Faction Imbalance

Nah VS is fine leave them be... fighting against VS is always a fun moment and longer too

My complain is TR Prowler... which can shoot from base A to base B with maximum destruction... Faster reload and better velocity and shooting 2 tank shells... If there is 5 or 6 prowler lock down and there is nothing that can actually go forward except "air"... or not...
Everything else with long ranged capabilities is nerfed to the ground... Anti mana turret engi ( which is broken anyway but every faction can use it )... AAT in base can no longer shoot anything... but they forget one thing... and its the prowler...
Not to mention their lockdown max with pounder... hav u ever use pounder with lock down?? that thing kills everything that even try to get into a room... max, infantry, everything... not to mention reload is fast like hell and faster rof... please compare them to "cough" "cough" falcon

Been playing this game from the start and come back from time to time... but for some reason TR always hav the broken toy (Striker, Vulcan, Fracture...) from beginning to end

I said that the MCG's greatest strength was that it was more fun to use, and yes, I do think it's better, but stats wise it doesn't seem like the Jackhammer (didn't check lasher) is any worse for the average player.

You can't compare the heavy weapons as simply as you can the LMGs, which is why it's hard to go into significant detail with them. The Jackhammer obviously has much better instant kill potential, but is limited to a specific range. The MCG is a bit better at longer ranges, but is worse than any LMG at those same ranges, so it's sorta like a middle ground between the Jackhammer and LMGs in a sense.

Wut. And of course you don't look at it like a player of the game - you don't compare things objectively, on a very basic level. The inability to look at this objectively is an indicator of faction favoritism.

I explicitly stated that I did not known that my conclusions were correct until I went and tested them. That isn't confirmation bias.

I still don't understand how this concept isn't understood; about headshots.

Responding does not constitute a good argument.

...

OK.

Let's take a look at this in detail.

If a SAW misses 75% of it's shots, that means it has an effective hitting refire rate of 480 ms.
If an MSW-R misses 75% of it's shots, that means it has an effective hitting refire rate of 320 ms.

The SAW does 40% more damage per bullet, while taking 50% more time to fire.

Add 1 headshot. 1. With the same miss rate
SAW takes 1920 ms to kill (3 body shots + 1 headshot = 1000); that's an accuracy rate of 25% and a HSR of 33%; nothing out of the ordinary! A typical case!)
MSW-R takes 1920 ms as well!!! (5 body shots + 1 headshot = 1001); that's an accuracy rate of 25% and HSR of 20%; nothing out of the ordinary again!)

BONUS!
If the MSW-R gets 2 headshots.. what happens? 4 body shots + 2 headshots = 1144 damage; that's if the headshots happen at the end of the firing. The MSW-R needs a 33% HS rate AND needs to hit those HS within the first 4 bullets in order to get the kill; with the same accuracy, time, and HSR of the SAW.

Now what if the target isn't a 1000 hp target, but instead 1400?
7 bullets (0 HS, or 0%) for the SAW in 3360 ms = 1400
10 bullets (0 HS, or 0%) for the MSW-R in 3200 ms = 1400
6 bullets (1 HS, or 16%) for the SAW in 2880 ms = 1400
9 bullets (1 HS, or 11%) for the MSW-R in 2880 ms = 1400
5 bullets (2 HS, or 40%) for the SAW in 2400 ms = 1400
8 bullets (2 HS, or 25%) for the MSW-R in 2560 ms = 1400
4 bullets (3 HS, or 75%) for the SAW in 1920 ms = 1400
7 bullets (3 HS, or 43%) for the MSW-R in 2240 ms = 1400

Would you look at that. The player who gets the higher percentage of headshots, with the same significantly high miss rate, will win in the same time period; with the added bonus that the SAW chews off more time per headshot.
This matches everything I've said to this point regarding harder hitting, lower RoF vs lower hitting, higher RoF. You cannot mention one downside and ignore the upside. Thresholds are reached sooner for each HS, and each threshold being hit even sooner for having a bigger boolet. With no headshots; and ONLY no headshots, does the SAW lose, with equal accuracy. SO about accuracy;
SAW initial acc: .4 (moving)
MSW-R initial acc: .35 (moving)

Lets examine the test cases above, and see the bloom for each gun that both players must deal with, and see if its accurate to say that their accuracy, given the same precison with the mouse, will be equal (notice these are the actual bullet counts incl misses from the above examples)

28 SAW = 7.05
40 MSW-R = 7.39

24 SAW = 5.47
36 MSW-R = 6.14

20 SAW = 4.27
32 MSW-R = 5.11

16 SAW = 3.35
28 MSW-R = 4.27



Notice at x = 20, the ratio is ~1.1. The ratio between the MSW-R at 30 bullets (1.5x) is .35+1.05^30 / .4+1.07^20 = 1.095.

