SAW/Orion/CARV Logical Comparison.

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by PyroPaul, Apr 28, 2013.

  1. PyroPaul

    A problem i have found in many of the weapon comparison arguments is that one side out right ignores 'Player Stats' because they believe there are too many variables at play that 'corrupt' the given information. Following this, those same players would state a dependence on 'Weapon Data' as it is 'immutable fact' and use the weapon data to display findings which they hold as true.

    The problem i have with this...
    The sampling size of the player stats fields are too large to be influenced by that many variables, the pool that the information is drawn from is large enough that the most important variables influence it the most, those being the Weapons Statistics.

    And while weapon statistics are 'facts' set in stone, the way individuals interpret them are not. All too many times these individuals are focusing on values which have less influence on the actual performance of the weapon, but they present it as Law.

    So here is MY look into the comparison of these weapons, trying to decipher the data and logically present it to you, coming to a defined conclusion using all the data i have.

    vertical (first shot - shots after)
    SAW- .9075 + .55
    CARV- .8 + .4
    Orion- .86 + .4

    horiz. (first shot - shots after)
    SAW- .28 + .175
    CARV- .45 + .225
    Orion- .43 + .2

    While some say recoil is important, i am not too sure about this because recoil can be countered directly through attachments and an individuals skill. It is a variable which can be controlled and/or removed from the equation entirely.

    CoF ADS:
    still/move (6 shots)
    SAW- 0 + .07 ( .0, .07, .14, .21, .28, .35) / .5 +.07 (.5, .57, .64, .71, .78, .85)
    CARV- .1 + .05 ( .1, .15, .2, .25, .3, .35) / .4 + .05 (.4, .45, .5, .55, .6, .65)
    Orion- .1 + .05 ( .1, .15, .2, .25, .3, .35) / .35 +.05 (.35, .4, .45, .5, .55, .6)

    still/move (6 shots)
    SAW- 0 + .07 ( .0, .07, .14, .21, .28, .35) / .2 + .07 ( .2, .27, .34, .41, .48, .55)
    CARV- .1 + .05 ( .1, .15, .2, .25, .3, .35) / .2 + .05 (.2, .25, .3, .35, .4, .45)
    Orion- .1 + .05 ( .1, .15, .2, .25, .3, .35) / .2 + .05 (.2, .25, .3, .35, .4, .45)

    I'm not going to list Hip fire specifically because a majority of players do not 'Shoot from the Hip'. Also because the division of the weapons is fairly evident in those numbers and don't require expanding in my opinion.

    Time per shot (6 shots) To .6s
    SAW- 0, .12, .24, .36, .48, .60
    CARV- 0, .08, .16, .24, .32, .4, .48, .56
    Orion- 0, .08, .16, .24, .32, .4, .48, .56

    (to present in a similar window of time.)

    Damage Potential.
    while not precise, this gives a mathematical representation of medium damage produced across a sampling. The assumption being that the individual is shooting at a single point, and the Cone is that % bigger then the point. So a CoF of 0 means the CoF is the same size as the target, while a CoF of .2 is 20% larger and is simplistically translated in that 20% of shots will miss.

    This is then applied to a base sampling, which then the medium damage found. Again, not precise because damage isn't calculated in % but rather as 'yes/no', but this is used to explain probability and potential.

    While the actual equation is much more complex, i'm not willing to try and dig through the annual of math to find it... you're more then welcome to.

    ADS +6 shots. (cumulative) to .6s
    SAW- 200, 186, 172, 158, 144, 130 (990)
    CARV- 128 121 114 107 100 92 (662) 85, 78 (796)
    Orion- 128 121 114 107 100 92 (662) 85, 78 (796)

    SAW- 100, 86, 72, 58, 44, 30 (390)
    CARV- 85, 78, 71, 64, 57, 50 (405) 43 36 (484)
    Orion- 92, 85, 78, 71, 64, 57, (447) 50 43 (540)

    Crouch Move
    SAW- 160, 146 132, 118, 104, 90 (750)
    CARV- 114, 107, 100, 92, 85, 78 (576) 71, 63 (710)
    Orion- 114, 107, 100, 92, 85, 78 (576) 71, 63 (710)

    The problem with all this processed data is that... well, it has no meaning.

    Any data in any endeavor scientific or mathematic is only half of the over all equation, The other part is the result, the Solution... the Answer.

    Luckily we are provided that in the Player Stats, which show the over all performance of all the weapons across a wide enough field that variables such as 'skill' and 'luck' become less influential. The average created by the sampling produces numbers which more represent the base mechanics of the weapon at play then the field of skill or lack there of in the sampling.

    So, With data in hand, you create a hypothesis based on all the processed data.


    the SAW is only superior if the Individual is Stationary or Crouch moving...
    Which then results in the following...

    A Stationary/Slow moving target.

    I'm sure you've heard the saying 'a still target is a dead target'...

    This would imply that Players using the SAW would die more often then players using the CARV and Orion... And as you know you can't shoot while dead (most of the time), which means that SAW users would probably get lower scores as they spend more time respawning.

