Log in or Sign up

Log in with PSN

The NC6 Gauss SAW, T9 CARV and the Orion - Replacing myth with facts

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Hisenburg, Apr 26, 2013.

Page 12 of 18

Epic High Five

Someone find me the cure for SAW FEVER, STAT

Epic High Five, Apr 27, 2013

#221
boogaa

Hisenburg said: ↑

“Sources; ps2.dynet.com

Disclaimer; I am thoroughly experienced with the NC and TR, and that has informed my statements. My experience with the VS, while I have some, is comparatively limited.

So, I've been playing PlanetSide 2 since mid-Beta, and I've been through all the balance changes thick and thin, and the logic many changes has, in reality, gone over my head. But I'm not here to be critical of Margaret Krohn, Joshua Sanchez and Jimmy Whisenhunt.

I'm here to discuss - initially - the discrepancies between the SAW, CARV, and Orion. I may expand upon other weapons as posters reply to the topic. It should be known that before I made any real decision, I thoroughly went through statistics(Statistics which I will be referring to in this post) and came to conclusions.

Let me begin with the easiest topic;

Many people claim that the Orion and T9 CARV are more or less identical, with the exception of VS's lack of bullet drop, and (previously) the different damage degradation rates. This is false. The Orion and CARV are substantially different weapons in their own right, and whilst they do share some similarities in the form of damage and rate of fire, ultimately they need to be considered as entirely different weapons. I'll outline the differences.

People think - or thought - the CARV and Orion had the same recoil, cone of fire, projectile speed and so on. This is solidly a false statement.

The Orion has a horizontal recoil of 0.2, this is as opposed to the T9 CARV's horizontal recoil of 0.225. Where the Orion trumps the CARV on horizontal recoil, the CARV does indeed suffer slightly less in terms of vertical recoil, with a marginally lower first shot recoil multiplier - the Orion has 2.15x and the CARV has 2x. This, however, has the trade off of the Orion having a higher level of recoil decrease - this meaning the Orion will recover from recoil faster than a CARV. This makes it more effective at burst fire.

A crucial factor that can never really be left out when we discuss the Orion and CARV, is move speed. Or rather, that the Orion has better ADS move speed as opposed to the CARV. As standard, most weapons lower your speed by 50% when you aim down the sights, this holds true with the CARV. However, with the Orion, your move speed is lowered to 75%(A reduction of 25%) when aiming down the sights. This gives the Orion an inherent advantage over the CARV in terms of ADS combat. If this wasn't enough, the Orion is also more accurate, with an ADS moving cone of fire which is 12.5% smaller than that of the CARV's. The Orion has a straight up advantage in ADS combat over the CARV, both in movement, and accuracy that compliments that move speed.

The advantages of the Orion do not end there, truth be told. With this ADS superiority, the Orion also has superior hip fire accuracy. The Orion has smaller cone of fire when hip firing on the move by a grand total of 25%. It has better standing hip fire as well, but when do we hip fire standing still?.

So, my conclusion on that is due to cone of fire, ADS movespeed and general superior accuracy levels of the Orion, the Orion is more or less superior in close quarters combat. But hey, at least the CARV recovers in longer range combat, right?

Wrong.

Ever since the removal of larger levels of damage degradation on VS weapons, what was questionable before is now statistical fact. We know, from my first paragraph, that the Orion is better at burst fire. We know that the Orion shares the same damage degradation level as the CARV, so it's know longer disadvantaged in damage. We know that when Aiming Down Sight, the Orion has a cone of fire 12.5% smaller than the CARV - while moving(They're the same when standing still. But if you're standing still in a long range engagement, it's a safe wager you're going to be sniped). This all heavily points towards the Orion being more or less superior in ranged conflict, but the icing on the cake is that the projectile velocity of the Orion is superior to that of the T9 CARV. Where the CARV's bullets travel at 600m/s, the Orion trumps that with 615m/s. Not only is bullet drop never an issue for the Orion, having to lead a moving target is easier to boot.

