Question: Why is LMG hipfire so inaccurate aka BAD?

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by netBattler, Apr 4, 2022.

  1. Scroffel5

    They were making realistic points, so I decided to as well. I only started talking about the application ingame when I said 'primarily game balance'
  2. Demigan

    Ah yes there are no situations where less damage falloff matter and no situations where your accuracy is lower so you need more bullets and no situations where you might fight multiple enemies and no situations where having a deeper magazine reduces the risk of being caught reloading!

    I think you severely underestimate LMG's and dont even know everything about them. Like the trait of having less damage falloff or how a deeper magazine can be exploited compared to weapons that try to be more conservative so they dont have to switch to their side arm.

    Are you high again?
    The MANA turret is basically an SMG on a tripod without the actual stability this should provide.
    The advantage of a shield is protection, which can be leveraged in many ways both offensively and defensively and not just for breakthroughs. In fact a lot of HA's will use it defensively to preserve KD. Hipfire is not a requirement, in fact in many situations you are better off using ADS and the lower damage falloff when peeking corners and culling your enemies. Hell that is useful even when using Carbines and SMG's.

    Making HA's cost nanites... How about no? What purpose would it have? just to let HA's have superior weapons than everyone else?

    This makes no sense at all. The cost and availability does not matter, what matters is where they differ from the other unit types. If the tank is ultra-rare or cheap as dirt would not change their vulnerability in cities and the power of using infantry as support against ambushes for example.

    Rarity is not combined arms, period.
  3. T.A.94

    Yeah I guess why?
    On an other note, ever used the high rpm ones sporting 143max dmg until 20m? Use shortbarrel and laser sight and go spray and pray all day long.
    Just don't complain, if a VS Engineer guns you down with a Beamer while ADSing.
  4. Pikachu

    To have excessive variety. The devs want the game to have lots of gun types. Carbines, assault rifles, machine guns, sub-machine guns, and they must all have a purpose, which they gain by having silly downsides.

    Fun fact: big heavy guns have less recoil. 1:29
    • Up x 2
  5. netBattler

    Okay so maybe I can live with hipfire being bad, but the cone of fire while ADS'd is, quite much, still effectively the bullets leaving the barrel at unreasonable angles. I got done playing with the Gauss SAW a few hours ago, and if you ADS and spray with that gun, the bullets stray pretty far from your reticle.

    Tbh, I don't think the LMGs have any advantage while ADS'd. We're both NC players, so I think you know what I'm talking about. The best ADS non-sniper/battle-rifle guns imo are the Vanquisher AR and the Gauss Prime.

    Maybe there are ways to simulate gunfire that runs in O(n^2) computational complexity, but I really don't think making the bullets' initial velocity vector be parallel and coaxial with your line of sight while ADS'd is one of those ways haha

    A lot of games nowadays are letting you hit what your sights are trained on, but just making the recoil pattern less predictable and controllable.

    I'm not saying I'm some aim god that can compensate for any kind of recoil, but I think it would be a more rewarding experience to hit what my gun is aimed at.

    I think cone of fire makes sense for hipfire, but not for ADS.
  6. JibbaJabba

    lol, miss me yet?

    better to try and fail to set me straight on a betel than deal with this man. so horrible lol.

    good luck!
  7. netBattler

    I'm just gonna put it out there that I think LMGs have no practical advantage while ADS'd over any other gun while ADS'd. Whatever theoretical 0 cone of fire for the first shot while standing still is overshadowed by the fact that 1 shot from an LMG doesn't get you a kill on any target. Not even a motion detector. Maybe if Heavy Barrels actually had a noticeable effect on the ADS CoF though... *think thonk*
  8. karlooo

    Ok, well could you emphasize and tell me how do you plan on giving vehicles a unique purpose? Something the team will care about, if these vehicles can be purchased and disposed off like a can of coke.
    For example, currently, if 10 players randomly, off the top of their head decide to pull tanks, how do you plan on implementing this crap into the game lol, how should the vehicles differ?

    Maybe there are situations but 1 in 100. Why don't you talk about my suggestion with magazines, instead of how it works currently, reloading the same magazine in 3 seconds? Like the damage falloff can go to the trash, all the "advantages" of LMG are worth jack...But if all weapons after reloading would reduce number of magazines, then that would be a whole different story, then the LMG advantage would be very visible.
    (And don't act like switching to sidearm is a handicap. I've experienced a thousand times where an infiltrator or other unit, 2 tapped me with a sidearm in 1.5 seconds from full health, in some cases while unloading bullets into them with T7 chaingun at close range)

    I use mana turret a lot and it itself drops enemies at any range as quickly as the LMG types for the certain situations. Damage output is maybe even more for the turret if you upgrade the cooling mechanism, also due to the fact it's hard to hit the weak spots plus boosts from Implants if it happens.

    "The advantage of a shield is protection... In fact a lot of HA's will use it defensively to preserve KD"
    Is that important?

    And that last sentence is probably your logic with vehicles.
  9. JibbaJabba

    The first shot CoF is not what makes an LMG have advantage in ADS. Only the SAW has a zero first shot CoF anyway.

