EM1. Why use it?

Discussion in 'Heavy Assault' started by MykeMichail, Aug 17, 2013.

  1. KnightCole

    Em1, noone likes it cuz in the end only thing that matters is did you survive the firefight?

    143@652 guns are a horrid dmg:rof ratio that leaves the user dead more often thrn not.

    Only use for 143@652 guns is stealth and hope u get a hit ratio of 10:1 or you lose.

    Ur good until someone comes Along with pretty much anything else anf fires back. I know this from my time with the t16. I lost count of the number of af19, nc6, 4, 14 and even the occasional em1 user who would kill me after i unloaded on them.

    My loadout im sure had something to di with it but yeah...it got old.
  2. Judgeratt

    How so?

    NW0 = 1000 health
    1000/143 = 6.99, so it takes 7 shots to kill.
    7 shots at 652RPM = .64317 seconds, rounded to .64 seconds.

    1000/167 = 5.99, so it takes 6 shots to kill.
    6 shots at 600RPM = .6 seconds exactly.

    NW5 = 1250 health.
    Resist Shield blocks 45% of damage, so that means we need to multiply bullet damage by .55.

    1250/(.55(142) = 15.89, so it takes 16 shots to kill.
    16 shots at 652RPM = 1.47239, rounded to 1.47 seconds.

    1250/(.55(167)) = 13.61, so it takes 14 shots to kill.
    14 shots at 600RPM = 1.4 seconds exactly.

    Even if you were correct, one one-hundredth of a second truly doesn't matter. Don't be pedantic.

    Does inaccuracy punish the Anchor less than the EM1?

    Let's look at differences in how long it takes to fire an equal number of bullets.

    652RPM, 10 shots = .92 seconds, 20 shots = 1.84 seconds, 30 shots = 2.76 seconds
    600RPM, 10 shots = 1 second, 20 shots = 2 seconds, 30 shots = 3 seconds

    So, to fire an equal number of bullets, the Anchor is 9% slower. That number doesn't change.

    Now, let's look at differences if you miss an equal number of shots.

    NW0, EM1 takes 7 shots to kill, and Anchor takes 6.

    0 misses, .64 seconds vs. .6 seconds = Anchor is 6.7% faster.
    3 misses, .92 seconds vs. .9 seconds = Anchor is 2.2% faster.
    5 misses, 1.1 seconds vs. 1.1 seconds = Anchor is 0% faster.

    NW5, EM1 takes 9 shots to kill, and Anchor takes 8.

    0 misses, .83 vs. .8 = Anchor is 3.8% faster.
    3 misses, 1.1 vs. 1.1 = Anchor is 0% faster.
    5 misses, 1.29 vs. 1.3 = EM1 .8% faster.

    NW5 + Resist Shield, EM1 takes 16 shots to kill, and Anchor takes 14.

    0 misses, 1.47 vs. 1.4 = Anchor is 5% faster.
    3 misses, 1.75 vs. 1.7 = Anchor is 2.9% faster.
    5 misses, 1.93 vs. 1.9 = Anchor is 1.5% faster.

    Finally, let's look at differences if you miss an equal percentage of shots.

    NW0, EM1 takes 7 shots to kill, and Anchor takes 6.

    75% accuracy, 10 shots vs. 8, .92 seconds vs. .8, Anchor is 15% faster.
    50% 14 shots vs. 12, 1.29 vs. 1.2, Anchor is 7.5% faster.
    25% 28 vs. 24, 2.58 vs. 2.4, Anchor is 7.5% faster.

    NW5, EM1 takes 9 shots to kill, and Anchor takes 8.

    75%, 12 vs. 11, 1.1 vs. 1.1, Anchor is 0% faster.
    50%, 18 vs. 16, 1.66 vs 1.6, Anchor is 3.8% faster.
    25%, 36 vs. 32, 3.31 vs 3.2, Anchor is 3.4% faster.

    NW5 + Resist Shield, EM1 takes 16 shots to kill, and Anchor takes 14.

    75%, 22 vs. 19, 2.02 vs. 1.9, Anchor is 6.3% faster.
    50%, 32 vs. 28, 2.94 vs. 2.8, Anchor is 5% faster.
    25%, 64 vs. 56, 5.89 vs. 5.6, Anchor is 5.2% faster. This is likely an anomaly. Besides, your magazine isn't that large, so the EM1 is faster anyway. :p

    So, what does this show us? Pretty much no matter how you slice it, the more bullets you have to fire, the Anchor becomes comparatively less better. If you look at accuracy in terms of percentages, there are some particular points where the above doesn't hold true, but those are the quirks of firing n bullets that do x damage rather than looking at raw DPS.

