So I got the Auraxium Medal on the AC-X11...

Discussion in 'Light Assault' started by DiHorizon, Jun 7, 2013.

  1. DiHorizon

    I guess that qualifies me to disseminate my opinions on how the weapon plays and whether or not it's worth 250 certs.

    This is the worst carbine in the NC arsenal. It has a skill floor that must be met before it can be used with any real effectiveness; the player using it has to be able to consistently land most of their rounds on target. My personal accuracy (if the stats site is to be trusted) is only 22%, a figure I attribute to purchasing the weapon when I was new to the game and getting my first 700 kills while having a mediocre framerate and running with a large outfit. Suffice to say I eventually grew very frustrated with the AC-X11 and went back to the stock Mercenary as I became better at the game. I recently revisited the weapon and finished getting those last 400 kills.

    The AC-X11 is generally billed as being a mid-range carbine, given its high damage per bullet, 0.0 stationary ADS CoF, small magazine and low rate of fire. The problem with utilising carbines at midrange are twofold: carbines have a more significant damage drop off than other classes of weapon and, more significantly, that is the intended range of LMGs, Assault Rifles, and Sniper Rifles. So not only are carbines' shots doing less damage, most other classes are using weapons with recoil patterns and attachments built for that type of firefight.

    All of which relegates the AC-X11 to even more of an ambush and flanking role than the average carbine, but that is a role almost any weapon could realisitcally fill. The stationary ADS CoF is only a meaningful advantage in situations where you can afford to stand still and your enemies are not aware of your position. The Mag-Shot pistol would often be my weapon of choice when faced with an unaware opponent simply because it has a more usuable hipfire CoF and allowed me to miss a few shots while still getting the kill. It even does the same amount of damage per bullet point blank.

    Despite the mediocrity of the weapon in any practical scenario, I'm very glad it exists. It's a true NC gun, being the highest damage, lowest RoF weapon of its class that rewards careful movements and surprising unaware enemies. The problem is that it trades too much usability for that uniqueness and I don't think it can be buffed without sacrificing some of that flavour. The best advice I can give a new player is don't buy it; 250 certs is deceptively cheap, but this weapon is a true sidegrade that trades magazine size, RoF, hip CoF, CoF bloom per shot and recoil per shot for 200 damage and 0.0 ADS CoF. The Mercenary will serve you better in every fight.
    • Up x 9
  2. Ronin Oni

    o_O

    ACX-11 is the goto carbine for LA's who want more ranged punch.

    If you wanna run and gun, it's nowhere near as good as the GD-7F
  3. DiHorizon

    I think "ranged plink" would be a better description. In situations where I could afford to, I had to wait for enemies to stand still before I fired on them - if they weren't standing still it was almost impossible to land enough shots to secure the kill before they ran. Against moving targets or players aware of my position, the most I can manage is stripping their shields before they either close and force me to run, or break line of sight to regenerate.
    • Up x 2
  4. Ghoest

    I have 80 kills to go for my Auraxium on the AC-X11


    Its by far the worst carbine up close. Its completely hopeless from the hip.
    I use it mostly for shooting people in the back when they stand still - but its really really good at shooting people in the back when they stand still.
    The Piston with slugs is better for shooting people in the back but it even worse than the AC-X11 up close or against moving targets.

    Basically the AC-X11 is if you mainly ambush but dont want to be completely hopeless if someone sees you up close.




    Next after I get my medal Im going to get my Razor back out of storage and see how it compares as an every day gun to the AC-X11.
    • Up x 1
  5. FnkyTwn

    There has never been a positive thread made about the AC-X11.

    People love the "idea" of the gun, but once they use it in battle, reality quickly sets
    in. 200 damage per shot is alluring, but in practice it doesn't get to fully utilize that
    damage due to Carbine dropoff range, unlike the other 200dmg range weapons.

    The AC-X11 either needs 5 more bullets per magazine, or a higher default velocity.
    Giving it 25 rounds would give it the same TTK as the Mercenary. They could also
    help balance it by giving it a faster reload. It shouldn't be that a Carbine designed
    for longer range has the slowest bullet velocity (for NC), and that HVA ammo only
    brings it in line with the other Carbines, but with even more recoil.

    It's minimum damage shouldn't drop to 143, it should only drop to 167. Again this
    is a long range Carbine.. so why it is so horribly hobbled at doing it's primary job?