This is the graph of the ratio of bloom between he MSW-R and the SAW.

Standing still bloom:


And this is BEFORE and recoil interference... which is worse for the MSW-R! (nearly equal for vertical, much worse for MSW-R horizontal)


So, estimating that the MSW-R will have equal accuracy to the SAW is wrong. It will have less; due to higher bloom (beyond the initial few shots), higher horizontal recoil, and a worse recoil pattern, with NO ability to be superior when standing still at all, with larger dropoff in usefulness over range....

What constitutes a good argument is subjective, what isn't is that I have responded in suit. It's also greater tha not responding at all, eh there pal?

The fact of the matter is that even by your own data without headshots the SAW loses. With headshots is a different story of course, but as I often find myself saying, "if one was a 'headshot-god' why wouldn't they use something that rewards headshots, such as a CQC-BA or even just a pump-action with slugs?" Even a Rebel can two-headshot-kill out to 15 meters.

With headshots, the SAW user requires a greater degree of accuracy, as has been said. Allow me to rip this little part out right here:

You say (roughly) "the high damage weapons benefit more for headshots" but continuously neglect the continuously-worsening CoF of the said high damage weapon.

Again, we did not start this discussion with TTK, just accuracy. You seem to continue this below, however.

I would humor you here, but in what "real-world" scenario do both players miss 16 & 28 shots respectively when within their maximum damage range? (That's at 10 meters by the way.)

At that point both weapons would be missing all over the place, anything would be!

The graphs follow suit with this ridiculously long engagement.

But no, obviously they wouldn't be equal; I don't think anyone has said they would be. Recoil has already been long debated, so I'll leave that where it lies. Though, I will combine it with your implication that the recoil, pattern, initial standing 0.1 CoF, and damage drop-off would at all make any impact what so ever within the maximum damage range of 10 meters which these calculations are based upon...

As a final thought, you have also cherry-picked the MSW-R because it is a CQC weapon, whereas I compared to two closest NC weapons of differing damage models.

Pound for pound, higher rate of fire weapons are generally superior to lower rate of fire weapons in practise, where much of the game involves CQC, hipfire spam, shoddy hit-detection, et cetera. This is true within the NC faction itself.

You do not have to be a headshot god.

Please re-read the post.

0% headshot rate - no player has this. It's nearly impossible. Just one headshot in 10 is good enough to be on par with, wait for it, an MSW-R user with the same head shot rate.

Wrong. It is as if you seriously don't read my posts. The SAW has better accuracy than the MSW-R, by a significant degree! Look at the graphs of bloom ratio. The MSW-R is going to have a much harder time landing a headshot on that 30th hit than the SAW will on the 20th.

Ah, so should we scale it to 50% hit rate? 75%? I'll tell you this; the ratio stays the same so long as the amount of bullets are fired for the same amount of time. Want to give them 50% hit rate instead of 25%? Just cut all the times in half! The difference remains the same; at 0 HS the MSW-R wins slightly, at 1, the SAW, at more than 1, the SAW, to varying degrees based on the % HSR. Even if the HSR is the same, the SAW wins, unless the HSR is 0.

I chose the MSW-R; one of the greatest LMGs in the game according to many players, and compared it to the SAW, one of the worst, according to many players, and showed that the SAW is indeed not worse; but better. I gave the MSW-R all the advantages; at 15m, with no upgrades (the percentage drop in vertical recoil from the compensator and forward grip are going to be larger for the SAW than the MSW-R); and the SAW STILL wins.

