SAW/Orion/CARV Logical Comparison.

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

  1. Zaik

    what is there? a slightly tighter (0.1) stationary ADS cone of fire on the SAW and a 0.1 worse moving ADS one? do you consider being stationary at infiltrator ranges to be a good idea?

    you're the one who wanted to take it to spreadsheets, i'm just using them. feel free to point out some way in which the CARV isn't as good or better than either of the other two on paper that isn't completely pointless or an equal tradeoff.

    btw, i already told you how.
  2. PyroPaul

    it is relevant.
    it is the results of the data being processed through the game.

    If the Results don't fit the Theory, you don't throw the Results away and ignore it...
    It is like ignoring the rules of gravity because you don't like how much you weigh...
  3. FnkyTwn

  4. Fenrisk

    SPH - K/D and player stats in general for guns are irrevelent for judging the medium to long range effectiveness of automatic weapons. This is especially true of default weapons. Pity no one replys to my posts because they can't refute what i'm telling them.

    1. 90% of combat is at 30m or less = 90% of default weapon score is made at 30m or less = You don't get to see medium to long range effectiveness through player stats.

    2. NC is made up of low BR 4th faction noobs who bring the over all score of their weapons down. That's why all copy/paste weapons with different names and NS weapons have lower player stats.

    3. High BR players are using shotguns for QCQ and LMG's for medium to long range combat. That's why you see a lot of high BR players still using the SAW as well as the EM6 while TR players grab the TMG-50.

    4. A significant amount of low BR players haven't a clue about weapon stats, attachments or what to use which brings the over all score down.

    5. Player stats don't show attachments used or at what range the score is achieved.

    6. Gun stats and attachments are programmed into the game. They don't suddenly change once you equip them.
    • Up x 1
  5. TintaBux

    Because there is nothing wrong with it.
  6. TintaBux

    Exactly, the stats we have are completely relevant and what we have, all TR keep doing is making personal opinions and not backing them up with any factual player/faction in game stats. So all it is, is TR just trying to get a buff on the T9 based on personal opinions that they want even more OP equipment, not facts.
  7. felfox

    As VS I'd say those stats explain what I've felt. At long range I get decimated by the SAW and now I see why, massive damage with pin point accuracy on burst fire. However in close combat the Orion destroys those same people and even on the few times I've played an NC I can't stand the SAW. It does have a huge range of attachments though but yeah those stats seem pretty spot on for how the SAW and Orion feel. (Haven't tried the carv since waaaay back so I won't comment on it)
    • Up x 2
  8. Ganelon

    K, then let's buff Phalanx turrets for NC.
    • Up x 1
  9. ladiesop

    Huh? the Phalanx turret performance is pretty even across the factions.

    Unless you're referring to the AI Phalanx, which had a total of 75 players across all factions using it in the sample period (compared with 2000+ for one faction for any one of the others).
  10. Ganelon

    NC fall behind in SPH with the Phalanx turrets. And seeing how everyone here wants to ignore weapon stats such as recoil but insists on using SPH as a balancing factor, I gave them an example as to why that is flawed.
    • Up x 1
  11. ladiesop

    The NC score lags by a small amount, which can be attributed to the population differences (and bonuses). In terms of vehicle kills (which is what they're for), they're really, really close and the NC isn't even last for the AV turret, and only very slightly behind in AA (I guess they don't get to shoot Reavers, who have the biggest hitbox).
  12. Ganelon

    NC lags behind in most of the common pool weapons in regards to SPH, and the difference in score is about as big, if not bigger, as between the Carv, SAW, and Orion (Orion coming out on top).

    Again, SPH is irrelevant.
    • Up x 1
  13. ladiesop

    Behind by a hair. (actually the NC score the most vehicle kills/hr for the Decimator, which could be credence to the population thing as Magriders and Prowlers are pulled more than Vanguards). Looks pretty balanced to me.

    Score or kills/veh kills per hour may not be the best metric, but at the moment it's our only metric or results we can measure; specification don't bring in any results to analyse, and are a basis for hypothesis but the hypothesis must be tested against results. I don't know what else you can judge it on at the moment, other than feelings, and I don't think it's a good idea to balance the weapons based on feelings.
  14. PyroPaul

    Why? The Kills and Veh. Kills are with in an acceptable tolerance.
    oh wait, you're going to be narrow minded arn't you?

    reply with 'You didn't specify that!' even though the entire thing is about how Player influenced stats is a integral part of understanding the weapons in the game.
  15. CupBoy

    You've got it totally backwards. Those are the things that are largely irrelevant to judge balance, not score/kills/whatever. The only way to judge balance is to look at how it actually performs in the game.

