Faction Imbalance

wat

OK... then what do you want, 30 meters? Even at 100 meters it takes the Merc's bullets .2 seconds to reach their target. The TRAC-5 has lower bullet velocity, so even if you're trying to make some sort of comparison here, the Merc wins out.

Whats with your font rendering on the site? You can't even see some of the operators!

Find me a player with 10% accuracy for a primary arm. Better yet, why don't we look at the average all time accuracy for the Merc and TRAC-5? TRAC-5 averages 20%, while the Merc averages 21%. So, the most realistic comparison possible (ignoring HSR) is to compare one at 20% and the other at 21%. The HSR for the Merc is 20% while the HSR for the TRAC-5 is 17%!

Yes.
5.5/~5.15 = 6.7%
2.6/~2.45 = 6%

Considering I'm eyeballing their data, I'd say coming within 90% of each other is pretty good.

25% accuracy and 25% HSR is 4 and 5% overestimating accuracy while 5 and 8% overestimating HSR. 12% accuracy and 0% HSR is 13% underestimating accuracy and 20 and 17% underestimating HSR.

Actually, there is an inverse relationship when it comes to complicated models and accuracy. This is standard in science; and it's why most formulas end up being very simple, because the variables used can often be expressed in their own equations.

The fact that you believe longer or more complicated is better really sows that you're probably in HS (ok im honestly not trying to attack your character or anything here), and think that math is meant to be hard or something. The formulas and equations you use in your HS math classes are derived from more difficult mathematical processes which aren't needed to be done every time because you can use the simply formula you get in the end which represents the relationship properly when given certain variables.

For example, you could find the area of a triangle using an integral, and a straight line. The formula for the area of a right triangle is 1/2 b * h, I assume you've gotten at least this far in HS Geometry. Well, the hypotenuse of that triangle will have c^2 = a^2+ b^2; or L = sqrt(a^2+b^2) etc etc.. you can use either Trig or just notice that the Y value of the peak of a right triangle will be 1 when X is one; that's a slope of 1.

If you integrate x dx, you get 1/2 x^2. 1/2 x^2 is equal to 1/2 b*h when b = h. It's more work to do even this basic integral, and to evaluate it from 0 to 1, than it is to simply use the formula derived from such a process. You'll learn this in AP Calc or in college when you take Calculus. It's really cool what you can do.

Huh? Where did you compare them with 25% acc and 25% HSR?

OK now I'm starting to think that your 12% accuracy value is your own personal accuracy value on PS4. Well, if you're discussing PS4, I won't choose to disagree with you. It's different there of course. The game is not designed to be played on the PS4, and all of my discussion has been relating to PC. If your argument is that accuracy values are so much lower on PS4 that the gap between 750 143 vs 600 167 exceeds what is meant by the developers, you've got a solid case.

I gave 25% accuracy examples previously.

0 HS:

167 600: 3200 ms to deal 1400

143 750: 2880 ms to deal 1400

(320 ms diff, 80 ms diff at 100%)

Notice what happens if you divide each time by 4. You get the 100% accuracy values of 800 ms and 720 ms!

1 HS:
2800
2560
(240 ms diff; 60 ms diff at 100%)

2 HS:
2400
2240
(160 ms diff; 40 ms diff at 100%)

3 HS:
2000
1920
(80 ms diff, 20 ms diff at 100%)

etc etc

So yes, the relationship stays the same.

So let's plug in the actual HSR and accuracy of the TRAC-5 and Merc; 20% TRAC-5 acc vs 21% Merc acc, and 20% merc HSR and 17% TRAC-5 HSR: let's even play favorites towards the TRAC-5 a little bit here and equalize the HSR; the Merc will take 2860 ms vs TRAC-5's 2800 ms.

What a tiny difference. Truly, 60 ms in almost 3 seconds of firing against a 1400 resist shield heavy (2% time save for TTK for TRAC-5 over the Merc), for the benefit of a 120 ms (40% time save for the Merc over the TRAC-5) if you land 3 HS at close range on a 1k hp target.

