Says the Chez: GU07 Weapon Tuning

http://i.imgur.com/idGgqbc.png

For every infantry class it is TR > NC > VS. For Maxes, it is NC > TR > VS.

You just have no clue. Go play an NC max for about a week the come back. If you reiterate your statement you are lying.
Nobody on TR or VS has a damn clue about how bad the NC max is, really you don't. Stop saying stupid crap like this until you have spent at least 50 hours on each of the maxes. I have never met anyone who has truthfully played all 3 factions past like 40 and come up with a conclusion even remotely close to this.

In reality (for those not smoking crack and who are not out of their minds)
Infantry: TR > VS/NC (I only say this because it goes both ways, but after patch it will be VS > TR > NC)
Max: TR > VS > NC

The statistics you linked are based on play time. Lets evaluate this because it is obvious.
1.) NC will play max less in most situations unless pinched in the idea situation (which is seen) because they are less useful
2.) NC will play max only when it is extreme CQB (Biolab) and guess what, that is what it shows
3.) Score will be higher due to only playing it in the absolute ideal circumstance (which is also shown)
4.) Statistics are based on 1 week. You need a real sample size wait for a month or more. Hell anyone can pick out 1 sentence or 1 chunk of data out of 1 instance to suit them and make it seem like everything they said was right. The government does this all the time to justify banning things like some drugs and guns and what have you.


Please dear god stop looking at statistics like this and jumping to conclusions before you know anything.

Devrailis the NC Max vet would disagree with you that the NC Max is somehow bad now. Just check out his player stats and you'll see that since the nerf he still gets plenty of massive kill streaks with his Hacksaw Max. So really nothing has changed. If you were good with the NC Max you will continue to do well.

I just tested battle rifle....I can definitely say it isn't up to par with other weapons even with recoil fixes the damage is the real issue with the weapon. 5 shots for a kill at any range is just too much when you can just grab a TMG-50 and fire triple the lead down field.

The pounder is MUCH better for killing vehicles now, however I noticed it still has major issues with dealing with infantry. Perspectivewise the burster has a much easier time killing infantry than the pounder simply because of the crosshair and alignment issues with the pounder's reticle at close ranges. Honestly think reticule on pounder needs improving or velocity on the weapon itself.

Still, he would most likely do even better with a TR MAX. When will you guys get that a few players that care about their K/d and are decent enough players will always get nice kill streaks with any weapon. That doesn´t make the weapon OP or as good as another.

You'd have to ask him that, he would do fine in any MAX but he obviously enjoys the NC MAX much more and has his reasons. The NC MAX is still the best Max CQC ,within 8m, and instigibs other Maxes in ways a TR or VS MAX could only dream of. I play TR Max very frequently, so I'd like to think I'm not just blasting out pure opinionated bias. You tell me though, I like learning new things about the game, but I form most of my opinions on Maxes based upon what Devrailis has told me and my own in game experiences.

^This is most of the problem.
TR and VS want their LMGs to be shotguns.
You don't have shotguns. You have LMGs.
Use your LMGs like LMGs and stop whining about how a shotgun is better at being a shotgun.

Who said I'm whining, I'm just saying the NC Max is presently not terrible. Extended Mag Hacksaws with Kinetic lvl 5 is a TR/VS Max's worst nightmare in a CQC situation without a doubt. I'm not even complaining about it, I just want people to acknowledge that the NC Max isn't garbage.

I wasn't targeting you in particular. I probably shouldn't have quoted just your post. It's a problem for everyone arguing the value of the different MAXs.
Both NC and TR/VS posts in this thread contain plenty of references. Everyone is stuck on comparing the three MAXs at CQB range. TTK, instagib, DPS, Bio Labs, etc.
It's frustrating to argue the in-game value of two different weapon types based on just one's ideal target range.

Well good sir, you must admit that most players pull maxes for CQC scenarios so this is where their misunderstanding of always dying from the NC Max comes from. I use my dual mercy max outside too, and I'm well aware that no NC Max, outside of the AV Falcon Max, has close to the same effective range. Most TR/VS players don't know how to use their Max properly outside so they never do, but then complain about dying to the NC Max inside which is understandably where your frustration comes from. Oh them noobs, whatcha gonna do?

PATCH: MIND GRENADES.
HEAD GLITCHING AKA CLIPPING AKA MIND BULLETS BUT WITH GRENADES.

I approve if that's what it is, otherwise give me that real physics arm pumping.

And NC MAX'es are noobs themselves indoors.

Only noobs are complaining about the NC MAX. It still works fine.

There are several problems here.

1.) Lets define CQB (or CQC) as being sub-30 meters because that is literally what it means to be close and do battle. This (sub-10meter) or (sub-15meter) crap has got to end because if you are sub-25 meters you are close enough for max damage on all weapons and very hard to miss. I am not using Wikipedia as my primary source here but they are a quick reference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close_quarters_combat
Close Quarters Combat (CQC) or Close Quarters Battle (CQB) is a type of warfare in which (usually) small units or teams engage the enemy with personal weapons at very short range, up to 30 meters, from proximity hand-to-hand combat to close quarter target negotiation with short range firearms. In the typical CQC scenario, the attackers try a very fast, violent takeover of a vehicle or structure controlled by the defenders, who usually have no easy way to withdraw. Because enemies, hostages/civilians, and fellow operators can be closely intermingled, CQC demands a rapid assault and a precise application of lethal force. The operators need great proficiency with their weapons, but also the ability to make split-second decisions in order to avoid or limit friendly casualties. CQC is defined as a short-duration, high-intensity conflict, characterized by sudden violence at close range.