    The weapon attributes, such as recoil, CoF, etc. are useful when looking for things to adjust but you can't determine how well it works without looking at how it performs - just like you can't look at two recipes and say "this one tastes better".

    And if you're going to refute score/hr or kills/hr as a meaningful measure of performance, at least try to form a coherent argument against it instead of just some smart-*** quip.

    What does that prove? And why do you think it proves what you think it proves?
  16. Enter Name Here

    Sigh, people put so much effort in comparing apples to oranges. The starting LMGs are not purposed for the same roles. Why? I don't know, ask SOE. However the fact remains that the Gauss Saw fills the same role as the TMG-50 for TR, Flare and Ursa for VS. Orion fills the same role as the MSW-R and T32-Bull for TR, and GD-22S and Anchor for NC. Finally the T9 Carv being a more general weapon is a bit harder to confidently nail down but I'd say it's similar to the Pulsar LSW and SVA-88 for the VS and the EM6 and Gauss Saw S for the NC. Someone put in the effort to write 10 paragraphs with those comparisons and then I'd be interested.
  17. HadesR

    From all the talk about the Carv's horizontal recoil I expected to use it and it would chuck my mouse across the room .. Shock it didn't, because the horizontal recoil differences between the SAW and the CARV is minuscule ( 0.050 ) and ingame are both easily compensated for .

    Will agree that " some " weapon stats matter but those are the ones that the players have little control over such as CoF and damage ..
  18. PyroPaul

    Actually i can, it is just there is nothing to reply to...

    1. Majority of combat occurs at 20-30m... Okay. yeah. Definatly not 90%, but a little over half for sure.
    so what?

    you don't get to see medium to long range effectiveness? What makes you say that?
    players will try and gravitate towards their innate advantage.
    SAW users will stay at range... Shotgunners will sprint in close...

    Unless if you want to try and argue that the NC Bolt Driver snipers is getting kills at ~5 meters, then your argument is kinda moot.

    2. Except that would be incorrect. You see, if NC was comprised of predomiantly 4th faction noobs... then they wouldn't have the Copy Paste guns and NS duplicates. And i find it funny that this is further reinforced by the fact that NC has the fewest owners NS and Copy/Paste guns while TR tends to have the most...

    3. again... so what?
    making a statement like that proves... nothing tbh.

    4. and so what? There are a significant amount of low-to-medium BR players that do have a clue about weapon stats, and bring the over all score up. Thats the point of having a mass sampling... the positives of one side negate the negatives of the other, creating an even ground which is primarily influenced by the core mechanic.

    5. and that matters how? recoil has little to do with the ultimate result. ADS CoF isn't effected by much of anything. Rate of fire isn't manipulated in the least, Except for UBGL/SG and Slug shot... attachments don't have as dramatic as an effect as you think.

    6. And just because they don't change when you enter the game doesn't make your interpretation any more correct... You are benching on the idea that Attachments, Damage, and Recoil are the prime influence in the game... but the player statistics compiled disagree with you on that. So you ignore them.
  19. PyroPaul

    I both agree and disagree.

    the SAW is a defensive weapon, proving to be superior when you find a spot to hunker down, not worry about getting stabbed in the back, and hose death. the Orion is an Assault weapon where you use it on the go. don't stop moving, don't look back. The CARV is a cover weapon, going from cover to cover.

    which is kinda the point of the thread.

    look at the weapons, look at their effects, come to a conclusion on why they are the way they are.
    rather then look at the stats, make a conclusion, and ignore the results created by the game.
    • Up x 1
  20. Enter Name Here

    Sure enough, my skimming skills apparently failed me. So many "this gun is better than this gun even though they fit totally different roles" threads thought this was another.

    That said, I'd still be interested in how your points apply when the similar weapons are brought in as well. Gauss Saw has lower score and higher death ratio on average than the Orion presumably due to role difference, but what about the Anchor/GD-22s/MSW-R? Does the Flare/TMG-50 have a similar score drop/death increase? Since they're not quite as strongly set in that role as the Gauss Saw does the Gauss Saw have an even more extreme result, or does it actually go better since people using it for that situtation do better?(though that last one probably isn't actually ascertainable since a lot of people just use it cause it's free)