The only possible boon the CARV has at longer ranges, compared to the Orion, is its larger ammo magazine. Having 100 bullets as opposed to 50 in a magazine is quite beneficial when engaging at long range, it means less time reloading in a specific fight(Honestly, if you can't duke it out at long range with 100 bullets, you either can't aim or you're too far away). This is the only thing the CARV has on the Orion. And its benefits are often argued when we get into close and mid range combat - where reload speed is more often than not a more beneficial thing to have as opposed to a larger magazine. Taking into account that average player's accuracy is in the 25% region, it'll take in the region of 25-30 bullets to drop targets, on average. There'll be a point where having the ability to reload quickly becomes far better than a larger magazine, and that's usually in close-mid range combat such as tech plants and amp stations, where you have a mix of safe places to hide and a lot of people to shoot. But that's conjecture, and it should be acknowledged by all that both have their benefits and downsides.

In short, the Orion is pretty much a better version of the CARV. More accurate, more versatile, better at long ranges and also capable of hip firing in a way the CARV cannot match.

Now, on to my next point.

Why the NC6 Gauss SAW is the best LMG in the game. I think I can summarize my point in one word;

(Warning; This next segment gets quite wordy. I'll but a giant bold asterisk when I finally get to the conclusion, so you can scroll down)

Damage.

Many people don't consider the damage alone enough to justify the grand statement that the Gauss SAW is the top dog on the block. And they'd be 100% correct. The SAW has a tonne of other stuff going for it as well. Namely accuracy, potential damage and attachments.

Let me just stop your objection right there. I think when I typed "accuracy" as a benefit in reference to the Gauss SAW, I got the attention of pretty much every NC player in the game. You see, let us take a look at the stats so I can actually support that statement, instead of simply using ingame experience and anecdotes as reference.

Allow me to open up my great book of statistics. The Gauss SAW has 0.55 vertical recoil. That's more than the Orion and CARV by 20%. I will immediately make the claim vertical recoil pretty much does not matter. But let's assume it does. The Orion and CARV have a rate of fire that's 50% higher than a SAW. In layman's terms, for every 2 shots fired by the SAW, the other two fire 3.

So, we know the SAW has .5 and the CARV/Orion have .4. 2*.55 = 1.1(This is the Gauss SAW) and 3*.4 = 1.2(This is the Orion/CARV). With that maths there I've simply shown, that in the same amount of time the Gauss SAW's recoil == 1.1, the Orion and CARV's recoil == 1.2. How, you ask? This is purely due to rate of fire. While rate of fire is beneficial to raw DPS - a meaningless value in truth - it is massively detrimental to accuracy. We're looking at 3 bullets here, now look at 6. 9. 12. The total recoil gap between the SAW and CARV/Orion climbs dramatically, with the CARV/Orion in reality have ~10% more working vertical recoil than the SAW.

But as I've said, vertical recoil is irrelevant. But I had to - as the title says - replace that myth with fact. The SAW has no recoil problems, in fact it has significantly less so compared to the other two.

This is made even more apparent when we take into account horizontal recoil. I dub Horizontal Recoil pretty much as "Artificial Cone of Fire". There's a good reason for that, but it's not an entirely accurate term. For weapons such as the Pulsar LSW or the MSW-R, that term does not apply at all. That's because the horizontal recoil on those weapons is only going in one direction. With weapons like the SAW, CARV, Orion - well, in fact, most weapons in the game - it goes both left and right. While logic may dictate to you that would mean the recoil cancels out, it doesn't. All that it means is that the recoil will go from left to right over and over again. This causes a random deviation with the same effect cone of fire has.

That horizontal recoil, by the way, is the reason why so may Terran players hate using the CARV. Having the highest horizontal recoil in the game with the highest ROF LMG(And that indirectly causing extremely high cone of fire, which will be explained further down) does not make for a good level of accuracy, regardless of how you play.

Now, what is the thrust of my point? Point is, the CARV has .225 horizontal recoil, and Orion has .2 horizontal recoil, and the SAW has .175 horizontal recoil. I'm going to skip the maths here because it's pretty obvious that two weapons with a higher base recoil with higher rate of fires are going to have more horizontal recoil than a weapons with a lower base recoil and lower rate of fire. That's just common sense. Now we've surmised that the Gauss SAW, infact, has no recoil problems.