2.) Given the above as a damn near given fact... The NC max is undoubtedly the worst max past 15 meters. I have seen 0 rebuttal to this statement. Meaning they "decent at best.. but really still terrible sub-15meters" and aweful post 15 meters. Meaning 30/2 = 15 so half of CQB they are OK and half they don't even work. Logically this means they are no where near acceptable for their range limits. And even in real life shotguns are meant to be sub-50 meters (without slugs). It is so hard to see all the facts and call them "THE BEST AT CQB) or even close to the best because every other max wrecks at these ranges.

3.) Seeing as the NC Max IS NOT the best at CQB and shotguns are MEANT to be CQB oriented then even at their only weapon they are not the best in class. How do you idiots not follow this logic?

Let me break it down even further.
1.) NC Max meant for CQB VS/TR meant for > CQB
2.) NC Max isn't best in CQB by definition and obviousness
3.) NC Max was nerfed even more in CQB by drastic amounts
4.) SOE (looking for kind words here)... clowns? Decided to make more VS/TR weapons better all around (including CQB)
5.) Non-NC still claim NC max is overpowered by weighted statistics and general idiocy.

I know this is the internet but.. really?

Name objectives to fight over that aren't in the middle of a close quarters combat area.

Any continent, any facility.

Right, I'll just stop using those pesky "facts" and switch to your brand of pure 100% Whiner ********.

Teach me how to avoid dmg from all the explosives+tank, esf and lib shells that get shoot into that close quarters combat area.

The NC Max is still better at killing than the other two.
Would be nice if suppressive fire gave better xp. The VS and TR Max's can suppress enemy infantry while an NC Max will outright kill them.

Dude I worked in statistics/research/analysis work for quite some time. You know how easy it is to pick a specific instance of just about anything and make it look like it's "Set in stone" or "Factual"? You pick 1 week out of however many this game has been out and the stats line up perfect for you so you say "AH HAH!". Show me statistics from the time the game started or break it down by battle rank or something productive other than "All maxes we think played in 1 week"... that is just so generic, unverifiable and overall a waste of anyone's time for any real evidence. Of course I am again probably just talking to a troll who really doesn't care and just wants to act like he knows something to justify something that is really unjustifiable.

This really is sad. I have enjoyed this game and tried to see it grow so that I could continue to have fun. I mean this is kind of the first time since EverQuest I put together a big organization (that does very well) on an SoE product and actively participated in community activities. But every patch it seems to move one step back. I would just greatly appreciate a developer taking the time to detail to me in hard facts to great length the process/thought process to these otherwise seemingly ludicrous and atrocious patches nerfing an already weak class and buffing it's opponents.I mean give us a workflow or a diagram or something aside from 'This is what we settled on' because it strongly appears level 20 kids who don't know jack about this game get owned by something and complain until you do something. Very disappointing.


Like dragon said it went from "NC is the hardest faction so I play them for a real challenge" to "It's damn near impossible to do well as NC" to "Why am I even logging on? It went from hard to stupid and there is no challenge because of how out of control it is getting". When you stop having fun is when it's time to move on... and I really anticipated spending a lot more money and time with this game (This is why I still have 100k+ SC) but it is getting hard. None of this has to do with 'whining' like that troll is claiming but more just disappointment for a game I really felt was encouraging.

Just as a side note to the developers I am apparently not talking to (due to lack of response). You do actually realize you are giving ALL maxes very potent CQB weapons and 100% eliminating the uniqueness of the NC max and not giving anything in return. On top of that, not only does every max get CQB that is just as good as NCs, but the NC max has no counter to mid/long range and their shotguns (their only weapons) are entirely useless meaning those of us who spent money on them wasted it. If I hadn't said it enough, very very very disappointing from a customer standpoint.

From any spawn room in the game, there is only one point that is limited to CQB. That is "Point A" on a tower.
Every other single point in the game requires a person to travel through both CQB and non-CQB areas.
So, to answer your question, this means that 98% of the objectives in the game are in the mmiddle of both CQB AND non-CQB areas. You're point is moot.

Actually, that's not true. By pointing out that 98% of the points are both CQB and non-CQB we are explicitly showing that the CQB limited NC MAX is range limited for a portion of 98% of the objectives in the game. Now that's just stupid.

^This.

We don't have proof that the flamethrower will be as good as the shotgun. However, I'd bet all my SC that SOE will make it as good (or better) in order to get NC players to pay money to get them. What then? The NC MAX will be equal at one range and irrelevant at all others? Seriously?!?!

Since NC maxes are only allowed to do well in CQC, let's give away our shotguns in return for real CQC skills.