I have been playing around with battle rifle lately (warden) and even though I know the damage is 250 which means 4 shot kill, it feels weaker then I thought. At the same time if the damage was increased to be meaningful, it would it kills in 3 shots which sounds too powerful. What do you think? Are battle rifles good enough yet?
Nope. If I want a battle-rifle style weapon, I'll take a slug-shotgun because it actually has enough damage to justify its use. The only edge the BR's have is that it is easier to land the shots because of the horrendous bullet drop on the slugs. If I'm VS, I never consider the BR's.
It only does 250 damage within 8 meters, and since it's a long range weapon you're almost never that close to your target. So in other words it's almost always a 5 shot kill, 6 if the target has nanoweave 1. Battle rifles still suck, they need an accuracy buff at least and probably some other buffs before they'll be worth using.
The Devs need to step up on this one and finally give BRs the damage buff they actually need. None of this *****-footing around with recoil, CoF bloom, and/or reload tweaks. BRs are already accurate enough. I can realiably hit a moving target @250m with then as they are now. Hell, I could do that before the recent buff. Give the things more damage per shot. BRs fire high power, full-sized rifle cartridges. You know, like most sniper rifles use. That's one of their defining characteristics that separates them from lower powered assault rifles and carbines. I'm not saying they should do sniper rifle damage because that would be ridiculous in this game. But right now they are simply too weak. They should be doing 300 damage per shot minimum, preferrably 334 like the scout rifles (which should also be buffed IMO). That'll give it a 3-shot kill out to 8 meters, and 4-shot kill everywhere else (unless the target has Nano). Given that sniper rifles are still more accurate than BRs I have no issue with giving BRs a damage boost.
The major benefit to BRs over Slug-Rifles is the bullet velocity. BR: 500 Shotguns (All): 275 If I am not mistaken, BRs can also equip HV ammo. While this is mitigated if your target is completely stationary; all other situations favor the BR. They've also had a tightening on recoil; add on top of that the forward grip buff with GU08, and they'll be ... niche but useful.
The last buff made the SRs and BRs much better, but they're still lacking. They need to do more dmg and/or have less recoil. A slight buff is all. I really want to use these guns more. For the BR, I'll gladly trade 5rnds for more stopping power.
The real problem with BR's is simply the nature of combat in PS2: Most of the fighting happens within 80m where you can be just as effective at the max distance with any other weapon by tap shooting while not being crippled in closer ranged engagements. In the few fights that occur at greater than that range are dominated by sniper rifles, and all others will simply run the distance or spawn tanks/ESFs. There is no room in PS2 combat for BR's to be viable, not to mention the addition of camera sway on 6x scope means the effective range of BR's will drop further. They are pointless weapons because they fill one role only in game that demand versatility from the classes that can use it, and they do not fill that role well enough to be considered at all.
And what would then basilisk have? How come pistol bullets have more power than lmg? The damage hierarchy in this game does not match real life much.
they are adding scope sway to 6x scopes in one week. anything at 4x range you should use different gun. heck at 6x range you should use a different gun. tl;dr they still suck and are gonna suck more btw i love the yellow text, you made me smile.
BRs would be quite viable if they did more damage per shot. Take a look at the semi-auto shotguns when using slugs for example. They're quite useful within the 80m typical combat range because even though they fire slower than the BRs, they do twice the base damage per shot (500). I don't have any issue landing shots with BRs on targets within 80m. Heck, I didn't have problems before the latest BR buffs. The problem is that I often simply don't do enough damage quickly enough to come out on top, despite firing as fast as my Eidolon will shoot. Boosting the damage up to 334 would fix this. That'd shave 1 shot off of its STK and .18 secs from its TTK, enough to make it more competitive with the "easy mode" automatic weapons at medium range without letting them overshadow sniper rifles which do 400-800 base damage. Even a boost to 300 would help by allowing it to retain its 4-shot base STK out farther than a mere 8m - perhaps out to any range if they also increased its minimum damage from 200 to 250. In fact, the more I think about it the more I think that might be enough of a boost: going from 250max/200min up to 300max/250min. Then the slower-firing scout rifles wouldn't be overshadowed by BRs either since they do 334 base damage.
I've actually have been having a lot of good times with the Warden, but I agree a bit more damage would be nice. Even when I get firing first I'll often win at medium, but heavy assaults still take too many shots at that range to compete well, especially with comp/grip lmgs. I feel BR should be a bit more useful at its effective range but otherwise the buffs definitely helped. It doesn't seem anything is changing according to Higby's GU8 post regarding BRs, so after this patch they may just naturally fit in, or we may have to make some noise again
I tried to like my Warden, I really did. It was one of my first purchases, because I liked the idea of having a high powered rifle. It was terrible and I didn't use it after the first couple of days. Then they made some changes so I put it into a loadout again. It was better, a tiny bit, but still never better than I felt I could be with any other weapon available. Hitting a target 5 times at range is nearly impossible, unless they are paying no attention at all. I got plenty of assists with it, HA's nearby finishing my targets of with a spray from their LMGs after I hit it once or twice. Sometimes finishing a guy off that someone else hit a few times too, but rarely a full kill. With a laser sight its not too bad close up and hip fired, but only if you get the jump on the other guy - and even then most times they'll get enough shots back on you to make you hurt. I think the damage should be like the scout rifles, 334 @ 15m to 250 @ 85m. Making it one less shot at all ranges to kill, it'd also be nice if the base ADS COF could be 0.0, just so I can be sure I'll land that first shot at range, but as it is currently I can deal with it.
VS have a decent BR because it has not bullet drop (and now no damage drop off) NC/TR battle rifles ares still terrible due to enormous bullet drop. cause you play VS....
Just increase the BR damage to 300-333, it will still be a 4 shot kill in CQC, but also at longer ranges...
Please, the bullet drop in this game is a joke. For TR/NC BRs, within 80m bullet drop is a non-factor. If you aim at the face you still get a headshot. At 120m, with a 6x scope you only have to move your crosshairs one mil dot below center to exactly hit your target. At 150m it's about 1.25 mil dots. And with High Velocity Ammo the adjustments are even less. If you're doing poorly with a BR it is not due to the bullet drop.
Needs a damage buff and needs to be fully automatic with a pretty low ROF. Lots of games have a niche for classic battle rifles like the H&K G3 or the FN FAL, being high damage per shot, low ROF weapons that are good at all ranges, people in games like CoD or BF3 will pick a battle rifle style weapon for versatility. In PS2 they're just a joke.