Let's address cone of fire. Compared to the CARV, the SAW's COF is absolutely identical. Infact, there are places where it is better, and there's one place where it's worse. When coming out of a sprint, the COF on the CARV is 40% higher than that on a SAW, that ultimately means that in most cases where hipfire will be occurring, the SAW will have a tighter COF - a trade off for its much lower ROF in this situation. That's fine.
The Gauss SAW has a higher bloom per shot than the CARV, by 40% in both ADS and Hip. However let's go back to our best friend ROF again. Taking into account the ROF of the CARV, the "bloom rate" is higher on the CARV - the same phenomenon as with the recoil in my earlier paragraph. With there only being a difference of 0.01 ADS and 0.02 Hip, however, it's safe to say the bloom rates are almost identical and the fact the CARV has such marginally higher bloom rate it's almost negligible. For example, it would take 10 seconds of sustained fire with the CARV for me to finally get the same cone of fire as the SAW when ADS moving. It's actually impossible because to do that I've have to fire something like 120 rounds without pause or reload. This only becomes a factor when standing still, as you will see below.

Take into account the horizontal recoil I referred to earlier, and you have an accuracy issue for the CARV. Take into account further, that the Gauss SAW has an amazing 0 cone of fire when ADS standing still, I surmised that the SAW is in general more accurate. 0 COF, in other words, means that the bullet will go exactly where you aim it, with no deviation. It's 100% accurate. The SAW also has lower first shot recoil multiplier(1.65x as opposed to the 2x on the CARV) and a higher recoil decrease than the CARV.
In layman's terms, this means the Gauss SAW is accurate enough to land 2 headshots in a row without effort(Possibly even 3 if the person is good enough to compensate for recoil while tracking the target[Not too difficult]) - about 800 damage.

*

The burst damage capability of the SAW is unparalleled amongst all the LMGs in the game. Where burst damage is the most important factor, the SAW comes out king. While I may have been obscure or abstract in my explanation, the general thrust of the point I'm trying to make here is that the SAW does not suffer accuracy issues. When we stack it up against comparable weapons such as the Flare, Ursa, and TMG-50, it suffers no more in accuracy than these, with only a marginally slower ROF. However, it comes up king because of its 200 damage per shot. If my little statistical-orgasm I've had throughout this post still leaves you in doubt that I have referred to stats when making that statement, go look at them yourself.

This problem is exacerbated due to the attachments available to the SAW. The SAW stands as the only starter weapon in the game which has access to advanced attachments such as Compensators and Adv. Foregrips. In addition to this, it has access to a much larger variety of Optics - from being the only starter LMG with 2x, to having a variety of 3.4x and 4x - and even 6x. The SAW is given the answer to all of its potential problems in the form of attachments - the only thing it can't do well is hip fire, which only the Orion can efficiently do.

The point being made ultimately here, is that the SAW is the best LMG. It has everything. Attachments. Damage. Accuracy. A large magazine size. The only thing it doesn't have is ROF - and that would be detrimental to accuracy. The SAW lacks raw dps - the only edge weapons like the Orion and CARV have on it - but raw dps is only a factor assuming 100% accuracy. I've surmised through the stats that the SAW is the more accurate LMG.

Many people are going to look at this post and see that I compared the Orion, CARV, and SAW. A fair argument to refute what I've said is that the SAW is a different weapon style to the other two in its own right, and therefore cannot be compared. I would agree, but these three are the starter weapons. If I have to buy a weapon to compare to the SAW and compete with it, there's clearly an issue.

While the SAW does not match up in extremely close quarters(Where the Orion will be marginally better), it is superior at almost every other level. Corridors in Bio Labs, fighting inside the walls of an Amp Station, fighting around and inside a Tech Plant, out in the open around outposts and satellites, in fields - these are the SAW's playground. The only time they do not dominate is a tower battle, where the Orion is simply better out of the three(But in reality, shotguns amirite?).

In short, the SAW is not underpowered or "bad" as players often claim. It has quite a lot of advantages over the other 2 LMGs, falling short only in cone of fire vs. the Orion and projectile velocity vs. the Orion. In order to compete with the SAW, TR and VS players have to buy their 167 damage LMGs. Personally, I find that completely unacceptable. The Terran Republic's best LMG(TMG-50) is the equivalent of NC's worst(Gauss SAW S). While the VS have more options with two 167 damage LMGs, neither of those two stack up to the SAW, with the Flare being a slightly worse version of the TMG-50 and the Ursa being stuck between a SAW and a T16 Rhino.