I'd say that's worth it. And I am again reminded of how well balanced this truly is.

edit: and all time stats for the TRAC-5 vs Merc besides the accuracy and HSR? They both have 16 kph; with nearly identical (slightly in favor of Merc) k/d. They truly are equivalent guns.

I'd much rather have 6-7 engineers in several tanks sunderers and air support. But keep thinking HA will win the day. 2000 hrs of multi faction play. Think I've come across ldedicated ock on squads like your hypothetical maybe 3x. Definitely the best way to counter vehicles, best way to take bases too. Certainly not sniper bait...8)

It all depends on the circumstances. The fact that you only stumbled upon a dedicated AV squad three times just proves what I wrote about the difference between organized play and random slacking.

Ah, here's the image I was looking for when "longer equations are better" was uttered:

I guess what I really mean to say is that no matter how awesome and coordinated a squad can be they can't carry an entire faction and win alerts day after day, week after week.

It comes down to how the faction as a whole plays.

Vehicles are called force multipliers for a reason. Players inside of vehicles are more powerful than they are outside of a vehicle. I'm not sure if you're just arguing to argue or if you really believe that the game can or should be played with nothing but infantry.

I believe NC as a faction struggles more than the other factions for 1 simple reason. They pull less vehicles during normal gameplay. I could be wrong but that's been my general experience. NC get pushed around fight after fight on my server because they foot zerg out of a few AMS's with 50+ infantry instead of pulling vehicles.

If it's a symptom of NC vehicles being worse so they don't bother I'm not sure, that hasn't been my experience as a driver/gunner on NC. Or if it's just that NC attracts a certain kind of player, the kind of player that prefers infantry. Or maybe the average NC players have less experience, are newer players etc and don't understand the meta that vehicles bring to the table or don't have the certs invested so don't bother...

Again this is just my observation. If someone knows where I can find vehicle metrics I'd love to see if they back up what I'm seeing.

If you're capable of doing simple addition.. then you should be smart enough to figure that out..

I knew you'd take that seriously. But you took the bait nonetheless.

10/10.

I think you're just mad because someone other than yourself can use Excel spreadsheets and look up gun statistics and player averages.

Better yet, stand in front of an enemy player 31+m away using your MCG

Walked into that one. This is only calculating average skill level, not individual gunfights -- you're conflating the two.

It’s not impossible for players to achieve 5, 10, or 12% accuracy in some scenarios(like trying to shoot those pesky targets with MCG at 31+ meters). A 12% accuracy can happen if a player is at distance, strafing, attempting to avoid your shots before they return fire, or a combination thereof. The majority of gunfights are not going to be two people standing completely still while shooting at each other. If you think it is, then you’re dead wrong.

Landing headshots is obviously an advantage for NC weapons, which we’ve already gone over. The sample cases you're basing your argument on is limited to the headshots players get with these weapons. What it does help show is that headshots are practically a requirement for these NC weapons to stay competitive with TR’s TTK rate, otherwise you get the kind of disparity rates when players go up against an HA with level 5 Nanoweave and overshield:



This isn’t even factoring in the skill required to use these guns. Using a carbine with high vert recoil might help you land the last headshot within close range, but more often than not your attention is divided between trying to compensate for the weapon’s kick, spread, etc., and aiming for the enemy’s head while he’s moving around your screen. There are plenty of people in this thread contradicting you for completely ignoring a weapon's ease of use, and your silly argument about how “BULLETS MEAN MOAR”, but I’m guessing your attention is divided between making backhanded comments to people disagreeing with you and hiding behind hastily written textwalls.

Agreed on that.

I wrote no such thing. All I'm saying is that people often underestimate the resources the game makes readily available and that Infantry AV/AA tends to scale exceedingly well.