    Pay closer attention to the actual aim stats, velocity, and most importantly the damage model and it's dropoff. The NS-15, NS-11A and NS-11C make a really nice apples-to-apples to see this.

    And then there is clip size...
  10. netBattler

    Actually the NS-15 and NS-11A have identical damage models. I just checked. In addition, the NS-11A has better muzzle velocity. In fact, at least for NC, the minimum damage happens for LMGs around 60-70m. Whereas for assault rifles, it's 80+, with the Gauss Prime having a 750m/s velocity and 130m minimum damage range with HVA.

    I *really* don't see any tangible advantage for the LMGs while ADS'd. I've done the AR Master directive and I'm working on the LMG Master directive now, so I think I have enough experience with both weapon classes to say that LMG ADS is comparatively underwhelming.
  11. JibbaJabba

    Assault rifles rock! They get the best of both worlds.

    But checkout the carbine in the same series. The LMG will quad-dink a head at unlimited range and has the higher muzzle velocity to help with this. The carbine won't. It's slower and falls off to a five-dink.

    It's not that the LMG is going to blow everything away at ADS. But it won't suck like it's hipfire does.
  12. Demigan

    Yes, because as I said the COF does not disappear when ADS, but just gets smaller. The thing is, the same thing happens when using any other weapon, so your complaints would be the exact same.

    You don't know the Gauss SAW has one of the smallest starting moving COF's?

    And are you saying that ADS is useless on LMG's? At worst it's equal to other weapons right? So there's no downside to using it, and with many LMG's having less damage falloff it's even beneficial. On top of that at range you tend to waste more bullets due to the target presenting a smaller profile, so having more bullets in a magazine is a useful trait.

    I have no idea what you just said but let's put it like this: We have a way to simulate inaccuracies while ADS'ing, it's called a Cone Of Fire.

    And because a lot of games do it means other games need to do it as well? Where's the fun in that? COF is actually a smart way to do it, as it creates a kind of statistical analysis on the player's side. "at this distance and this COF size, I will have an X success chance of hitting the target. That means I can/can't risk it to keep firing".
    It also gives rise to various tactics, such as when you keep holding the trigger you walk down from the head to the torso as your COF grows to make sure you keep hitting (useful for CQC weapons when using them at longer ranges). Or your hold your fire to settle the COF when it grows too large and keep hitting the head (useful for longer range weapons).

    It's also rewarding to know at what point your COF grows too large. It breeds gameplay where players aren't encouraged to just hold the trigger and try to compensate for the recoil constantly, but use bursts. It fits PS2's style better since PS2 is (for the most part) not an arena twitch-shooter.

    It makes sense for both.
    • Up x 1
  13. Demigan

    I actually think this makes a case for LMG's having more COF.

    COF is an amalgamation of various factors, recoil being but one of them. You can even see in the video that it takes a moment for him to acquire a target and fire (besides that all targets are pretty big and nearby, but then you wouldn't hipfire if that weren't the case).
    If we were to add something, like the target actually trying to avoid being hit, then suddenly that M60 is going to have a lot more trouble tracking the target correctly than a compact and light weapon like an MP5. That resolves itself in more COF as you try to keep the big heavy weapon pointed at the moving target.
    Worse: now we start walking with the guns. That M60 is going to jostle and move a lot more due to it's bulk than a compact weapon would, increasing it's COF even more.

    So if you were to say "COF bloom per shot would be lower, but if you move and/or shift your aim more than X degrees per second* then your COF will automatically bloom similar to how jumping automatically increases your COF" then it would be OK. Otherwise I see no justification in categorally improving LMG hipfire COF.

    *Maybe base the COF bloom on the total turn ratio. A small movement makes little difference, a 360 grows your COF immensely.
  14. netBattler

    I'm more hinting at maybe the heavy barrel should do a better job on LMGs than on other weapons. Yes, almost every weapon right now has an ADS COF. But there's nothing special about LMGs except for the larger mag. AR's generally outrange LMGs. SMGs generally have higher rates of fire. Carbines are a middle ground between AR and SMG, but also they don't suffer from maximum COF during air-born maneuvers. Also, some Carbines have really low COF bloom. Snipers and Battle Rifles have their niche. I'm saying there's nothing "special" about LMGs except for mag size... but what's it matter if you miss half your shots or more from COF effects while ADS'd.

    Gauss SAW having a lower moving COF is fake news. I just checked. The initial moving COF is 0.4, which is pretty standard for LMGs. TR has the smallest COF's for LMGs, and even other NC LMGs have smaller cones of fire, coming in at 0.35.

    I don't understand this "less damage falloff" argument for LMGs. They appear to generally have pretty standard damage falloff and their damage model is usually outclassed by ARs.

    ADS COF is maybe smart in your parlance, but to me it's a relic of the past. There's no statistical analysis to be done regarding CoF in the strictest sense, but if you really want to talk statistics: the angle of the bullet leaving your barrel relative to its "line of sight" is likely generated by simulating two uniform random variables, with a new pair being generated with different endpoint parameters after every shot. First for the angle coinciding with the plane perpendicular to your barrel, and next, for the angle in the resultant plane parallel to the barrel.