These statements are supported by stats pulled from the game.

God this post was longer than I expected it to be...”

Nice investigation, however stats do not represent at all the in-game facts. NC Gauss SAW got lot of recoil making it difficult to handle even with all teh attachment. I played several month with that machinegun and recently I tried HA Vanu and was suprised by the ease to kill people, my K/D was uncomparable to what I use to do with NC. So once again, NC got only ****** weapon, that is true with LMG, SMG ... and rocket launcher .... facts are what we should consider not stats that are totally irrelevant...

boogaa, Apr 27, 2013

#222
Cinnamon

Xind said: ↑

“Which makes the Carv totally superior to the MSW-R. >_< These people are terrible at "side grades."”

MSW-R is supposed to be a close range assault weapon so if they were to buff it's role as a sidegrade it should be something like ads movement speed or reload not recoil. Or just nerf pump actions or something.

Cinnamon, Apr 27, 2013

#223 Last edited by Cinnamon, Apr 27, 2013
Turiel =RL=
Here is the only comparison that counts:
- x 1
Turiel =RL=, Apr 27, 2013

#224
NietCheese

I would bet my last dollar that the TR guys who think the Gauss is fantastic would be crying rivers when they experience the recoil first hand and realise that fast firing weapons win most encounters.

NietCheese, Apr 27, 2013

#225
WalrusJones

Turiel =RL= said: ↑

“Here is the only comparison that counts:
”

Why not Dirt-Em instead?

WalrusJones, Apr 27, 2013

#226
EnviousCipher

NietCheese said: ↑

“I would bet my last dollar that the TR guys who think the Gauss is fantastic would be crying rivers when they experience the recoil first hand and realise that fast firing weapons win most encounters.”

OR perhaps TR players have played with the Gauss SAW on an alternate, y'know, something anyone can do? I would take the SAW's recoil pattern over the CARV's current one any day.

EnviousCipher, Apr 27, 2013

#227
Turiel =RL=

Recoil is an artifical modificator to make you randomly miss shots - shots that otherwise would have hit, because you lined up your mouse pointer and your target perfectly. So instead of hand-eye coordination, the outcome is decided by stats and random factors.

The funny thing is that even the guys who believe in recoil "for realism" spend a ton of certs on attachments that elminiate it as much as possible.

With that much recoil, I wonder if it makes more sense trying to miss your target on purpose, than the other way around. If I can hit everything except my target, maybe I should not try to aim at it. Overall this whole empire specific recoil issue makes this game terrible from a competitive standpoint. This is also the reason why they will go NS-only for E-Sports. Pretty sad, that it had to lead to this.

Turiel =RL=, Apr 27, 2013

#228
The King

Intruder313 said: ↑

“The Orion is better than the CARV, that's certainly true now that the CARV got indirectly nerfed many moons ago. Prior to the nerfs the CARV was amazing when I used it - I simply fired the 100 round off in nearly 1 burst and walked the bullets onto successive heads. I recall getting 5 kills with 1 burst once. The SAW needs firing in very short bursts or you'll find yourself practically knocked over by the recoil.

I'd say the Orion and Gauss SAW are about equal overall due to the ADS move speed on the Orion: the ADAD strafers with Orions (or their other 75% ADS LMG) will mince someone trying to keep a Gauss SAW targetted on them. The Orion is also very easy to control even stock.

Anyway while these 3 are the default weapons you are not really comparing like-for-like, I think which weapons were default and which occupied the 100 and 250 Cert slots was almost random. NC and VS got lucky with good defaults (though it's important to note you really DO have to spend 330 Certs on the Gauss SAW to make it useable; it's an uncontrollable monster in stock form. Those bonus attachments are really a Cert-Tax you have to pay to tame the beast).

The Gauss SAW equivalent in performance/use terms is the TMG-50.

The Guass SAW is not even the best NC LMG: many NC who've really put some time and testing into it consider the EM6 to be the best NC LMG because it's simply more versatile and controllable than the Gauss SAW.”

