[stupid question] how does high RoF help in cqc?

This is stupid, high ROF is better because theres typically less recoil/bloom per shot making repeated hits more likely, while with something like the gauss Saw your 3rd shot is somewhere in the sky if you're not heavily compensating for it and don't even both with hip fire. Most high ROF low damage weapons also typically have better DPS stats, and in CQC where DPS is more relevant because of less misses, thats king.

Talking about hypothetical weapons that don't exist isn't useful.

Because it's RoF is terrible, and it's DPS is poop because of it's RoF.
It's funny that you have the chaingun in your sig though, a gun that works because it can throw many bullets at enemies in a short time frame, despite being having pretty garbo accuracy. If it's RoF was lower and it's damage increased it would be a worse gun.

if two guns have the same "accuracy loss per second" then it's pretty obvious that the slower firing gun will have more accuracy loss per bullet fired. it fires less often, so when it does it loses more accuracy, but when it fires the second bullet the gun will be pointing the exact same spot than a gun with much more RoF and much less recoil/bloom per shot, while firing its 3rd, 4rth or 10000th bullet. RoF alone has nothing to do with accuracy.
I'm not saying the Saw is exactly accurate as the most accurate gun, the saw is just as accurate as any other gun that has the same accuracy loss per second, even if the bloom/recoil per bullet is different because of RoF.

yes the lasher example was just to show that increased chance of hitting doesn't mean increased damage done.
btw if the chaingun fired 400 times a minute dealing double its damage per bullet it would be the exact same gun but its recoil per bullet fired should be adjusted to match what it has now and the new damage profile would probably act differently when dealing with resistances. it's performance in CQC would be the same.

In CQC high RoF is considered just as good as high damage. Your targets are closer easier to hit...recoil won't come into a larget effect. A guy ten feet in front of you for example you shouldn't really miss even with bad recoil because the bullets don't have a chance to stray that far from their path yet. So you can get more headshots faster.

So the lasher & chaingun are similar in performance of CQC? because that's what you've just said. They aren't the lasher is significantly worse due to it's RoF, even though it is more accurate.

yes that works with every weapon regardless of their RoF, and it's also true that a fast firing gun could kill faster when headshotting, but that is unrelated to the rate of fire itself and more bound to how damage is calculated in planetside, since a 167/600 gun will kill faster than a 143/750 weapon when headshotting, even while having less dps on bodyshots.

a gun firing 400 times per minute doing 286 damage per bullet, with 600 m/s bullet speed is much, much different from a lasher. and yes, the lasher being more accurate doesn't mean at all it would deal more damage, as I was trying to show with the lasher example.

You're post is stupid, what i said is exactly why High ROF weapons are superior to low ROF weapons in CQC.

yes but your post is wrong, deal with it or try to prove it right with facts. I'm ready to change my mind and I opened this thread just for that, but all I read is "you waste less damage if you miss" and that's WRONG. you waste the same amount of damage because while you miss you just fire more bullets the higher the RoF of your gun is.

You haven't provided any facts other than your own idiotic opinion, high ROF weapons make it easier to land more hits in CQC because they recoil/bloom less per shot, where as low ROF weapons recoil and bloom more increasing the likely hood of a miss, requiring more action from the user to keep it on target, its that god damned simple. Add in the fact that High ROF weapons also have more DPS and dun dun dun........

You asked a stupid question, got answers then derped hard to refuse to accept reality.

not enough apparently.

you have a gun that fires two times a second and each bullet being fired makes the barrel of said gun go up by, let's say, 4 degrees.
you have another gun that fires four times a second and each bullet fired makes the barrel of the gun go up by 2 degrees.

after one second of firing, the guns would be pointing the exact same spot. same after 0.5 seconds, same after 1 million of years. the user will have to compensate in the exact same way, and the accuracy is just the same even if one gun has double the "accuracy loss per bullet fired" factor. got it now?