    Inversely, due to the higher general mobility while in ADS, coupled with other factors unique to the weapon, the Orion players should not die as often and get a higher score by comparison, with the CARV performing between the two.

    Take this Hypothesis and Compare it to Known Results (Player Statistics):
    SAW Players got the lowest Score/Hr. (nc- 3807, tr- 3893, vs- 3975)
    SAW Players got the worst Death/Hr.(nc- 12.5, tr- 11.9, vs-10.89)

    NC lowest score/hr, Highest death rate.
    VS highest score/hr, lowest death rate.
    TR between score/hr, between death rate.

    which matches my hypothesis.

    I hope this provides a better understanding of the weapons to people and shed some light on why the player stats panned out the way they did. And Hopefully it will quiet some arguments which use weapon data only 'facts' as their keystone...
    • Up x 5
  2. Bape

    All and everything is balance but you know TR. You are about to get a spam of " Ill take the saw any day" in each of their reply.
    • Up x 2
  3. Eclipson

    The Guass saw is the easiest to get kills with, and most versitile with its large assortment of attachments. The only thing that bugs me about it really is that it's the starter weapon. The TR have to save up 500 certs to get a decent LMG (TMG-50) which is just a slightly better Guass Saw S, which a lot of NC say is horrible compared to the Guass Saw.
    • Up x 5
  4. Fenrisk

    Same broken statistics spewed all over the forums. Here are a few facts that completely destroy your wall of text.

    1. 90% of combat takes place at 30m or less so guns designed for long range combat with great accuracy don't see a higher score/hour as a direct result. Guns designed more for 30m or less see a higher score/hour. This is especially true of default weapons. This means you can't identify the best medium to long range weapons based on player stats.

    2. The player stats do not tell you what attachments they are using.

    3. NS weapons used by NC players perform worse

    4. Copy/pasted weapons but with different id tags perform worse for NC.

    4. default weapons get used by BR 1-25 noobs learning the game. If their weapon is designed more for long range then short they think their guns crap.

    5. Shotguns rule CQC

    6. More noobs playing this game then pros so they don't use the right guns for the right job.
    • Up x 9
  5. Odin

    Stop linking actual facts and data, the tr and vs kiddies want to keep thinking its the best lmg. The em6 is so much better lol...
    • Up x 2
  6. Chiss

    In come the TR, as expected.
    • Up x 2
  7. Ganelon

    Doesn't take away that the Carv is ****.
    • Up x 1
  8. Odin

    • Up x 1
  9. Ganelon

    • Up x 3
  10. Zaik

    why do we keep getting these threads

    they always go exactly the same way

    everyone remembers this one time an undercover hacker instakilled them with x from a bazillion meters away and assumes that everyone else they fight is just bad, and they base their entire opinion on that experience.

    then what is? it's not K/DR, so if it's not SPR, then what?
    • Up x 1
  11. Odin

    Rofl yeah avg kills per hour and score per hour means nothing at all, actual performance over all people and all servers is meaningless compared to random tr complaining about their "up weapons".
    Thanks for the chuckle today I needed it.
    • Up x 3
  12. Ganelon

    How about weapon stats? Recoil, CoF etc. etc.

    Stop trying so hard, it's not working for you.
    • Up x 1
  13. Zaik

    which weapon stats? i think that would work against you anyway, the carv looks a lot better on paper than it is in practice.
    • Up x 1
  14. Ganelon

    No it doesn't.
    • Up x 1
  15. TintaBux

    In your opinion, for me and many others even br90+ TR players the Carv is easier to get kills with.
  16. TintaBux

    That's not a good way to look at it, the best way to see is in game stats, which show the Carv is perfectly fine.
  17. SpcFarlen

    The reason why is for 200 damage per shot, its amazing at longer ranges because it requires less shots to hit. Im not saying i hold that view that i want the SAW, but thats the reasoning behind it. Doesnt have to do anything with it being OP or UP, just it has a niche where the other two factions dont have.
  18. Ganelon

    You only say that because you want the Carv to remain **** for some reason or other.
    • Up x 5
  19. Zaik

    feel free to enlighten me where it isn't blatantly superior to the other two outside of digging up obscure values 99% of people don't even know exist like horizontal recoil tolerance.

    if you're just looking at available spreadsheets all you can see is that the CARV has almost identical ADS accuracy to the Orion and double the magazine size(orion has a whole 0.05 advantage on ADS moving. hipfire accuracy on all LMGs is terrible, so that doesn't really matter. orion has .75x ADS speed, which again is a cqc thing and ultimately pointless because there are weapons completely superior at hipfire in every other weapon class in the game except rocket launchers and sniper/battle rifles.

    TTK on carv is 0.48 within 10m, 0.56 outside it. TTK on SAW is 0.48 within 10m and 0.6 outside it.

    so yeah, in case you haven't gotten the picture yet, on paper the CARV appears to be the best at doing what LMGs do despite the fact that it is ******* terrible at it in game.
  20. Ganelon

    Calling stats that are not in your argument's favour obscure? Clever.
    • Up x 3