    Inaccuracy harms the EM1 less than it does the Anchor.

    Also, remember that we're still talking about imperceptibly-small amounts of time, here.

    The Anchor does have better hipfire accuracy. Is it *that* much better? Doubtful. Then again, I'm considering both weapons with ALS. If you use Extended Mag or something then the story is different, but we're making an apples-to-apples comparison here. If you're regularly in fights where you have to compensate for bullet spread against a single opponent, you shouldn't be using the EM1 or the Anchor anyway.

    Why would you reload with enemies around you? I find it's best to reload between fights. Thus, the more you need to reload, the more fights you need to disengage from and the more opportunities enemies have to jump you while your pants are down.

    If you're up against 3 or 4 people with the Anchor, you can kill them and reload on your way to the next group. You can do that with the EM1 too. The trade-off is a meaninglessly-longer TTK and slightly worse hipfire spread for twice as much ammo in the mag. All that extra ammo gives you more options, including more choice about when you reload.

    If you run out of ammo before the last kill, you're being limited by your ammo, not your accuracy, and thus the EM1 will serve you better. Besides, if your accuracy sucks with the Anchor it'll suck with the EM1 too, so what's the difference? Also, remember that with the EM1 you can still lift your finger off your left mouse button between opponents, so your fire cone can reset.

    How would the EM1 make you die sooner against more opponents? Equipping the weapon doesn't lower your health. If you think the lower TTK will make a difference, you should reconsider what .04-.07 seconds really mean.

    Right you are. I still prefer having to reload far less often, however.
  3. MykeMichail

    Been using the EM1 a lot more since I first posted this.

    Basically - if more open situations like techplants and amp stations, where there's still plenty of CQC action to be had, I'll use the EM1. In really tight, almost pure CQC environments, I'll run Anchor.
  4. Sossen

    Your calculations don't consider the fact that there is no delay before the first bullet. If you fire two bullets then you fire the first one instantly and the second one after a delay determined by your RPM. Thus, TTK ignores the first bullet - if you need 10 shots to kill then you will only need to account for 9 delays. The number of delays is divided by your RPM and multiplied by 60 to get the TTK.

    It doesn't really matter if the proportion by which the Anchor is faster is lower at lower accuracies. The important thing is to reduce the time it takes to kill someone by as much as possible. If it takes me .1 second less to kill someone then that will often be the difference between getting shot three times and getting shot four or five times.

    When you shoot someone who isn't aiming at you already, it takes the server a given amount of time to transmit that information to the target. It then takes a considerable amount of time for him to react at all - around .2 seconds. Then he needs to get his crosshairs over you, maybe another .1 - .2 seconds. At this point, a weapon that kills in 1.1 seconds with 50% accuracy has maybe .7 seconds left on the clock. A weapon that kills in 1.2 seconds would have .8 seconds left on the clock. See my point?

    Of course you won't always shoot someone first, and you will probably not survive being jumped just because of a slightly better weapon. That doesn't mean that situations where .1 seconds matter are rare, or even uncommon. The TTK in Planetside 2 is higher than other FPS games out there, but it's still very low.

    The hipfire spread is not just slightly worse. The base hipfire COF for the Anchor is going to have around half the cross-sectional area of the EM1's base hipfire COF. Quite a lot. That's assuming that advanced laser sight halves your COF radius, which I have been led to believe. It might be different, but any other possible configuration benefits the Anchor more. It definitely makes a difference for your hit rate, even if just a couple of percent. That's still a bullet or two less.

    The Anchor also has better accuracy while aiming down the sight and moving or not moving, 20% less horizontal recoil and the benefit of having a higher damage type, which all in all helps you a lot at mid-long range. All the EM1 gets is 70% more damage per magazine. But what good is that?

    This is my point exactly. If you can kill 4 guys in a row with the EM1, then you can do it with the Anchor as well and with less risk. Since you would have to be very good at aiming to kill 4 decent guys in a row with the EM1, you shouldn't need more than the ammo available to the Anchor - if you do need more, then you're likely already dead if the enemies are decent. Scrubs can be finished with your sidearm. If the only situation that really benefits the EM1 is when you go up against 5-6 or more decent players within a brief period of time without reloading or recharging your shield, then you'd either have to be extremely good at aiming or extremely good at avoiding bullets.

    I will say that having a larger ammo pool is a comfortable feature, though I never run out before I can find another resupply point.
  5. Judgeratt

    Or, put another way, the delay after the final shot doesn't matter. Fair - you've got me there. Still, I feel that one one-hundredth of a second doesn't change anything.

    This is one of the strengths of the Anchor, but I feel that needing to reload less often has done far more for me than the slightly-quicker TTK would. And in those longest TTK scenarios, well, you're probably also running NW5 with your Resist Shield up.

