Inspired by what I felt was somewhat inadequate testing on how effective attachments are at negating recoil, I spent a couple hours running my own set with the NC6 Gauss SAW. Method: At a warpgate, walk out the door and down the platform until you get to the row of 5 vehicle blocking poles. Stand against the center pole and align yourself at the exact center by using the ones on each side as points of reference. Then zoom in, center your crosshairs on the very edge of the pole as it appears on your screen, and open fire while not moving the mouse. Screenshot when you've expended 99 bullets from your clip and have a single round left, resulting in precision within 1%. Repeat with all weapons and attachments you wish to test. Return to the same spot and take a screenshot (unzoomed, if necessary for the highest point of your crosshairs during testing to be visible) and screenshot with the edge of the pole barely showing at the bottom of your screen. This establishes the variance of your different tests, from which you can determine the effectiveness of each test's recoil reduction. In this test, the smallest vertical distance covered was 841 pixels, resulting in precision within 0.84%. A source of unavoidable imprecision is the random vertical cone of fire spread of your weapon. Horizontal recoil and cone of fire are insignificant for the purposes of this test. Results: Default NC6 Gauss SAW: 1132 pixels travelled upwards during a 99 round burst. Compensator NC6 Gauss SAW: 1009 pixels travelled upwards during a 99 round burst. Approximately 8.91% reduction in recoil. Grip NC6 Gauss SAW: 949 pixels travelled upwards during a 99 round burst. Approximately 19.28% reduction in recoil. Advanced Grip NC6 Gauss SAW: 841 pixels travelled upwards during a 99 round burst. Approximately 34.60% reduction in recoil. P.S. Sony can you please just give us the bloody numbers already?
Nice test, good to see some actual numbers. Out of curiosity do you know what the reduction was for advanced foregrip and compensator? This is why new players that like the nc6 gauss saw should definitely cert into both levels of foregrip first before compensator. I've seen too many players go for compensator before the advanced foregrip.
true...with those things it becomes the best LMG ingame im surprised it hasnt been nerfed down to the lvl of the others...
Ok, so now I understand why people like the saw.. they put the advanced forward grip on it.. I cant hit the broadside a barn with my stock saw under full spray, I hate the thing...
You should never full spray with the saw. Bursts of 5~10 will give you much better results, and only spray if you need to hipfire.
The SAW is a nice weapon, I used it fully certed. But the new NS systems LMG is even more accurate and much easier to kill with long distance bursts. Part of me say NC lost an advantage, but part of me also say we gained, as this is much easier to use than the SAW.
Hmm The smaller clip offsets that a fair bit tho' doesn't it? Also the NS systems is bugged in vr, it has no 6 times scope. (check cert menu). I and a few others bought it because we intended to use it with 6 times scope.
THEY LIED TO ME!? No but I remember the spreadsheet only mentioning horizontal previously. Now when I checked it also mentioned vertical, hmm...
The Spreadsheet has a lot of testing and word of mouth in. The only things from the data files are the basic (max) damage values, ROF and recoil values. Even the min-damage was done from testing, not from game data. Bullet velocity is also there, but the numbers don't seem right when comparing rockets (fire a decimator and default launcher and time it to a distant-ish vehicle in testing)
Not really, I never get anywhere near emptying the clip on the SAW before realoading. The new NS systems LMG allows 6 kills with a few rounds to spare in the magazine, normally plenty of time to change clip. I think clip sizes over 50 rounds are not really worth much from an advantage point of view.
thanks a lot for that test! i read a lot about the SAW in this forum - from "worst LMG" to "best LMG". i'm personally testing it again and again in battle with changing attachments and can compare it to every NC-LMG in battle: for me it's whether the best nor the worst. sometimes it sucks because of the low RoF, sometimes it rules because of the high damage/"accuracy". best overall NC-LMG for me is - by far! - the EM6. it beats the SAW in many situations, can beat the SAW in every situation. the SAW S is rather the little brother of the EM6 than of the SAW - get it if you won't afford the EM6. the EM1 is the "opposite" of the SAW - will beat it easyly in CQC, no chance at looong ranges. (equipped with the advanced laser it's a lot fun to play with the EM1!) all other NC-LMGs have only 50 rounds per clip - not enough for a HEAVY!
Unfortunately you can't measure horizontal recoil as easily and that is the stat that decides how effective guns are at med and long range.
TMG-50 would be better for tracking moving targets than the SAW, if it's anything like the GD22-S, SAW S or EM6 (at least for me), as the slightly higher rate of fire, lower bloom per shot combined with the harder hitting bullets reaches a fine medium between the two.
Unfortunately, I don't have access to the TMG-50, but I think I have described my procedure in sufficient detail that you can perform an identical test yourself and post the results.