Be consistent, please. We were talking a case where all stats except RoF / damage are equal. This means DPS was equal too.

yes but we cannot use as "standard ground" a setting where your goal is to hit enemies instead of kill enmies, because that would change the weapon we consider "better" than another. (just like you said, we would end up with shotguns for long range combat)

Why would we end up with shotguns at long range? What does long range even has to do with it? We were talking about RoF vs. bullet damage in close quarters specifically, with all other stats being equal. DPS is an important stat for CQC, and should always be taken in consideration.

just quoting you iridar D:

a faster firing gun will hit more the target, will it deal more damage than a weapon with same ttk/accuracy/everything but different RoF/DPB? no

I thought it was obvious that example was about close quarters. It was meant to convey how a weapon that is easier to hit with is preferable for close quarters, despite doing roughly the same damage per shot.

Easier to hit with = damage done more reliably. I specifically said it's not about DPS or TTK (how fast you kill the enemy). It's about ease of use and reliability.

I keep hearing that faster RoF is better for up close but what is regarded as the best SMG?

This is what makes the Armistice so tough to use, if your crosshair drifts off the target for even a moment, you just missed with half of your magazine. While with the Cyclone you only miss with a couple of bullets.

Also for the whole missing a single bullet, then I have to bring up headshots. In most cases you are not going to deal exclusively headshots and in same cases may only get one or two of them, so a gun that needs 5 bullets to kill only needing 4 compared to a gun that 6 instead of 7, which one received the most benefit?

Also higher damage guns have a better chance of finishing off a wounded target in a single bullet.

Do the dps numbers, and you'll find out that 200 damage times 500rpm is less than 143x750. Why? 750RPM is 50% higher rate of fire than 500rpms. However, 143 is only 26% less damage than 200 damage. As a result, the CARV does around 25% more damage per second. NC weapons are much closer to VS weapons on damage output, but actually lose slightly in raw damage comparison. There is the situatinal bonus for NC of higher MV and a bit longer range, but, those are rarely a factor when taken into consideration with things like VS having no bullet drop. Nevermind that the VS have High ROF weapons (750 or more) and none of them have bullet drop, putting VS squarely ahead of TR in about 90% of CQC engagements. NC cannot compete with either, without using shotguns. And even then, their shotguns are actually on par with other faction options, and their SMGs lose out on DPS considerably to both other faction SMGs. (they do get a bit more range, but, for an SMG, that's pointless to really bring in as any carbine will out do that SMG).

Somewhat true, but the last point is very very unlikely to occur. (as these guns only vary by 1-20 points of damage out of 1000 hit points (or more).

And in CQC, game stats across the board show that high ROF x lower damage wins compared to low ROF x high damage when (as isusually the case) the high ROFxlow damage raw dps exceeds significantly the dps of the low ROF weapons. In Planetside 2, this is patently the case, and is a big reason why the VS and TR have a big advantage in internal-base and biolab fights.

I'm not saying the NC guns are bad, but in terms of balance, they are the weakest hitting weapons in the game when it comes to the stat that really matters: DPS.

I never can understand why so many people assume the introduction vids about each faction's traits are gospel, while ignoring the hard stats.

Also, most gamers have no idea about the concept of "synergy", which hurts their ability to make critical-thinking based judgements.

in CQC you have quick moving target, with low ROF you can have small window due lag, before target out of sight. you both moving and missing and low ROF guns has poor HIP accurasy and other stats that make it not good at Spray&Pray

No.

MATH. You posted the damage and ROF numbers yourself, no need to invent a conclusion with made up numbers for DPS.
200x500=100000 dps
143x750=107250 dps
How exactly did you arrive at around 25% higher dps?

The VS beat everyone in CQC because of no bullet drop? That's... wrong, to put it mildly.

The NC DO compete very well with both VS and TR in CQC, using the Anchor. And then of course there are shotguns everywhere in shotgun faction. NC children have underslung shotguns on their #2 pencils. You can't just dismiss that. Try to force a squad of non-developmentally-delayed NC out of a building sometime and get back to me on how they lack in CQC.

The cyclone is an amazing SMG, I'd say the best.

The NC arsenal has some issues and some gaps to be sure. But CQC effectiveness is honestly not something I'd ever dream of complaining about for the NC.