    I play at 1280x1024, and the difference appears to be 3 pixels in each direction. This is another of the Anchor's strengths, but again I think it's a minor benefit. There's little difference between the two, and for me, I doubt that missing a bullet or two every once in a while has done me more harm than the larger magazine size.

    And yet, I find the EM1 much easier to control at range. I only have VR experience with the Anchor, but I remember having that impression even when trying to decide which weapon to purchase. When firing single shots, the EM1 moves up and to a side, but the Anchor makes a little circle. So, the EM1 is better, for me, at medium range, but the difference isn't huge. In any case, when I choose a close-range weapon, the gun's performance at 40+ yards is a secondary consideration for me.

    To me, the EM1 is less risky. There's essentially no difference in TTK and the hipfire difference isn't big enough to make a difference when in hipfire range. The EM1 is less risky to me since I can easily kill four people without reloading, but I might have to reload with a 50-round gun. Also, after taking care of those four people, I don't *have* to reload, but with the Anchor I would. With the EM1, I can make sure I'm in a favorable position first.

    We see this weapon very, very differently. Are you sure you're not thinking of the EM6's hipfire, or that you're thinking of the EM1 with the *advanced* laser sight? The crosshair difference in minor, especially among LMGs. I don't see much of a difference in aiming between killing four enemies with an EM1 and an Anchor. It's not like the EM1 fires like the SAW, or the Anchor an SMG. In fact, I would think it's harder to kill four people with an Anchor than with an EM1, since with an Anchor you're much more likely to have to reload before you kill them all, whereas you won't need to reload the EM1.

    Running out of ammo entirely is pretty rare when I play HA. The EM1 does get more rounds to fire overall, but meh. It's the number of rounds in each drum that I care about.
  6. Judgeratt

    The most important stat is how well a weapon clicks with you, and the Anchor is still a fine weapon. I even think the EM1 is a little bit underpowered and should have a .75 ADS movement modifier. However, my message is that the people who say "The EM1 sucks. Anyone who uses it is wrong." are, in fact, wrong, and haven't thought the matter through for themselves.
  7. Jogido

    have you used the EM1? I noticed the TR 143@652 guns are not exactly the same kind of animal. Though similar weapons, the EM1 with adv laser and Soft point ammo are better options to me.

    The TR ones just can't be as good at cqc hipfire which is the main strength for the Em1 and Anchor. Mobile close range engagement without the ads slow down.

    The T16 seems to lean toward range fighting and the T32 seems to be a general all rounder while not excelling at anything.
  8. KnightCole

    Except anything em1 does the em6 can do better.

    Exmag and sup? Em6 can do it with harder hitting bullets so u get more kills.
  9. Judgeratt

    Not true. The EM1 has WAY better hipfire and reload speeds. It's also a far better dinner guest than the EM6.
  10. Flashtirade

    As someone who has gotten the gold medal on the EM1 and is reluctant to go all the way to Auraxium with it, I can safely say that the gun has lost me many a firefight in situations that are even or sometimes even in my favor. I'm not the best heavy assault, but I believe the majority of people aren't either, so I'm at least a somewhat valid metric.

    My advice:
    Run either a grip or ex mags, the double laser doesn't tighten up the hipfire nearly enough to be competitive with other guns in its category. The grip will make the horizontal recoil a little more controllable so you can eek out a little more effective range (I'd say the max is about 40-50 meters), and the ex mags is so you can live out your rambo fantasies.
    Run a silencer or SPA, but not both unless you plan on trying to compete with CQC weapons within 20 meters. I prefer the silencer because the reduced sound and lack of map pinging is useful for engaging multiple enemies, but SPA is good too since the EM1 needs all the damage it can get.
  11. Jogido

    personally I like going a different direction. adv laser, soft point, 1x sight, no barrel attachment. I find it working decent at medium ranges without grip. CQC is all about being a moving target while hip firing. I can take on shotgun users, but maybe that's just me.
  12. KnightCole

    Reload is a very meaningless thing to me. Reload speed doesnt win u fights.

    1s or 7s...its all the same to me.

    Em1, if all it can do is reload and hipfire better than em6, why would u ever use it and not em6?

    Em1 and saw s...those are the 2 most pointless guns in this game. They are not special and really offer nothing.

