Lynx 2.0 is good. However, Lynx 1.0 should be brought back.

Discussion in 'Light Assault' started by asdfPanda, Apr 21, 2014.

  1. asdfPanda

    I'm posting here for visibility. If the post is considered spamming, then please delete, mods.

    TR has 5 carbines that are good for close quarters, but can still do work at medium ranges: TRAC-5, TRAC-5S, TRAC-5 Burst, Jaguar, Lynx. TR has 2 carbines that deal with the medium to long range niche: T5 AMC, and the Cougar.

    However, the TR arsenal lacks a dedicated CQC weapon. The old Lynx filled that role.

    People claim that the old Lynx had scarce differences with the Jaguar. However, there were still viable tradeoffs.

    -The Lynx has a tighter, SMG tier moving hipfire spread, as well as higher RPM, which lend to its better CQC capabilities.
    -The Jaguar has arguably more controllable recoil, as well as a better minimum damage of 112, attributing to its renowned versatility; doing well in close combat, yet still working at medium ranges.

    Other people claim that the new Lynx is good at CQC. While this is true, the old Lynx is better in close quarters than the new Lynx.
    The new Lynx loses:
    -0.75x ads speed multiplier
    -1.5 SMG tier moving hipfire spread
    -5720 damage per magazine
    -10m more minimum damage range
    -143 damage tier
    -a marginal amount of damage per minute
    Which are all qualities that factor into the old Lynx's success in CQC.
    In return, the new Lynx gains higher RPM and more controllable ads, and a faster reload. The new Lynx does a little worse in close quarters to do a little better at medium range.

    The advantage of the new Lynx in close quarters is in its headshot capabilities. However, the old Lynx didn't need to ads to excel in CQC, and when the old Lynx did ads, it gained a valuable 0.75x ads speed multiplier.

    However, people also argue: "Why should TR have 1 more carbine than the other factions?"
    The other factions have niches to fill as well. VS needs a competitor to the Pulsar C for medium to long range, and NC debatably needs a competitor to the GD-7F and now, the Bandit, for closer ranges.

    The TR should have both the old Lynx as well as the new Lynx. There are already weapon models for both; SOE only needs to act on it. Having both Lynx 1.0 and Lynx 2.0 would only add to the TR arsenals variety, with no downsides.
    • Up x 3
  2. Iridar51

    While I wouldn't mind them adding the old Lynx back as a new weapon for hipsters who would buy this gun once again, myself I really don't care for it. It was a boring ineffective weapon in my hands, and I didn't use it in that short timeframe when it had "SMG tier accuracy".

    But I can empathize with you, I can imagine how I would feel if my favorite weapon would be removed.

    In my opinion, giving 5-6% DPS when compared to GD-7F / Serpent is more than justified to gain in versatility.
    It's a bit strange though. In a way, Lynx 2.0 kinda competes with the Jaguar now. Both are easy to handle, versatile close to mid CQC carbines, good both at ADS and hip fire. I guess the main difference is that one allows you to be accurate in ADS while moving, while another allows to be fast.
    • Up x 3
  3. Dahwhatsdat???

    Been running with the new lynx a lot recently since the update. Performance is good and I don't have to be as careful with aiming as I once did. Unfortunately its not all sunshine and roses. A number of times I've gotten killed in a situation where the old lynx wouldn't have let me down. For the most part this has been limited to CQC against someone with a higher DPS weapon, much like the old lynx, although to a slightly greater extent due to worse hip fire accuracy. However there have also been a number of times where I have been caught off guard whilst reloading or simply out of ammo, something that rarely happened to me with the old lynx. Conversely I've also been succeeding in situations where the old lynx would have failed me. Mostly at ranges beyond where I'm comfortable hip firing. To me this is just more evidence that they are simply different guns with different roles. I like the new lynx well enough but it just isn't the same and I would much rather have the old one back.

    Edit: Also the new lynx has a great deal less staying power then the old one. I'm getting sick of constantly having to abandon a good position simply because I've run out of ammo for my primary. I'm seriously considering ditching nano weave in favor of certing out ammo belt.
  4. asdfPanda

    The thing is, the new Lynx competes for a niche already had by the TRAC variants and the Jaguar. While it is a viable alternative, and brings more variety to the carbine arsenal, was it really necessary to essentially remove a carbine that filled the CQB-niche?