Vulcan op mswr same as orion enforcer weird marauder annoying gatekeeper also weird. Prowler ap i dont play tr mosquito pilots are always pros. Mosquito and reaver way easier to control than scythe.
THIS IS JUST MY OPINION.

Banshee annoying and should be heard from the other sode of the continent

Huh!?

Look at Dasanfall - is there a single gun with 12% accuracy on average?

Do you think that average stats obtained from actual scenarios in game do not represent what actually happens in game? I don't get it - do you seriously think that the stats on Dasanfall are representative of anything besides the typical case?

And no! Even then! 12% accuracy is abysmal, truly! Example: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/113244749?t=08m24s

Look at my accuracy while firing from this long range on moving targets.

First target: 75% acc (3/4)
2nd: 10% acc (3/31)
3rd: 30% acc (5/17)
4th: 12.5% acc (4/32)
5th: Close range, they were barely moving; won't count this one; but 100%
6th: 21% acc (4/19)
7th: 17% acc (3/18)
8th/9th: I fired at two separate targets in a really awkward way, so I won't count this (to make up for the close guy not moving)
10th: 33% acc (5/16)
etc. etc. etc.

I'm just one person. But my average over this period was 20%. Dasanfall contains the averages for all players in all situations; and 20% appears to be pretty typical.

0% HSR is an extreme oddity. No one has a rate this low, and it is just as inaccurate as to compare guns at 100% HSR. At typical HSR, NC guns are on par. Below, they are worse by very few ms, unless the accuracy is also very low in that example. At higher than typical HSR, NC guns are better by the same amount they are worse at 0, or better by significant amounts of time if the accuracy is also excellent.

Do you disagree with this or what

OK so we've discussed vertical recoil already. In the same period of time, TR guns will recoil vertically just as much as NC guns. That means landing the same HSR, or accuracy while aiming at the head in general, is going to be the same.

I fail to understand how this concept is so foreign to you.

I also think you genuinely don't understand why and how the bullet counts influence (or don't) accuracy rate. You are saying that firing more bullets results in more damage, correct, not more hits?

Regarding ease of use for weapons in general, you and the other NC guy are the only ones in the thread who have said anything about that besides me. Unfortunately for both of you, dasanfall exists, and it shows that your comparison between the Merc and TRAC-5 is flawed, as well as your assumption that left-right recoil is worse than left or right recoil. You did see the stats, right? That show that the Merc is used more accurately, and with more headshots? How do you intend to argue against that? "NC players are just better"? Can't be that, cause NC's pop is typically the highest on my server at least, yet they win the fewest alerts by far.

I ran the numbers for more scenarios to pinpoint the exact points at which they compare;

For a 1400 HP target at max damage range:
Using 720 ms vs 800 ms as a base (ttk at 100% accuracy 0% hs), each HS brings the 167 in favor by 20 ms / accuracy, while each cut in accuracy by half doubles the time between the two guns. This means at 4 HS, no matter the accuracy rate, the 167 breaks even. 4 HS for the 167 means 80% HSR (143 is 67%).
For a 1400 HP target just outside max damage range (21m):
Each requires 800 ms; each HS puts the 167 in favor by 20 ms, and each cut in half of accuracy makes no difference
This stays true until 31m (assuming weapons with a damage model of 143@15->112@65 vs 167@15->125@75)

For a 1200 HP target at max damage range:
640 vs 700 ms, with each HS closing the gap by 20ms/accuracy, and each cut in half of accuracy doubling the time. This means the 167 damage weapon needs 3 HS, or 60% HSR (143 is 50%).
For 1200 just outside max damage range (31m):
720 vs 700 ms, each HS again closing the gap the same as usual, accuracy has the same effect
This stays true until 39m.

