Says the Chez: GU07 Weapon Tuning

To be fair, the timestamps would be quite different on a pistol killboard.

91 kills (I assume, didn't count) in 41 minutes for a 2,22 kills/minute, regardless of any deaths that might have occurred, is a hell of a lot more than I get with my non-MAX infantry. But the question is: How many kills/minute (or per death) can TR and VS MAXes get?

And how much can MAXes choose the terms of engagement? If NC MAXes are used 90% of the time camping biolabs and TR MAXes are used 50% of the time out in the open, how are we supposed to judge any sort of efficiency from kills/minute statistics? To give an example of what sort of things need to be taken into account.

on second thought , except the infiltrator these aren't to bad choices, some of them i actually like

what i dont want to see in more snipers, they are already making up for over 50% of my deaths, and practically close to none of my kills

Bullcrap. Lower population on most servers. Their empire benefit does not extend to much outside of their infantry weapons, and the other factions even get to have no drop for free, if you consider the fact that homing rockets like the TR and fly by camera rockets like the NC do no have to worry about drop.

Do the VS get a higher burst potential for their TTK like the NC? Nope. What's the penalty for that? Lower rate of fire? But same total DPS as the TR? Ouch. That sure is a trade off.

Do the VS get a higher RoF to help juggle and jiggle the screen of our enemies? Nope. Whats the trade off for that? Lower damage, but the high RoF makes it the same DPS as the NC? Ouch. That sure is a trade off.

What do the VS have? Oh, accurate no drop weapons... that almost anyone can mimic by aiming down sights and thinking. Oh, what is our trade off ? Lower total DPS, no front load damage, and no added screen juggle against enemies. The ONLY empire at a net loss for dps for their empire perk.

Like if you agree that people are dumb about this.

How many?

This many.

When you can wield a "Median" gun the median of guns will have a purpose.

Aggregation in this case only serves to obfuscate. Compare the Long/short range models and you will see a different story. The median obscures this because the factions do not have the same ratio of long/short range guns.

i don't understand this change. They don't get bullet drop, so instead they get damage reduction at range.

How is this fair to NC/TR.

Seems like a population based thing to me.... oh well, been meaning to play VS for awhile.

Most of the median guns were actually median, in terms of the bullet velocity. The ones where median differed from available options (the two choices for median being different in value), I noted it.
If you want the true median weapon used, look no further than the default weapons for each class. But I think you might agree that comparing these is not purposeful either - CARV and Gauss SAW aren't meant for same range, for example.

But feel free to look through the bullet velocity of the various guns and come to the conclusion that, on the whole, Vanu are definitely not disadvantaged in that area.

I tried to list the relevant stuff.. average, median and the variation range. The complaint I was answering to was "Vanu guns" not "vanu <range> guns" as well, so I didn't think to spend extra time to point out something that's not even significant for actual performance.

TR already is. Nothing will change there.

Balance? The simple fact that TR and NC have bullet drop.... that's so negligible that there might as well not be any.

Ahem.

Let's compare then, shall we?

Standard assault rifles ("mid-range" if we want):
T1 Cycler -> 580
Pulsar VS1 -> 615
Gauss Rifle -> 650

Long-range assault rifles:
SABR-13 -> 620
Corvus -> 600
Reaper DMR -> 555

Close-range assault rifles:
Cycler TRV -> 550; TAR -> 570
H-V45 -> 590
GR-22 -> 600; Carnage BR -> 580

Standard carbines:
TRAC-5 -> 490
Solstice -> 515
AF-19 Mercenary -> 500

Long-range carbines:
T5 AMC -> 570
Pulsar C -> 515
AC-X11 -> 480; Razor GD-23 -> 550

Close-range carbines:
LC2 Lynx -> 450; LC3 Jaguar -> 440
Serpent -> 420; VX6-7 -> 465
GD-7F -> 500

LMGs are more difficult to compare and i'll try to stick with the 3 styles that can be found among TR and VS weapons.

Mid-short range lmgs, 750 rpm:
T9 CARV -> 600; MSW-R -> 580
Orion -> 615

Mid-range, sustained fire lmgs:
Pulsar LSW -> 620; SVA-88 -> 630
T16 Rhino -> 640; T32 Bull -> 600
EM1 -> 590

Long-range LMGs:
TMG-50 -> 615
Flare -> 600; Ursa -> 640
Gauss SAW -> 600

NC weapons are there just for comparison's sake.

The results are: VS has mostly a higher bullet speed than the TR and sometimes even than the NC. Usually it's pretty balanced and the differences aren't that noticeable as they remain in a 30 m/s range.
The only cases where the VS is the slowest are with one close-range carbine (the Serpent is the slowest) and one of the two long-range LMGs (the Flare).


Enjoy.

false

Ignore facts are you? TR are the best faction as the stats and facts show.

Am I the only one that thought at least using 2x falcons was a very viable option against vehicles? I mean learn how to aim those things at range and use charge to get out of fire/around targets and you're a born n bred tank killer. I fear this "buff" might overdo it a bit :/

- You forgot to mention those performance improvments that are usual for your updates (-10% fps).

- Buff the VS weapon? Sure! Why? Why not!

- more AV weapons - finally something that is REALLY needed in this game!

You do realize they aren't adding any AV weapons, they're making the pre-existing ones viable
You should be thrilled considering the Pounders are the weakest of the MAX AV weapons

To be honest, the Falcons are the best of the bunch, high DPS, best splash damage I believe, highest projectile speed, and highly accurate. Hopefully they'll take that into consideration and try to bring them all to the same level instead of just applying an equal buff to them all

people arguing about 20 m/s difference on infantry weapons bullet speeds... let me get my popcorns

Your empire benefit does not come with a penalty to total DPS, it's just a different way of dealing damage. The VS empire perk was the only perk that also came with a net loss of damage that CANNOT be compensated for with ANY amount of skill.

The punishing horizontal recoil on the CARV and CARV-S also cannot be compensated for with any amount of skill.

I'm a little bothered by these changes. I play a lot of VS now and enjoy their guns, but this is a little unfair to TR LMGs. The CARV and CARV-S have a very crappy amount of horizontal recoil that makes them nearly useless at range - it's better to take the TMG-50 in most circumstances. This heavy change could be somewhat justified by having less damage dropoff (rate of fire is not relevant - the Orion and SVA-88 have the same ROF and are more accurate - magazine capacity is not relevant either since large mags are balances by long reload times), but now without the dropoff, VS weapons will be superior to most of their TR counterparts.

At close range, of course, it's simply better to have a shotgun no matter what. GG-getsh*ton-lolnoob.

Choosing your gear right counts as skill. There is no attachment I can put on my gun to negate a damage loss of range. You can put on a forward grip if you really need it. You can also compensate for the spread by using smaller bursts and re-aiming more often at range. I cannot do any different method of firing to make the damage go up with my empire's weapons. QED.

Yes, but putting a forward grip on a weapon that you're going to use at range is a given. It compensates for it a little but, but it still sucks because the *base value* is so high. "Using smaller bursts" and "re-aiming more often at range" is something that you do not have to do with VS LMGs.

I'm not trying to say that the VS weapons should not receive this change - what I am saying is that other than the TMG-50, TR LMGs are inferior to their VS counterparts.