    I still like the new Lynx though.
  5. Iridar51

    That niche is too small and bears too little difference to what we already have to worry about it.
  6. asdfPanda

    Fair enough. However, I have to say that changing the Lynx in such a manner widens the gap between the Lynx and notable CQC weapons such as the Serpent, GD-7F, shotguns, and debatably the VX6-7 and Bandit(stretching it here though).

    We still have SMGs, but they were, and will never be as good as the old Lynx.

    In addition, while that niche may have been small, did it warrant the change to the Lynx, making it comparable to an already competitive niche? The Lynx change decreases weapon variety in terms of weapon roles, in the TR carbine arsenal.
  7. Iridar51

    Who knows, perhaps they intend to revamp Serpent / GD-7F at a later time, then the gap wouldn't be so big.
  8. Thrustin

    All they need to do is add the 0.75 ADS modifier back and all is well.
  9. Dahwhatsdat???

    Unfortunately for the purposes of making the new lynx function somewhat like the old just reapplying the .75 ADS movement modifier wouldn't be enough. You would also need to increase the magazine size to make up for the lost DPM as well as tighten up the hip COF to its previous levels. I just can't see SOE making those kinds of changes to an already strong gun.
  10. Thrustin

    The DPM is not coming back. I'm pretty sure SOE did that on purpose to bring the DPM of the other faction equivalents closer together. Was the hip COF widened?

    Reapplying the 0.75 ADS modifier is a big start. The lynx is a beast in close quarters in ADS mode, however because you can't move fast while ADS'ing, you soak up a lot of damage as well.
  11. Thrustin

  12. Dahwhatsdat???

    Actually the old lynx's high DPM was the only thing that allowed it to compete with the superior DPS of its counterparts. That was kinda the whole point of the weapon. If SOE really did nerf its DPM to bring it in line with the GD-7F and serpent then they need to reconsider that line of thinking because they essentially just took away a good chunk of the only real advantage the lynx had over those weapons.

    And yes the hip fire was nerfed. The moving hip fire at any rate.
  13. asdfPanda

    The problem is, the Lynx in its current form is extremely controllable and effective while ads. Adding a 0.75 ads speed multiplier would be cutting it close to the "overpowered" zone.

    The new Lynx is a completely different weapon. Previously, the old Lynx had two notable advantages to the higher dps Serpent and GD-7F: higher damage per magazine, and better moving hipfire accuracy. Now, the Lynx's hipfire is brought in line with the Serpent/GD-7F, and its damage per magazine is mitigated.

    The new Lynx cannot compete with the old Lynx in close quarters, even if the 0.75x ads speed is brought back.

    EDIT: I wouldn't be opposed to the new Lynx gaining a 0.75x ads speed multiplier. However, I don't think SOE will do that. Then again, I don't think SOE would bring back the old Lynx any time soon.
    • Up x 1
  14. Thrustin

    It's only fair due to sacrificing DPS and DPM. For the new lynx, it is something it really needs to compete in CQC.
  15. Iridar51

    Lynx 2.0 has literally 5% less than Serpent / GD-7F. In return it gets massively better recoil, better CoF stats and faster reload. I'm happy to make this tradeoff.
    • Up x 2
  16. Thrustin

    But according to above, worse hip fire. So we are mainly forced to use ADS. Therefor, it's justified to have the 0.75ADS back. I have no idea why they took it away in the first place.

    But I agree with you, it's quite awesome.
  17. Iridar51

    GD-7F and Serpent have same hip fire CoFs as Lynx.

    They took 75% ADS away because they probably wanted every faction to have one fast ADS carbine with better hip fire for mobility, and one high DPS carbine for aggressive close quarters.
    Right now the situation is relatively fair, and I see no reason why anything should change.
    • Up x 1
  18. Thrustin

    Because the design decision makes no sense. How can you be aggressive in close quarters when you are moving slow as a brick? The Lynx was meant to be the close quarter mobile carbine, not the Jaguar.
  19. Iridar51

    Then how come this is rule is true for other two factions? Does GD-7F has 75% ADS? Does Serpent? Then why should Lynx have it?
    • Up x 1
  20. Thrustin

    They have higher DPS. Sure, we have higher DPM, but that is by far not as important as raw damage output.

    But apart from that, yes they should have it in my opinion. Since I'm TR and don't play the other factions, I'm only voting for the Lynx to have it. Make a thread for the other carbines to have it and I would still support it.