For a 1000 HP target at max damage range:
480 vs 500 ms, with the same changes as above; the 167 and 143 need 1 HS to have equal time (20% HSR and 17% HSR)
For 1000 just beyond max damage range (16m):
560 vs 600
Until 40 meters, where it becomes
640 vs 600

So, which is the typical case? Because it appears to me that these cases are descriptive of all cases, and so we can use them to determine where which gun is better.

1400 HP
Low HSR = 143 750 rpm wins (decently, by 80+/acc ms) - this tier represents the tier where the 143 gets 1 full extra bullet (80 ms refire rate)
Avg HSR = 143 750 rpm wins (barely, by 60 to 20/acc ms) - this tier represents the tier where the 143 doesn't have 1 full extra bullet, but hits the threshold sooner through it's DPS
High HSR = tie - this tier represents the 167 needing extraordinary HSR to match the thresholds hit by the 143

1400 outside max damage range
Low HSR = tie - this tier represents the 167 reaching damage thresholds on time with the 143
Avg HSR = 167 600 rpm wins (barely, by 60 to 20/acc ms) - this tier represents the 167 reaching damage thresholds a little sooner than the 143
High HSR = 167 600 rpm wins (decently, by 80+/acc ms) - this tier represents the 167 reaching the kill threshold before the 143 fires it's last bullet

1200 HP
Low HSR = 143 750 rpm wins (barely, by 60 to 20/acc ms) - this tier represents the tier where the 143 doesn't have 1 full extra bullet, but hits the threshold sooner through it's DPS
Avg HSR = tie - this tier represents the 167 reaching damage thresholds on time with the 143
High HSR = 167 600 rpm wins (barely, by 60 to 20/acc ms) - this tier represents the 167 reaching damage thresholds a little sooner than the 143

etc, etc etc.

Basically, as everyone has always said forever, 167 weapons just do better at long range, and benefit more from headshots. If the percentage miss rate is the same for both weapons, the time increases equally for both.

This isn't even arguable.

Ive played NC a fair amount and from my experience the arsenal is amazing. The issues i usually come around to is the players are less organized and even when they are execution is slow/poor now this is just my experience yours may differ. Its a real shame too because NC has my favorite arsenal despite most my time being TR.

Sorry, I can’t read anything through all these straw mans.

How does it disprove that one of these weapons requires more control, again? Seeing that average stats aren’t indicative of how difficult/easy it is to use a weapon, you haven’t done anything except use dasanfall as an appeal to authority.

What better way to determine that by simply making an empirical observation instead of relying on patterns of inconsistent numbers that you end up cherry picking every time I bring one of them up? Empirical evidence in this case just works better. It might even help explain why your kdr for the Merc stinks worse than it does for the TRAC-5.

To close, I’m just going to post ThreePi’s comment since it’s pretty on point and one of the best answers to what’s being argued about back and forth:

I'm asking for a clarification.

Because we must assume that the playerbase averages out to have equal skill among each faction. Because the Merc has better accuracy and HSR with equally skilled players, this must mean that it is easier to control and aim such a weapon.

You are misusing the appeal to authority fallacy. I am not saying that I am right because some sort of authority says something; I am write because of the logical conclusions that can be made through even basic logical processes.

Equal players
One gun have higher accuracy and HSR

What other explanation can there be other than the gun being easier to control?

I do not play light assault. Almost at all. It makes sense for me to have poor stats with both weapons, as I never took any time to learn how to use them, and I never played LA seriously at all; so not only was my aim significantly sub-par while playing LA, but so was my positioning etc. But, I did make the comparison of the GODSAW and the MSW-R from my own stats; guns I've used for over a thousand kills each by far. The MSW-R has right bias'd recoil, while the GODSAW is left-right; they have nearly identical vertical recoilpatterns (per time), with the GODSAW having higher vertical recoil per bullet only. I said that I was but one player, and so this is not conclusive evidence of them being equal to control.

Which is why I brought up the average from the entire playerbase for the Merc and TRAC-5; as this is such a huge sample size that we CAN come to a conclusion; as any outliers are taken care of with such a sample size.