    And wtf does better dinner guest mean? Looks better? All the lmgs look the same. Anchor has a clip now but its still the same model.
  13. UNSCSpartan051

    The EM1 was designed to control firing lanes with its fast reload. Therefore an Ex.Mags setup would be better.
    But the problem is The EM6 can do what the EM1 does but better. 167 damage for a decrease in 52 RPM. Since your both running Ex.Mags hipfire doesn't really matter. EM6 has a slightly slower reload, but guys used the the SAW, it's pretty fast.
    With HVA EM6 can reach out and touch guys.
    If using the EM1 as a CQC gun, both the GD22s and Anchor will serve you better with higher TTK and in the case of GD22s cert cost.
    Gauss SAW is better for longer ranges.
    It tries to be too many things failing at them all. The 143 TR-esque Damage doesn't help.
    EM6 is what the EM1 wants to be, the Swiss Knife.
    The SAW acts more like a Heavy Machine Gun. Setup a stationary position and mow people down with that insane damage.
    Anchor and GD22s are the Carbines of the HA, suited to clearing hallways with some mid range capability thrown in.
    The Cyclone IMO is the Room Clearer, the Tommy Gun, with the high damage.
    Blitz is a crutch for bad aiming.
    IMO NC has the 600 RPM 167 damage that noone else has. Its the sweet spot for inf weapons in the game. Vertasility and puch. The Gauss Rifle, Mercenary, EM6 and Anchor are beautiful.
    NC is high Damage, good Staying Power.
    If you don't value these, stop using the TR copies such as the Blitz and 143 damage tier weapon.
    Real men use 167 and above.
    Using the 143 tier weapons shows you do not value freedom.
    NS weapons are the worst, selling your soul to the devil.
    • Up x 2
  14. hansgrosse

    I've said it before, and I'll say it again; it's all in using what the weapon does well to your advantage. You may not value the EM-1's mag size/reload speed combination, and that's fine, but that doesn't mean it's not extremely valuable. I personally find it to be an incredible advantage. In contrast to your assessment, I'll contend that mag size + reload speed DOES win you fights, especially during hectic, outnumbered defensive operations, and it does so quite often. I haven't been using the EM-1 for very long, but in the time I've spent with it my KDR has jumped .05%, which is certainly not an insignificant statistic, and it's continuing to rise.

    I guess what I'm trying to get at is that the EM-1 will probably NOT perform for you if you try to force it to work within your predefined playstyle (as most players do), but if you adapt your playstyle to suit the EM-1's quirks it can and does shred through everything you come across that walks on two legs. They're effective in different situations and at different times, but when you're playing to the weapon's strengths I'd put the EM-1 right up there with your beloved EM-6 any day. ;D
    • Up x 1
  15. lilleAllan

    Ok, the one thing EM1 has over EM6 is faster reload.
    Which is of course somewhat nullified by the fact that the EM1 has far less damage per mag and fires it off faster.
    EM6 with extended mags is basically the highest damage/mag weapon in the game, so it's better than EM1 at it's other supposed gimmick, suppresion, while still maintaining higher DPS.
    • Up x 2
  16. Jogido

    don't forget hip fire. Em1 has better hip fire, esp with the adv laser option.

    I personally don't use it for suppression fire so much as just killing my targets...but just wanted to point out that suppression is not about hitting targets. It is about pinning them down so damage is not as much a factor as RoF.
  17. Jogido

    Exactly, I have Auraxium medals for every NC lmg. They are each good at something....but they all won't work for everybody.

    They only odd ball is that the Anchor is a straight up upgrade to the GD22s which is still a good weapon in it's own right with it's fastest reload and budget cost.
  18. NiteJazz

    The EM1 is a similar version of the T16, and a very close imitation of the VX29 Polaris, that said, the weapon pwns all other LMGs in CQC. It comes with 100 rounds in a mag, so no need to reload so often, and when you do reload no need to worry, it has a very fast reload.
    Pop a forward grip on it and you have really good weapon. The EM1 is my favorite weapon and all NC hate me for it, but its to my liking because I like fast RoF weapons. The Gauss Saw and the EM6 suck IMO, despite the fact that I can get really good Kill streaks with them.

    So if your a person who likes high RoF weapons, then the EM1 is for you, I really hate that NC are ungrateful of the weapon when I really want it on my TR character. I'l trade you my TMG-50
  19. Mxiter

    T16 pwns at CQC? :eek:
    EM6 and Gauss sauw suck?:eek:
    Trading the TMG for the EM1? :eek: (NC would also get Clone weapon with saw-S while TR would get something worst than the T16 an lack of real mid to long range guns.)

    What's the point to get 100 ammos mag if your DPS is so low that you're dead before getting a single kill?

    EM1 sucks in every statistical measure that matters in CQC, which was supposedly its intended role. 2nd gen SMGs absolutely slaughter the EM1 in every possible way with advanced laser/soft point ammo. the only good thing about the EM1 is the magazine capacity. bottom line, if you're NC, EM6 is the only way to go.