Because NC weapons have so much recoil that even with an advanced grip, a stock TR weapon generally has less recoil for no attachment cost.
I know that if I gave you a generic response that, TR having less recoil isn't true, you would link the stats. So, for the sake of anyone who doesn't understand, I want to make something clear. The T9 Carv has less recoil per shot than the NC6 Guass Saw, because the T9 Carv shoots much faster. The T9 Carv with the foregrip(The only recoil reducing attachment it has) is harder to control than the Guass Saw with the Advanced Foregrip and Compensator. While the Guass Saw has higher recoil per shot, that recoil is experienced at a much slower rate so naturally you have more time to compensate for it with skill. The T9 Carv has a high fire rate and even though it has less recoil per shot, it is still high enough that with the recoil being experienced in such short and quick intervals it becomes harder to control. General experience playing both factions will tell you that the Guass Saw with all the attachments is like a laser beam compared to the T9 Carv with all attachments. The Guass Saw is simply put, easier to use.
Played both NC HA, and TR. NC's stock stuff has way to much recoil then the TR guns- spiting bullets as а ппш-41 .
SAW has lower dps, so it's worse in close quarters. It's a tradeoff. Iirc it has the lowest dps of the NC LMG (except the NS crap thing) and NC dps is lower then TR on average as well. Plus you shouldn't forget that the difference between full attachements is like 200 certs ? 400 certs is a huge amount for newbies. Stock it's bad, (perhaps worse then the other 2) but upgraded it's not bad. But then again, for that cert price you can also get other guns, namely an upgraded GD-22 or EM6 which both have certain advantages over the SAW.
Going from the raw stats, you could say, no, they don't. I'd argue VS #1, TR #2, NC #3. actually - and here's some stats to support my hypothesis: Kills per minute 1. SVA 2. Pulsar LSW 3. EM6 4. Flare 5. T9 CARV-S 6. Polaris 7. T16 rhino 8. T32 Bull 9. Em1 10. TMG-50 FYI - #17. "Super nerf plz OMG wtfbbqpwn SAW" Score per Minute 1. SVA 2. T-9 CARV S 3. EM6 4. T32 Bull 5. VX Polaris 6. Pulsar LSW 7. Ursa 8. Flare 9. Em1 10. Anchor FYI - #16. "Super nerf plz OMG wtfbbqpwn SAW" The "poor man's SAW" the TMG is comfortably ahead of its "better" rival in both categories. The SAW loses to the Orion and CARV in all categories, except it is slightly better than CARV in kills/minute.
Some people just shouldn't be allowed near statistics. To accurately compare experimental data, you need to control all other variables as much as possible, otherwise, you cannot be sure if a difference is due to what you're examining, or due to the other variables. There are significant differences between the population using a default weapon, and the population using a locked weapon, and there are significant differences in usage patterns (such as downtime) between a medium-range weapon hauled around everywhere and a CQC spewgun that's only pulled out when it's rock and roll time. Trying to compare values between both category shifts at once is futile. Pretty much nothing on that chart -is- useful, really, except to track changes within each cell over time. Or do you want to believe that the NC Sunderer Basilisk is 7% less powerful than the VS Sunderer Basilisk? Or that the rear Basilisk on a Sunderer is stronger against vehicles while the front one is stronger against infantry?
Sunderer basilisks have such a low usage that 5 guys going on killing sprees for a couple of hours is likely to skew the results. Statistically, the sample size is too small to measure for those. LMG users are a lot more common.
Agreed. This did not stop people comparing scatmax vs chaingun MAXes (~8%) - and that wasn't even like for like. However if the SAW is getting 16 kills vs 21-23 for a "CQC" gun (though most of the guns at the top of the list do not fall into that category)- the ~20-25% suggests the CQC LMG is more useful in high risk situations when there are lots of enemies to be killed then a long range "plinker" therefore it is a "better" gun. There are lies, damn lies and statistics. However I'd suggest raw stats are not particularly more or less reliable than the theorycrafting in this thread using theoretical spreadsheet dps etc. There are many variables involved in that as well. I'm just looking at the other side of the coin. Remember when TR and VS used to say "L2P" when NC complained about their weapons, quoting spreadsheets - then quickly screamed "NC OP OP Higby favourites" when flinch mechanic (unfairly favouring high RoF weapons) removed their free built in handicap?
In all fairness, a lot of us have always said that the NC guns are fantastic. Personally I hardly think they're op, just better. The flinch changes just made them even better!
I'd be happy if they just gave the TMG-50 an advanced grip just like the closest relative, the Gauss Saw S has or an advanced laser & softpoint ammo like the EM6 (which gets HV ammo too). Even though the TMG-50 is a -med-to-long range weapon for us TR. It is the only TR weapon with the same damage & range tiers as those other 4 NC LMGs (which includes the EM6 & Gauss Saw S), so I figure, if they'll give an EM6 an advanced laser, why not TMG-50...although I'd prefer the Advanced Grip. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...10m&sortcolid=-1&sortasc=true&rowsperpage=250
The SAW S does not have advanced laser or anything. VR training gives a load of attachments that aren't certable in the a trial game. None of the TMG's actual rivals in the 167 damage category have an advanced foregrip.
Previously i would of argued that the NC had the better options for LMG's Now with the normalization of damage fall off for the VS i would argue that they have the best choice of weapons in every class. T hey get no unique downside and get Both Slow and fast firing, High and low damage, better aimed and better hip firing choices allowing them to pick an LMG that exactly suits the play style. Combined with access to certain weapons that other factions do not get access to... most obvious examples, 167 Damage carbine, TR lack this and an 845 ROF carbine, TR lack this also... Now the VS get the advantages of the weapons they use without any downsides generally they see better accuracy combined with no bullet drop and the choice weapons for any play style with huge rangely stats... Well we know why that is.. The NC weapons are generally average in the hands of most, but the few skilled players truly dominate and i imagine if you only looked at the best players the Saw would be ahead of the other LMG's by a large margin.
This is a complete nonsense the GD-7F is the only example, and that is tied with a VS carbine for RoF. The highest RoF NC LMG is just plain terrible, and is still a lower RoF than several TR and VS LMGs. This whole thread is perfect example of the politics of envy where facts are something noone is interested in.