    I'm gonna go ahead and say that's my best guess as to how the engine does it. It's certainly a valid model though. If we assume that is the method, then I would argue that it's computationally less expensive, even by just a tiiiiiiny amount, to just dedicate resources to randomizing recoil, rather than generating/instantiating a set of random variables for every CoF Bloom increment.

    The Crux of my post is that I don't care if almost every weapon in the game has ADS CoF. I just wish LMGs were more special than big mags only. A change that could be easily implemented is by making heavy barrels do more for LMGs only.
  15. JibbaJabba

    Then go look at more stats. It's right there in black and white. Find the default carbines vs the default LMGs and compare.

    I just gave you a solid example in post 29. You ignored it. I pointed it out again in post 31. You ignored it again.

    You are not arguing in good faith, or being obtuse, or are blind.

    Everything is generally outclassed by ARs by design. They out LMG the LMGs and out carbine the carbines. They have crappy clipsize to keep it in check and are only given to medics (or the other support class w/ASP).

    Iridar goes over it in excruciating detail but under the hood there is simply a bound/ranged RNG calculation which is as computationally cheap as it gets.

    They are but you keep ignoring or dismissing everything except the mag and then turning around and saying "why does it only have the mag going for it?". I'm watching this conversation unfold in disbelief. :p

    ADS is ranged combat. Damage falloff matters. Velocity matters. Shots miss more at range so mag size matters. LMGs are better at all of these things.
  16. netBattler

    Sorry friend, I'll address your concerns after work!
  17. Demigan

    I always heard that LMG's were superior in starting ADS COF and I just checked, that is only occasionally true for non-moving COF. The Gauss SAW moving COF of 0.4 is actually one of the largest starting COF's of any LMG or Carbine and most other LMG's have a larger starting moving COF as well.

    For this discussion I dont think it matters too much, the LMG's are solid weapons in their own right especially on the shielded Heavy, but we need to be fair. Especially the whole geek-out of "oh noes Gauss SAW is most accurate head dinker!" Which I've heard for years now is wrong since almost no one starts a fight standing still.

    Now for Netbatter, you somehow create a hierarchy of "SMG-->Carbine-->AR" with the LMG outside of that loop. Yet its the AR that is the odd one out. Its supposed to be "SMG-->Carbine-->LMG", because the AR was specifically created to be one of the most powerful weapon classes and given to Medics to make the class more appealing to players.
  18. karlooo

    (and so on)

    Guys.. how the hell can you write pages about nothing? Cone of fire, is cone of fire, who cares.
    But the point is something is wrong with the heavy assault. The Heavy Assault is in a state of being both useless and toxic.

    Toxic from the name to the design. Firstly what even is a heavy assault? It's such a vague name and the reason for that is the player is supposed to decide what it means for them but the problem is the sandbox aspect is outdated, obsolete. Basically the people choose what's the meta, what's trendy, basically equip high DPS, accurate weapon, forward grip, laser sight, aim at head, that is the state of the "customization".
    Design meaning that the majority of weapons are LMGs, which all require you to ADS. This turns you into a slow moving target which I'll get to later, basically making you not any different from any other class in the game, combat wise. Giving people the impression that it's an unbalanced class which has a press 'f' to win mechanic (extra HP), and they're going to complain non stop.
    Uselessness meaning when you ADS, you're a slow moving stationary target which can take like 3-4 more bullets but why take that over the Engineer who can take possibely100 bullets, or why would you take HA over a medic who has a much better gun, assault rifle, can heal themselves in combat, allies in a radius, revive in 2 seconds, mass revive with the special devices.
    The Heavy Assaults shield is an enabler, allowing them to move forward themselves better than any other class, meaning that mobility is its strength, but you lose the mobility when you ADS lol.

    Mobility gives you much more survivability than the Nanoweave armor (small arms damage reduction on body hits before) and Nanite Mesh Generator, combined. You can dodge more damage by just moving...That's why I keep on repeating, machine gunner, shock troop, machine gunner, shock troop, machine gunner.
    One of my most used guns is the T7 chaingun Ever since I understood how to use that gun, I just cannot get off it. It just feels like this is what the Heavy Assault was designed for. Moving into important positions, strafing, dodging bullets, unloading firepower with high mobility. Sidewinder Implant is a good combination, more indirect survivability.

    But it feels as if I am the only one who plays Heavy Assault this way because the majority of guns are the LMGs, turning this class instead into this sorry, useless, disgusting toxic class.
    Demigan pretty much summed up the state of the HA, they use shield to preserve KD. It's in such a bad state that that's pretty much one of its main uses.

    To sum it up, people do what's trendy, due to this customization is absolute, the units need to be given a purpose.
  19. karlooo

    (deleted something here to not get into nonsense arguments)
  20. TR5L4Y3R

    talks about not getting nonsense arguements while he states nonsense arguements hilmself .. really constructive discussion ...
    • Up x 2