The SAW is worse than the MSW-R in hipfire, yeah. But now you're moving the goal posts. Originally it was "NC stuff is bad on paper and in game directly", now its "OK so NC stuff is actually performing pretty good both on paper and physically in game, they're ACTUALLY bad because of statless, immeasurable confirmation bias ridden assumptions".

It is far from impossible to not land any headshots in an engagement. Happens all the time to and for everyone. Obviously no one has an actual 0%, but that's just the same as saying no one has a 100% accuracy rating. Just doesn't happen, statistically impossible.

One does have to score at least one with a greater or equal total number of headshots than an opponent to beat them under your typically theoretical conditions.

Essentially SAW needs less headshots to win.

Your data also strongly suggests that the TTK of high damage weapons is reduced by a greater amount per headshot than low damage weapons. (Go figure.)

Again, what player would require 30 shots from less than 10 meters to kill? This would have a stronger point if we were regarding a longer range engagement (in which no one stopped firing for any reason what so ever), but we're of course limited in our practical application of theoretical values. (PS2 should really do something about that... It'd be nice to see the vehicle resistance types as well.)

Maybe make it require 10 & 15 or something, but in CQC that won't amount to much. (I replicated the graphs myself and the difference in values was so pathetic and insignificant that it is depicted as a straight line on standard window settings. [10 to -10 on either axis.])

Regardless, it should stand to do so if the higher skill-required weapon is able to kill faster than another weapon when both are stringing headshots under theoretical conditions.

You see, we are arguing different things. I mean to demonstrate the difference in firing accuracy between two closely related weapons, and you are using two weapons of different intents and designs on different factions on polar opposite ends of the (opinionated) quality spectrum.

The SAW would have higher vertical recoil even with a compensator. Again though, recoil, generally speaking, doesn't have a very large impact on a fight that cannot have a distance greater than 10 meters between the two players. And we're talkin' Ps2 meters, not metric system meters...

Oh boy, this is gonna need some digging to find those old quotes.

OK, I mostly did some skimming over my relevant posts, and it comes down to this:

• NC infantry weapons are worse than the TR and VS because "their accuracy-demanding weapons are inaccurate."
• "The high damage, low rate of fire weapons have greater bloom per shot to 'make up for a lower volume of fire.' The NC features predominately high damage/low RoF weapons and has exclusive access to the 200DMG/500RPM damage model. These weapons require higher aim than other weapons as their users are punished significantly greater for missed shots, while simultaneously causing a greater likelihood of missing otherwise accurate shots."
• "If a SAW and a MSR-W are firing at a distant/nanoweave'd/heavy-shielded/some combination target, there will be a large number of shots fired to kill even with 100% accuracy. Given the differing "bloom tolerance" of either weapon, the SAW would likely start to cause CoF-based misses near the end/sooner than the MSR-W would. (Which would punish the SAW user more than the MSW-R user...)" Additionally: "The effective bloom of a weapon is only the same when in theoretical engagements, must like how a SAW, Carv, and Orion has an identical TTK on paper but almost never pair out as such in practice."
• "But when one combines a demand for high accuracy with an exponentially-increasing chance to miss each consecutive shot fired regardless of player aim, the results are exaggerated to point where there is a noticeable impact between the two weapons."
• "Pound for pound, higher rate of fire weapons are generally superior to lower rate of fire weapons in practise, where much of the game involves CQC, hipfire spam, shoddy hit-detection, et cetera. This is true within the NC faction itself."

If anything, I'm the only one has been consistent in my argument. The "goal posts" for me have remained the same throughout my argument; low RoF weapons require accuracy to be effective, yet have less accuracy than higher RoF weapons (even amongst the NC's own arsenal), and punish their user greater for missed shots, where by user error or as a creation of the weapon's imperfections.

And you said that I don't read your posts.

->

6 shots (SAW) = .55 * .75 (comp) = .4125 per shot vertical = 2.475
9 shots (MSW-R) = .35 * 1 (has no comp) = .35 per shot vertical = 3.15
add in initial shot recoil multi, 1.65 (SAW) vs MSW-R (2.5)..

As shown a few posts above, the SAW (for example) is more accurate (has less bloom) than the MSW-R (for example).