Now, it'd be unfair to compare the SAW on dasanfall with the MSW-R since the SAW is a default LMG; but we CAN compare the TMG-50 and the GD-22. They have:
Equal RPM
Equal damage
Equal velocity

The TMG-50 has left-right recoil, and slightly higher vertical recoil
The GD-22 has single sided recoil

So, according to you, we should expect the GD-22 to be more accurate, have higher HSR, etc. My personal idea is that the TMG-50 will be only just barely less accurate, because of the increased vertical recoil.

Across all time, the TMG-50 has managed 19.9% acc and 21.6% HSR The GD-22 has achieved 21.6% acc and 21.6% HSR.

Seems reasonable to me.

The EM-6 has slightly higher RPM than the TMG-50, equal damage, and equal velocity.

Both have left-right recoil. The EM-6 has very slightly higher initial bloom when moving and ADSing. So how much of a difference does that make?

The EM-6 ends up with 20.5% acc and 21.6% HSR. That's a gun that we expect to have WORSE accuracy than the TMG-50, and yet, it hits slightly more often. This indicates that even among the large playerbase sample, there is some degree of range we can expect the guns to end up with. This means 19.9% and 21.6% is virtually equal; with a potential very slightly advantage for the 21.6% gun when it comes to accuracy. The difference in vertical recoil is 0.45 and 0.4; quite small, and so is the difference in accuracy, with all else equal besides the left-right vs single side recoil bias.

This means that recoil bias direction makes no impact in the accuracy of the gun.

Everything brought up by that guy has been addressed.

Excise me again for the double post. Here are stats for the TRAC-5 vs Merc for only he past 30 days:
http://ps2oraclestats.com/monthlystats/
Merc: 13.75 kph, 21% HSR
TRAC-5: 13.46 kph, 19% HSR

TMG-50: 27.7, 24%
GD-22: 28.6, 24%

So, dasanfall's values reflect quite well the last 30 days stats.

Hmm... 7340 total kills, of which 1477 are MAX weapons, 3470 are from the Jackhammer, 1536 are from NS, carbon copy, and explosive weapons... 2 are from the Magshot (unless ya' want to add them to the "carbon copy" pile), 1 from the Gauss Rifle, and 323 from the Railjack.

That leaves 531 kills unaccounted for, likely consisting of non-infantry-based weapons and "other" kills.

Now I'm not calling you a liar, but unless you're harbouring an undeclared alt I don't feel that you can really make the claim that the NC arsenal is amazing based on personal experience alone.

Two things to remember when quoting stats:

1) DA stats are "all-time-ever" stats. So they include all performance across the whole game's existance, including all buffs, nerfs, changes etc. As such, unless you can justify that the changes made to weapon X will not significantly affect it's performance over time, you can't use DA to make inferences about the state of play now.


2) OoD stats stopped updating in June 2016. As such, unless you can demonstrate that no changes have been made to a weapon since that date, again you can't use OoD to make inferences about the state of play now.

Just another example of why you clearly don't understand statistics.

It is better to have complete older statistics than it is to have none whatsoever.

The fact that the DA stats nearly match the OOD stats, with one being a random month and the other being all time, shows that regardless of sweeping nerfs and buffs, they are mostly inconsequential. Changes to Carbines and LMGs were nearly all the same since that latest month and today. Nearly all got damage reductions.

Besides, the accuracy and HSR will not have changed based on any changes done recently. The differences which we are examining - RoF, recoil bias, etc, have stayed the same relative to each other since the game was released.

Really? REALLY?! Clearly it's not just statistics where your understanding is pretty dodgy.....

Quoting from just the latest patch notes (abbreviated to references only for RoF, recoil and velocity, since those are what you've been mentioning) :

Tell me again how the only changes are "the same"......

The TRAC-5, Merc, TMG-50, and GD-22 do not show up in those patch notes.