability is a tertiary benefit of the carbine design, not a primary. Carbines are lighter, smaller, easier to carry and compatible with a greater number of roles in the military than a full-barreled assault rifle. True, carbines are better suited indoor warfare, but that is NOT the environment most current conflicts operate in. Urban warfare is a primary concern of current military engagegments, which do not necessarily require greater maneuverability. Get it? Most current conflicts are urban environments, not necessarily indoor. And while indoor engagements would no doubt favour the increased maneuverability of a carbine, this is not the reason most western militaries are adopting carbines as their general infantry weapon. Honestly, go talk to someone with experience with these weapons and current military tactics. You have no clue what you are talking about.
I think you are arguing semantics here, maybe I'm choosing the correct words? Carbines are good because they are lighter:yes obviously-I consider this in game terms as maneuverability. Carbines are good because they are shorter: easier to carry inside vehicles and use in doors-I consider this in game terms as maneuverability. I feel like your just rephrasing what I'm saying.
All of them. ARs a better than Carbines. Also, it's funny people above me are arguing about carbines being lighter and more maneuverable yet on the VS/NC side, the CQC carbines don't have a .75 ADS movement multiplier yet the CQC ARs do. Doesn't make sense. In fact, it makes sense that all carbines have a multi higher than .5.
You really shouldn't be ADS'ing with a carbine to be worried about the lack of 0.75x movement speed, however CQC AR's such as the Carnage BR, TAR and H-V45 act like carbines and are needed for medic when up in the frontlines. But yeah go ahead and get AR's as long as the ability to equip shotguns is removed from LA.
If the devs have balanced the weapons properly, nobody should be worried about LA getting ARs because they should be less suitable for CQB than carbines. In my opinion ARs and Carbines should be open to all classes but the infiltrator. There's no good reason why not. Each weapon type has its own strength and weakness, plus the NS weapons, SMGs, revolvers and shotguns have broken the class barrier anyway. The only restriction should be LMG for heavies as they have augmented armor.
That's just a stupid statement and you know it. You need to ADS to hit reliably past 5m (10 with and adv laser) and a 0.75 ADS movement multi is a straight up upgrade to 0.5 multi, there are no downsides to it. This. SOE basically copied BF3s crappy weapon balance.
Apologies for the necro post here. Has anyone mentioned the difference of velocity between carbines and ARs? Because that's the part that really kills me. (Aside from recoil; I'm a TR player, you know, only one gun with balanced recoil, and it's got the most awful velocity) I constantly find myself having to lead targets at close-medium range. Essentially, if it's moving at mid-range (30 meters maybe? Is that considered mid-range?), I have to lead my shot. Although I play LA, I know it's shocking, but I like to ADS. When my target starts sprinting across a field at medium range, I don't want to have to lead my shots very much at all. Until I'm shooting from long range (60-75m+) I don't really want to have to lead my target. I'm supposed to be the best at urban and close-medium range combat, right? I'm not able to when I have to lead my shots past 30 meters. Therefore, don't give us ARs: buff our carbines! At least I could find the good in carbines in battlefield (tighter ADS accuracy than ARs while moving, less while standing still). That suited my run-and-gun playstyle, even as an ADS-er. This game, though, has failed so far to show carbines as anything more than watered down ARs. I sincerely hope our weapons are improved so that they can shine in their own light. And no, hip fire accuracy and reload speed are not sufficient in exchange for overall ADS accuracy, velocity, and damage drop-off. Most people admittedly prefer ARs; there's a reason. Buff the carbines.
We will like it for the first month or two, then they will nerf the crap out of it. SOE's business practice made it abundantly clear that there is no point buying something with SC because it's just going to be $7 useless in-game item that sits in your inventory.
This essentially adds up to two points Maneuverable Versatile Given the new tactics of the American military, I'd say they switched to carbines because of the maneuverability, not the versatility. We're moving on to using APC transports and unifying squadrons under a single APC with mounted support weapons. This means troops will be entering/exiting vehicles a lot more often then conventional soldiers would. Something maneuverability helps out a lot. The primary reason urban warfare is a concern is BECAUSE it involves a lot more indoor combat. As opposed to open desert or other forms of conventional warfare. That being said, maneuverability is looking like something they would have looked into a lot more then what you imply. Most urban conflicts involve a great deal of indoor combat. In fact I would dare say that ALL of them involve a great deal of indoor and close quarters combat. This is what separates such conflicts from conventional ones and why new tactics, strategies, and training methods are being adopted. At the very least urban warfare means shorter ranges. Which is why shorter barrels (which mean shorter ranges) isn't as much of an *** kicker for soldiers in an urban environment as it is for those in an open desert or open field environment. The adoption of carbine over full sized AR is a pretty obvious choice when you run through the list of pros and cons for both and examine the more likely battlefield situations that they will be in. Maneuverability is far more likely to have had the biggest influence of that decision over anything else. Put it this way, what weapon would you rather have in a biodome? An AC-X11 or a shotgun? Why? Is it because that weapon is better suited for your intended play style, or because you're more likely to engage enemies at short/long ranges?
ARs are completely wrong for LAs role. A short to medium range raider. The guy who's first in. He is not meant for longer range front-line combat