    To Sum Up. Fix one of the following:
    -25 Bullet Magazine Size
    -560 Bullet Velocity
    -167 Minimum Damage
    -Faster Reload


    Edit: You're not going to get as many responses from actual users out of the LA
    forum. Due to it's small magazine size, the AC-X11 isn't all that popular outside
    of the Engineer class. Sure.. some LA use it.. but most are going with a lot more
    viable options for their class. You'd get more sympathy out of the Engineer forum,
    where the AC-X11 is the bane of their existence. :eek:
    • Up x 3
  6. Kronic

    Personally, I've always thought that long range carbines should just be gimped version of long range ARs and CQC oriented carbines should be straight upgrades to CQC ARs, makes sense to me. But as we know, CQC ARs are better (in general) than Carbine versions while the AR weapon class is also the superior long range choice compared to carbine. However the ACX is still a bad gun regardless. Mostly due to its muzzle velocity and mag capacity.
  7. Wolfwood82

    -sigh- No auraxium does not really qualify you to try and play DEV with a weapon. Auraxium with every weapon (both infantry and vehicle) in the game wouldn't really qualify you to play DEV with a weapon. Gamer's really don't have the mentality for balancing weapons (especially ones used by them or their team) because they tend to want more then what is fair. Conflict of interest, you want a challenge but you want to be able to defeat that challenge easily.

    It's a medium range weapon, meant for targets between 10 and 50m or so. It's clip size is to prevent it's exploitation as a CQC weapon since it's TTK is very close to the GD-7F, it's drop off/velocity is meant to keep it from hitting the "long range" zones for carbines where the Razor is suppose to be effective. And it's reload is comparable to other dedicated medium range carbines. I mean common, it's already one of the faster reloading carbines in the game.

    It's a uniquely difficult weapon to balance because of it's 200dmg shot. It just does not have much room for improvement without screwing over other weapons. It's also in a unique position for what it's balanced for. I personally think it should have been balanced as a long range carbine, but you guys got the Razor for that.

    And positive threads about any gun are few and far between. Much easier to complain about a weapon, and complaints can potentially earn buffs while compliments can earn nerfs.
  8. FnkyTwn


    It's good to know that you got Auraxium with every weapon i guess.
    Could you please post a link to your NC character so we can verify?

    Edit: I know you don't have an NC character, and I know you haven't
    used the AC-X11, and that you're really just a professional forum foil.
    Shooting down well thought out ideas based on practical usage, in
    favor of your trusty spreadsheets. If you ever actually had any real
    advice instead of your patent "everything is fine as the devs intend it"
    malarkey people might actually bother listening to you.

    Wolfwood tends to show up in threads just to tell people that they're
    wrong and they don't really know anything about the game they're
    playing. It's his schtick.
    • Up x 5
  9. TeknoBug

    4 months ago I'd be saying the AC-X11 would be the choice for ranged, but it's the Razor GD-23 now, that gun performs in both close and long range. Devs changed something with the AC-X11 some months ago that made it not so fun to use anymore, I used it exclusively since launch up until that dreadful patch, and there was a time when high damage/low rof guns had a bug on hit registration for a couple weeks which made the AC-X11 completely unusable.
    The Reaper DMR is balanced IMO so why should the AC-X11 be junk when the Reaper DMR isn't? They have identical characteristics except for the dropoff damage.
  10. Ghoest

    1 The Reaper has a much higher velocity.
    2 The Reaper has less drop off.

    That is why the Reaper is really good and why the AC-X11 is a novelty.

    The AC-X11 is slightly better than the Reaper at hip fire - but both guns are so horrible at hip fire that it doesnt matter. You should NEVER EVER hip fire either one.
    • Up x 2
  11. Wolfwood82

    Oh I'm sorry. I just happen to respect the time, energy, and effort that people put into making games, then balancing those games, then re-balancing them. Shot in the dark here but maybe the people who have 15+ years experience in game development might know just a little bit more then the couch DEVs that every game forum has.

    By the way, that "well thought out" idea of upping the minimum damage to 167? Yeah that was my brain child. I wasn't actually suggesting it in a serious manner. I was just asking Beaver why he didn't ask for that instead of a potentially overpowering change like 5 more rounds in the gun. The answer was that he probably did, but it wasn't ideal. The most ideal change is the one we tend to "come up with" and post. Ask for the cookie, hope for a crumb.

    Kinda like this little list here...

    To Sum Up. Fix one of the following:
    -25 Bullet Magazine Size
    -560 Bullet Velocity
    -167 Minimum Damage
    -Faster Reload

    Recognize it? So, what you are really saying is...