Simply not true.
All I need is 30 certs, heck iron sights is good enough, but I like the NV.
Oh, recoil? You really call that recoil?
It's hardly noticeable.
Maybe I am used to recoil or something, but this gun doesn't have much of it.
And yes, I believe it is the best LMG in the game.

The King, Apr 27, 2013

#229
Bape
EnviousCipher said: ↑

“OR perhaps TR players have played with the Gauss SAW on an alternate, y'know, something anyone can do? I would take the SAW's recoil pattern over the CARV's current one any day.”

I swear you TR make me LOL so much " Ill take the saw any day" I can tell you first hand that the SAW is more difficult to handle then any other gun compared to TR/VS. No TR should talk unless he is BR 30 + with 1500 kills with the saw.
- x 1
Bape, Apr 27, 2013

#230
Paperlamp

Whether or not SAW is the best - it undoubtedly is for long range but CQC is debatable - it's certainly true that the Carv doesn't compete with the other starters. Really it's not just starters either, TR really doesn't have any good LMGs relative to VS and NC.

I'm really sick of switching between MSW-R and TMG-50 and finding them both lacking.

LMGs I'd take over every gun in the TR LMG arsenal without question -

SAW
EM6
GD-22s
Orion
SVA-88
Pulsar LSW

Paperlamp, Apr 27, 2013

#231
Hisenburg

I'll address other posts later.

Turiel =RL= said: ↑

“Recoil is an artifical modificator to make you randomly miss shots - shots that otherwise would have hit, because you lined up your mouse pointer and your target perfectly. So instead of hand-eye coordination, the outcome is decided by stats and random factors.

The funny thing is that even the guys who believe in recoil "for realism" spend a ton of certs on attachments that elminiate it as much as possible.

With that much recoil, I wonder if it makes more sense trying to miss your target on purpose, than the other way around. If I can hit everything except my target, maybe I should not try to aim at it. Overall this whole empire specific recoil issue makes this game terrible from a competitive standpoint. This is also the reason why they will go NS-only for E-Sports. Pretty sad, that it had to lead to this.”

This isn't really correct. Recoil is a constant, predictable modifier designed to reduce your accuracy. You can compensate for it, purely because it isn't random. A player experienced with compensating for recoil could, in all honesty, use a Gauss SAW completely stock with no attachments - maybe an Adv. Foregrip. It just wouldn't really be worth it.
What you may be thinking of is Cone Of Fire. That space in between the lines on your crosshair is the cone of fire. The area in which your bullets will hit. That is truly random and cannot be compensated for - except by bursting your weapon and controlling your fire. It's a pretty old mechanic and has been in video games since the 90's.
This, by the way, is the reason Horizontal Recoil is a huge issue, in that it acts as an artificial form of cone of fire, because it will cause a huge random deviation in your fire on top of the cone of fire you already have. Makes weapons extremely unpredictable, and that means players cannot actually improve with the weapon or compensate for its issues.

Hisenburg, Apr 27, 2013

#232
WalrusJones

The King said: ↑

“Simply not true.
All I need is 30 certs, heck iron sights is good enough, but I like the NV.
Oh, recoil? You really call that recoil?
It's hardly noticeable.
Maybe I am used to recoil or something, but this gun doesn't have much of it.
And yes, I believe it is the best LMG in the game.”

We need to give these guys a drill course on using the SCARMK17 on death basin sands night.

They would never complain of video game recoil again.

WalrusJones, Apr 27, 2013

#233
EnviousCipher

Bape said: ↑

“I swear you TR make me LOL so much " Ill take the saw any day" I can tell you first hand that the SAW is more difficult to handle then any other gun compared to TR/VS. No TR should talk unless he is BR 30 + with 1500 kills with the saw.”

And i can tell you from first hand experience also (since i do play NC a fair bit as well as TR) that you're full of ****, and request you stop assuming that people only ever play as one faction.

EnviousCipher, Apr 27, 2013

#234 Last edited by EnviousCipher, Apr 27, 2013
TintaBux

NietCheese said: ↑

“I would bet my last dollar that the TR guys who think the Gauss is fantastic would be crying rivers when they experience the recoil first hand and realise that fast firing weapons win most encounters.”