Complete chart showing it all:

The 'avg' here isn't a true average of the bloom values but the average which can be used to compare these on a whole; NC's 244 is lower than the TR's 249. The standing still accuracy is far superior while the initial moving accuracy is average. Yes, this is only LMGs; if you want to discuss the other guns feel free. You may be right 100% on the other guns. I have not looked at them.

Again with this "harder hitting weapons are punished more" bs.

False. At long range, you don't move when firing; the SAW has far superior accuracy to the MSW-R when not moving:

Additionally, the SAW drops 1 damage tier at range. The MSW-R drops 2. So, for a 1400 HP target, with no HS, the SAW would take 9 while the MSW-R would take 13. That's 44% more bullets while the MSW-R fires 50% faster. Given the accuracy difference (pin point vs .1) on the first shot, any distance shooting will have the MSW-R missing more than this difference in DPS in damage.

I cannot believe you're trying to argue that the SAW is worse than the MSW-R at range.

So, since all the numbers say otherwise, how are you measuring accuracy?

Eh, I'll get into the debate too!

From experience, the MSW-R is IMO way easier to use than the Gauss SAW due to better recoil, because I feel that the SAW is consistently trying to rip off my arm even with all the attachments, while the MSW-R is fairly manageable, and when it's recoil pattern is mastered, it's very easy to pull off headshots.

On paper, the SAW looks superior, but in reality, a lot of stats are either insignificant or meaningless. A 0.01/2/5 CoF difference is virtually non-existent in all but the greatest of distances, and the stand-still accuracy stats are also meaningless, because realistically a player who stands still is headshot bait, and it's only done if your opponent has either no way of fighting back, there's no-one to capitalize on your vulnerability or if you're exceptionally bold.

The MSW-R has a significant edge in CQC, due to the fact that it's more consistent and much easier to use, and at mid-long range it's all up to skill, as they're fairly even, unless we're talking extreme long range, where the SAW has an obvious advantage.

You're also debating with interpreting skill in a mathematical way, which is silly. Skill is very much inconsistent and can't be measured/interpreted accurately with stats, in reality it's possible to achieve 100% accuracy in an engagement, and sometimes even 10% or 5%.
I mean, some of the stats you're showing don't make sense in reality, pretty much everyone or most people would burst their shots if the recoil or CoF is too chaotic, so the disadvantages are minimized.

If two FPS-Gods engage one another with their respective weapons, the Gauss SAW will come out on top, because it's a perfectionist weapon that massively rewards you for flawless performance, but in reality, only very few people can pull that off, unless you're comparing the gun's performance in the highest levels of playing.
Much more commonly, you have two average, meh, decent, or good players. In those scenarios, the MSW-R has more room for error, not because of the "Higher damage, slow RoF guns are punished more", but because it takes more effort to adjust and fight against the naturally higher recoil of the SAW, which is harder to control.


The SAW is a great gun, but it's very much a perfectionist weapon that punishes you for even the slightest mishaps, while the MSW-R has more lee-way and more power in CQC, just for the fact that it isn't as harsh to control. It all depends on the skill of the user, the Gauss guy is better? He'll win. The MSW-R guy is better? He'll win. But realistically, it's way easier and faster to get good with the MSW-R than to get good with the SAW, I'd say that the MSW-R has a slight edge.

Nothing that you said directly disagrees with the point I've been making the entire time. Many here are arguing that the stats of the weapons simply cause them to be weaker, when in reality, it just comes down to their use. Stuff like reload speed, equip speed, and hipfire is actually making a significant impact, moreso than bloom, accuracy etc in typical engagement ranges. But there are those that insist that accuracy is the problem, and it's really not.

I'll call stats such as hipfire accuracy (for LMGs), mag size, equip, and reload speed as auxiliary advantages. And when, as shown in the posts I've made in this thread, you see that the killing potential in an 'even' match to be equal, you can't say something is better or worse. I've been saying since the start that these auxiliary advantages that NC gets don't match those of the other factions - particularly with the default loadouts.

If you can deal with the reload speed, as in, you aren't caught off guard ever, then it no longer is a weakness and you can exploit the higher killing potential of the SAW at higher skill levels. New players can't do that. They'll reload their 100 round mag after 1 kill, for example, negating their advantage of a large mag size (and large damage/mag), and enhancing their weakness of low reload speed.