    To Sum Up. Fix one of the following:
    -25 Bullet Magazine Size - most desired change...
    -560 Bullet Velocity - I'd take it if I couldn't get the first one...
    -167 Minimum Damage - Well at least it does what I really want...
    -Faster Reload - Here I'm just desperate for any bone....

    Did not even have to change the order, funny how psychology works.

    By the way, I hate the statistics. Every game where someone goes and creates them ends up inevitably ruined. At least as far as every forum user is concerned. Every player will find and pick out the worst quality of whatever it is they happened to have picked out for the purpose. Then parade it across the forums making it sound like the worlds worst thing. Then demand that the DEVs do one of a list of possible changes when really they don't have to do jack about it. Then the thread gets entertaining when someone else challenges this person's opinion and a big fight breaks out. Then the challenger leaves and the thread dies and ends up on page 5 within 3 days only to be replaced by a whole new thread about the exact same subject.

    People then suggest that well maybe if the same subject is repeatedly posted, maybe there is a problem! In reality humans are just built to complain and try to improve things they complain about. It's why we're launching various objects into space and exploring the surface of mars while other apes are still mastering finger sniffing and poking dead logs with sticks to get termites out.
  12. CanadianAttackBeaver

    • Up x 1
  13. Wolfwood82

    Umm, the entire point of discussion is to persuade others to see things your way and/or change their opinion to agree with yours right? So what in god's name makes it bad to change my mind on whether the ACX is a long or medium range carbine? Oh right, because it was someone else who convinced me using simple logic, rather then you using.... whatever it is you call what you were using... I do believe you popped a blood vessel when you realized that part. Your reaction was hysterical.

    Also, and I do believe I've mentioned this before, look up the definition of sniper. It does not specifically say "only long range". It in fact says "concealed or distant position". You can snipe with a pistol. Laugh clown laugh.

    Not to mention you used a god awful math formula to figure out TTK of a weapon which; completely plays favorites with faster firing weapons, totally ruins any kind of balance effort, and is inaccurate as hell. Especially when you look at weapons like PA shotguns (which apparently take almost a full second to kill someone with).

    And your entire point was based on kills per magazine. You then decided that a faster reload speed would be "an acceptable change", never mind that this wouldn't really solve the problem you presented, not unless the reload speed was increased to something like half a second.

    You claimed the weapon was a medium range weapon, I finally agreed with someone else who mentioned it. So let's look at it both ways, for ***** and giggles.

    As a long range weapon, it did a minimum of 143@85 and, according to the little napkin graph I made specifically to prove this point, that means it does more damage then any other carbine at any range. One of the points I believe I made in the other thread. Now while it still limits itself to 2 kills per magazine at this range, it's TTK remains above every other competing carbine at each carbines max range.

    AC-X11: .72@65, 75, and 85m
    Pulsar C: .728@75m
    T5 AMC: .736@65m
    Razor: .763@75m

    Neat, I wasn't even trying to list them in that order. Anyway you'd have an argument for minimum damage increase IF it was meant to be a long range carbine. Possibly even 5 more rounds, but if it was meant to be a long range carbine, chances are it would already have had 5 more rounds or a higher minimum damage.

    Let's look at TTKs and other fun facts for medium range carbines shall we? Assuming medium range is around 45m.

    AC-X11/Mercenary/Gauss C-Burst: .6@45m
    Pulsar C/Gauss C-S: .624@45
    Trac-5/Jaguar: .64@45m
    Razor: .654@45m
    Solstice/Solstice Burst/Trac-5 S: .68@45m
    NS-11C/Solstice SF/T5 AMC: .736@45m

    That time I was listing them in descending order. Most of the above weapons that were "long range" actually drop a whole STK at 45m, except for the poor T5 AMC. After 45m, assume the TTKs of the "long range" listings.

    At CQC ranges.

    GD-7F/Serpent:.426@10m
    VX6-7/Lynx:.45@10m
    AC-X11/Jaguar: .48@10m
    NS-11C: .552@10m

    Comparable TTKs and kills per magazine. This weapon can easily be exploited as a CQC ambush weapon especially with 5 extra rounds in it.

    All the above math basically assumes that damage can be broken into fractions at a given range. I doubt this is the case but differences of .x don't seem to impact the numbers enough to change the needed STK and I'm tired. This is about as sloppy as I can get mathematically speaking.