Very true, unfortunately these TR threads keep popping up asking for buffs for TR and nerfs for other factions, it's none stop, despite TR being the best faction already overall and most of these request just unrealistic and not feasible, but at least this thread is kind of more constructive.

TintaBux, Apr 27, 2013

#235 Last edited by TintaBux, Apr 27, 2013
Mastachief

TR moans about an NC weapon despite having better weapons across the board dresses argument up to appear none bias ..... Standard.

Mastachief, Apr 27, 2013

#236
Fenrisk

Mastachief said: ↑

“TR moans about an NC weapon despite having better weapons across the board dresses argument up to appear none bias ..... Standard.”

NC noob whines about having a shield that can take 20,000 points of damage and regens in 7 seconds. Standard.

Fenrisk, Apr 27, 2013

#237
Paperlamp
Mastachief said: ↑

“TR moans about an NC weapon despite having better weapons across the board dresses argument up to appear none bias ..... Standard.”

We don't have better weapons across the board, I think where we really shine is ARs, and to a lesser degree carbines - due to having 40 round clips mainly. We don't have good LMGs, neither of our traits seems to really be applied to our LMGs and we don't have any standout LMGs due to this, for any range. VS have equal RoF with better accuracy, NC have higher damage with better accuracy. All TR LMGs are outclassed by either an NC or VS variant of it. MSW-R is a weaker Orion, TMG-50 is a weaker EM6, and those are generally considered the best close and mid-long range options for TR.

So if TR has good ARs and carbines - maybe even the best, but weak LMGs, you might say it's overall balanced. But LMG balance is kind of a bigger deal though, since it's the most played infantry class. Plus, guns of all types across factions should be balanced rather than certain factions being the superior choice for some classes. Right now it sucks if you main HA on TR.
- x 1
Paperlamp, Apr 27, 2013

#238 Last edited by Paperlamp, Apr 27, 2013
WUNDER8AR
ITT NC downplaying the capabilities of the SAW.

It's simple:
If you're a bad shot you'll find the CARV or any of the lower dps/ high rof LMGs to be good, maybe even superior to the SAW, since a high ROF is typically more forgiving when coupled with a large magazine. Due to the high ROF it is also very likely that missed shots at sustained/ burst fire simply go unnoticed, where as when you're using the SAW you actually notice when a shot misses because of the slower rof. All of which gives you the impression that a CARV is more accurate/ easier to control than the SAW, which, in fact, is simply untrue.

SAW is ultimately the superior weapon if can actually get and keep your reticle on a target, which is by no means rocket science in this game.
- x 1
WUNDER8AR, Apr 27, 2013

#239
TintaBux
Paperlamp said: ↑

“We don't have better weapons across the board, I think where we really shine is ARs, and to a lesser degree carbines - due to having 40 round clips mainly. We don't have good LMGs, neither of our traits seems to really be applied to our LMGs and we don't have any standout LMGs due to this, for any range. VS have equal RoF with better accuracy, NC have higher damage with better accuracy. All TR LMGs are outclassed by either an NC or VS variant of it. MSW-R is a weaker Orion, TMG-50 is a weaker EM6, and those are generally considered the best close and mid-long range options for TR.

So if TR has good ARs and carbines - maybe even the best, but weak LMGs, you might say it's overall balanced. But LMG balance is kind of a bigger deal though, since it's the most played infantry class. Plus, guns of all types across factions should be balanced rather than certain factions being the superior choice for some classes. Right now it sucks if you main HA on TR.”

TR has better equipment (And weapons) across the board, as the stats show.

Code:

MAX: NC > TR = VS Engineer: TR > VS > NC Medic: TR > VS > NC Light Assault: TR > VS = NC Heavy Assault: TR > NC > VS Infiltrator: TR > NC > VS MBT: TR > VS > NC ESF: VS = TR > NC
TintaBux, Apr 27, 2013

#240 Last edited by TintaBux, Apr 27, 2013

(You must log in or sign up to reply here.)

Page 12 of 18

Home
Forums
Forums

Quick Links
- Search Forums
- What's New?
Staff Post Tracker
Staff Post Tracker

Quick Links
- Staff Post Tracker
Help
Help

Quick Links