So if there is anything that should be compared between factions, it isn't whether one gun can kill as readily as another; it isn't whether big boolet is worse than many boolet, it's whether you can do your job without getting caught with your pants down; and how much of an impact the players who streak naked through open fields have for your faction. I've said it before and I'll say it again, NC certainly has a problem there with new players.

Try it out in the VR. Unless you are referring to recoil over time and not per shot or whatever, in which case I would say the reticle would jump by a larger degree and would require more movement to be covered between shots to place it over the same position as prior to the shot, but whatevz.

As shown above, the SAW has greater bloom for each accuracy-demanding shot, which causes each shot to be continuously less accurate, and to a greater extent than with a high RoF weapon.

I can't really tell what the graph is trying to say, it's a little unclear to me. Do you have the source that I could look at?

A SAW and a MSW-R both miss two shots. The SAW is punished more than the MSW-R because it has a much lower rate of fire and therefore requires more time to fire another two to make up for those missed shots.

Only if firing single shots. If so, then yes. Only if one survives the ordeal, that is.

I am not arguing that it is worse at range. I am arguing that the SAW (or any low RoF weapon) is less accurate at range, and needs to allow for the CoF to be reset, while a MSW-R (or any high RoF weapon) would be able to continue sustained fire.

Again, the increased bloom per shot. That's it. Guns miss lots in full-auto, low RoF guns even moreso, which is worse for them than it is for high RoF guns.

At this point we should just agree to disagree, 'cause I feel like we're just repeating ourselves here.

Campagne, no "h."

It's simply the ratio of the two blooms. You've got your ti-84 sitting around, right? Graph this: (0.35+1.05^(1.5x))/(.4+1.07^x). What that shows is the bloom at the same time (x) between the MSW-R and the SAW. (1 = same bloom, under 1 = MSW-R has less bloom, over 1 = SAW has less bloom)

In order for the MSW-R to miss two shots, it needs to have missed for 160 ms. For the SAW to miss two, it needs to have missed for 240 ms. If the SAW is off-target for 240 ms, if we are to be fair, the MSW-R must also be looked at as off target for 240 ms; which is then 3 misses. 3 shots for the MSW-R will produce more bloom than the 2 of the SAW, if both are moving and a few shots have already been fired. Considering that the bloom is low until that point, it can be argued that both will hit with early shots more accurately, correct? But the MSW-R increases in bloom quicker, which means the MSW-R user must allow the bloom to settle earlier in order to maintain accurate fire.

Sorry, *table, not graph. Nevermind, I was reading it wrong because I'm an idiot. Totals and averages as opposed to a per shot basis.

It's not that the user of either weapon necessarily was off target for the entirety of the 160/240 ms, but that their target moved just prior to firing. But regardless, the TTK increases by a greater amount for the SAW than the MSW-R, given an equal number of misses. If the two weapons were to lose an equal amount of time, both would be worse off and would have a roughly equal decrease in accuracy, depending on exactly when those shots were missed.

Before I have to answer another gigantic textwall, can anyone please explain to me why the F bloom still counts when you shoot and then aim down sights? Has it always been this way? And if so, why?! Why would anyone in their right mind program weapons to be like this?

It seems more like an inability to program their intentions; really a bug, which has become a feature as SOE-> Daybreak lost programmers (they can't even adjust cloaking values for example... that's indicative of probably one guy who barely knows the code - and not a single person who originally programmed the game still working there).

In the code, it's probably very simple, where each shot determines the total bloom of the next, with a special value at the start dependant on status (moving/still/AD/hip). It would be extremely easy to simply subtract the difference between standing still/moving ADS/hipfire when the status changes, just like it does for moving/standing still (you don't have to wait for bloom to settle if you are only changing between moving/standing still). So, the fact that it happens for one and not the other just seems like something they forgot to do.

No one in their right mind would see this and think that it's intentional.

ESFS so the vanu have pancake thats easy to hit from up or below or just behind the NC has a flying tractor thats wide from evey angle its just so big and then we have the real issue here TR has a flying needle thats tiny infront tiny from the back small from the top and bottom

Another thing to note is that the NC max is larger, and has a larger hitbox as well. TR comes close, then Vanu. Vanu max's hitbox is so much smaller it's kinda crazy.