    So I can see why the NC have such a problem with the AC-X11, it's probably the exact same problem the TR have with the T5 AMC, it's literally our weakest gun. I'm betting more math will show that the T5 is out matched by the Lynx at medium range and outmatched by the Trac-5 at long range, just as the AC-X is matched by base carbines and beaten by the GD-7F at medium range (I did the math but until I've had some time to double check the numbers, this is where I'm leaving it)

    Both are "meh" weapons in terms of TTK, but have their own advantages above and beyond what the above numbers show. It's just that most players respond to TTK first and other nuances (sound, so called "feel", things of that nature) second when doing that whole "I hit auraxium on this and other guns" thing.
  14. Corezer

  15. Ghoest

    Another lie.

    It is far and away the worst CQC carbine NC has and maybe that anyone has. Its hip fire CoF is much larger than every other NC carbine and its only .5 move speed. The Razor is a much better CQC gun(and its not a good CQC gun.)
    • Up x 1
  16. Wolfwood82

    Almost all the carbines are "only .5 move speed". This is a bonus feature given to a select few, not a standard feature of CQC weapons in general (something I wish would change to being given to all carbines rather then just 3). You don't need hip fire CoF for ambushes at CQC. Pop a x1 or x2 reflex and ADS with it, or do what most shot gun users do and lick the back of their neck before you shoot.

    Treat the weapon as you would a Jaguar, which typically sports a fore grip and reflex sight for ADS combat at short range. The moment you ADS with this gun is the moment you eliminate virtually all it's major downfalls for CQC-short range combat. Granted CQC typically implies "in your face" but, you have a knife for that. And if you are trying to engage targets at those ranges in strait up fire fights on purpose, you should be using a shotgun anyway. All carbines suffer failings in that range of combat.

    I'm sorry Ghoest, nothing I said in that post was a lie. Not a single word.
  17. KnightCole

    As far as the NC go, in general, I feel the stock guns are more than adequate in every situation. No need to really ever upgrade or side grade any of their guns...besides maybe the NC1 Gauss Rifle. Of course, I just suck with the gun.

    As for the AF19, yeah, that is by far the best Carbine. I know its popular, its the only thing I ever saw when I was TR and it killed me every time.

    Laser and a x2 optic...AF19 rocks.
  18. CanadianAttackBeaver

    Ah yes, let's start balancing pistols because we can "snipe" with them, according to your definition. Please, use your brain for once and demonstrate a little consistency. You were referring to using the AC-X11 as a long range weapon, and I demonstrated it is the worst option available in that scenario. So your point is... you agree, now, that the AC-X11 is a medium range weapon? Ok, so you admit I'm right. Thank you; too bad you have to act like such an anti-social clown to do so.

    God awful, eh? Hardly. Looking at the damage a weapon outputs over time will give you a general indication of the TTK you will see in-game, in different situations. But hey, if going up to a target dummy in the virtual reality training area is indicative of how you evaluate weapons, then you are making my point for me. TTK is better measured by average damage output of a weapon over time rather than assuming you will always land your first shot.

    Compare our calculations at different ranges (assume a linear reduction in damage) on the AC-X11 and the most our results differ by is 0.12 seconds.

    I'm sorry your comprehension skills aren't up to par with your spastic reaction skills but maybe you should go back and take a look. I also discussed damage drop off (where I hilariously proved you to be full of sh*t), compared it to other weapons (namely the Pulsar C, where, again, I hilariously proved you to be full of sh*t). I did use kills per magazine as the basis of my analysis as it is a static metric. I recognize that, for example, landing a shots at maximum damage and then landing shots at minimum damage is a situation that would rarely, if ever occur. However, measuring kills per magazine also provides a nice curve to assess the relative performance of weapons against each other and against each faction.

    And no, I didn't say a faster reload speed would fix the problem I presented. I clearly stated that a 25 round magazine would fix the problem, as would less damage drop off at range. The faster reload was something I wanted to see implemented because it does mitigate some aspects of the 20 round magazine. I even bolded my recommended fix, but I guess you were too busy frothing at the mouth and spitting on your monitor to notice that.

    So I was right. Thanks for having the child-like maturity to admit that.

    And here, ladies and gentlemen, we get to see what a clueless troll Wolfwood actually is.

    If you had a shred of experience with the AC-X11, and I mean even a SHRED you would know that there is no way in hell you are going to kill someone at .72 seconds at range. The recoil, bullet speed, and rate of fire (assuming you miss a shot) will all slow your TTK down.

    You harped on the AC-X11 having the
    and I have repeatedly shown that this effectively means nothing in-game, at range. At range, the other balancing features of the gun negate this aspect of the weapon. Are you seriously that dense you cannot recognize that? Go in-game (not the VR) and try to kill someone with nanoweave who is shooting back at you with the AC-X11; then try it with the Razor. Come back and tell us if the AC-X11's one less shot to kill actually made a material difference. It doesn't.

    So, the entire premise of your position (at least, what your position is now) is now based of TTK? Let me give you a clue, sweetheart. The AC-X11, even with a 5 round increase to its magazine size would still only have a kills per magazine potential equal to the other NC (excluding GD-7F), TR and Pulsar C carbines.

    You also mentioned
    which would have the same effect on kills per magazine, at range, that a 25 round magazine does. Do you get that? Your (rudely) proposed solution has the exact same effect as what I have proposed. The one difference is that my solution doesn't change the intent of the weapon.

    Go back to school, chump. For someone who purports to be studying game design, you are woefully ignorant of how to assess the impact of potential solutions.

    Like Ghoest stated:
    The fact you are blind to this isn't a surprise, because it doesn't fit your myopic view.

    Just for everyone to be clear, the formula Wolfwood is using to calculate TTK is: (60 / RPM)*((1000/damage) - 1)
    *(If anyone wants to verify these numbers, be sure to use the "roundup" function in excel on the (1000/damage) since you cannot kill an enemy with a fraction of a shot).

    Clearly, this assumes the first shot hits. Your TTK ranking is determined by the damage value of the first and following shots. If the first shot misses or players transition to another target between shots, these numbers are invalid and will basically provide the TTK values I provide below.

    Wolfwood's TTK at 10m:
    AC-X11 - 0.480 seconds
    Mercenary - 0.500
    Gauss Burst - 0.500
    Gauss S - 0.520
    Razor - 0.545
    GD-7F - 0.426
    NS-11C - 0.552


    The calculation I used is: 1000 / (damage*(RPM/60))
    With my calculation, I assumed the TTK will be a factor of the DPS of the weapon. I believe this is indicative of the performance you will see in-game, as it is an average of the weapon's damage over time.

    At 10m:
    AC-X11 - 0.600 seconds
    Mercenary - 0.599
    Gauss Burst - 0.599
    Gauss S - 0.623
    Razor - 0.653
    GD-7F - 0.497
    NS-11C - 0.644

    Our TTK times differ by 0.07 to 0.12 seconds; hardly a material difference. Both of our calculations factor in damage and rate of fire. The slight difference is the assumptions. Then again, you are clearly too stupid to recognize this and you clearly cannot understand my "god awful math".

    So, we can see there is no chance of the AC-X11 becoming some sort of CQC monster given these times to kill. And I have repeatedly shown that the other aspects of the gun, recoil, rate of fire, bullet speed, damage drop off and magazine capacity all limit the damage potential of this weapon at range and at close quarters.

    The AC-X11's niche is in the mid-range (assume 45m for consistency with Wolfwood). At 45m, the AC-X11 has the kills per magazine potential that other NC carbines have at their maximum ranges. Assuming a linear reduction in damage, at 55m the AC-X11 has a kills per magazine potential of a SMG. I'm sorry, didn't you just say
    .

    And you're right; the NC carbines do have similar TTK at 45m, except the AC-X11 would require a 25 round magazine to have the same kills per magazine at that range as the other NC carbines.

    Increasing the magazine size of the AC-X11 to 25 bullets will give the AC-X11 the same kills per magazine potential, at 45m, as the other NC carbines. And to iterate, for the fourth or fifth time (since this obviously hasn't sunk in your thick skull), this capability will still be mitigated by the recoil, rate of fire and bullet velocity.

    Honestly, Wolfwood, b!tch slapping you and your asinine posts is getting tiring. Piss off and let the adults have a discussion. Go back to school, study up a bit, take some social interaction classes and maybe you'll be worth my time. Until then, you are nothing but a misinformed loudmouth, braying his poorly constructed analysis like some ignorant a$$.
  19. Goretzu


    Yup, you pretty much nailed it.
  20. Goretzu


    It's just not a very good gun, it's ok in some very specific circumstances (if it had one or more of the buffs above it could be a very nice gun in those circumstances).

    But in 90% of situations you'll be better using something else, and if you are going to be using it in multiple types of situation that basically 100% of the time something else will be better.

Share This Page