I know. It seems a little unbalanced, I agree... but the devs had a far more important task to complete and unfortunately, balance was a necessary casualty in completing that task. I speak, of course, of maintaining dat sweet spandex ***!

You just did.

So what do you do? Turn into a passive aggressive wiener and act like you're above others when they don't bow down before your 'all and powerful' statistical reports? And when those reports contradict what you’re trying to argue for, you move the goal posts and reply, ‘well those weapons don't count', or change the subject in hopes that no one will notice the limited data you're reporting on.

Um, you’re basing this on overall data, not taking into consideration of its weapon changes. Avg kph and k/d on dasanfall do not reflect these.

The reason why I brought up MCG is because it has left-right horizontal recoil bias specific to all NC carbines but one. All TR and VS carbines except one(for each) have a right recoil bias, and compensating for this is much easier, consistent, and therefore predictable for up close and distance fights. Left-right recoil bias is unwieldy, unpredictable, making them inaccurate especially for ranged gunfights. My assertion about NC having the worst recoil in the game still stands. I didn't even have to look at the stats to get that one right, go figure. Weapon stats here.

wiener alert. According to my research on carbines, the aggregation of bloom, left-right horizontal recoil bias, highest avg vertical recoil, and lower ttk to start with shows that NC weapons have unwieldy, inaccurate, non player-friendly weapons. Furthermore, if it’s true that NC guns require you to stand still for the most effective shot, then there’s a greater disadvantage for its infantry -- when applying the stats in-game.

Balance is not what needs tweaking anymore, they've been only tweaking that for almost 5 years since PS2's inception. What needs to be reworked is the grind. How long it takes to earn XP, Certs, weapons, etc. This is what's killing the game hugely, it's the reason people leave and don't want to come back. Most people find it unejoyable they'll have to play for days just to unlock one weapon.

What. I made like 15 posts detailing aspects of the LMG's stats and didn't do that at all for the Heavy weapons. How did I do anything even close to comparing the Heavy weapons like I did the LMGs?

Since the beginning I've said the MCG was better than the Jackhammer. Only later did stuff contradict that, their actual player use stats, and I said as much. And yes, when you compare two things objectively and you're arguing with someone who does it subjectively, you are superior, you are more convincing, and you are more truthful.

Both were buffed recently. One to have better sustained DPS and the other to have better damage at ranges beyond point blank. Both are decent buffs - and like I said:

If you feel like the buffs were so significantly in favor of the MCG, ok, you can believe that; but the stats were in favor of the Jackhammer for all time, so it should make sense if the MCG receives a better buff, putting them on par. Makes sense to me.

...

per

bullet

But the NC does not need to hit as many bullets to kill the enemy.

Do you see why a per bullet comparison doesn't work?

Also personally, I find left-right bias to be much easier to deal with than single direction bias. For example, the MSW-R has a bias to the right, and the Bull has a left-right bias. My accuracy, as well as my head shot rate, are higher with the Bull. The Rhino is also left-right bias, and I again have slightly better accuracy and higher HSR.

For NC, my GODSAW has equal accuracy to my MSW-R, and equal HSR. Keep in mind my GODSAW stats are from several months prior when I had significantly worse sensitivity settings, a tiny mousepad that kept slipping, etc. I have improved significantly; and my MSW-R stats are only on par to my GODSAW stats.

I'm just one player, and it's just my experience; but I have a hard time understanding how low amounts of left-right recoil are harder to deal with than high amounts of left or right recoil.

You're gonna make me spend another hour putting these all together in one place easy to look at. You can't compare these things just eyeballing them, give me a break. Take the averages yourself, multiply by the rate of fire to get the actual bloom and recoil felt for equivalent damage dealt (really quickly, the average damage dealt by all NC carbines is 1700, while TR and VS are 1725; it's mostly a lot of bad Carbines pulling NC down though, they have the highest DPS one tied with VS at 2014; TR's highest is 1894).

The Cert gain is more than reasonable once you know what you're doing. Until then you have enough vanilla toys to keep you occupied.