I play both NC and VS HA and i can tell you the SVA-88 is nothing special. I find both the Orion and the Ursa do better at their effective distances and are easier to control. The Gauss Saw is a killer at range because it shoots exactly where you aim. The most versatile and easiest to handle for me is the GD-22S, i have 5% higher accuracy with it than the SVA-88. Personally i don't understand why people think the SVA-88 is awesome at range when you could use the Ursa or have tried the Gauss Saw / GD-22S. The CoF of the SVA-88 sucks for long range accuracy and from personal experience, compensator and HVA does nothing to increase that. Infact i feel more comfortable without HVA and compensator because i don't cripple myself with all their drawbacks, i.e. less hip fire accuracy, larger detection radius and more vertical recoil.
The best part of the thread is that the Orion and SVA-88 are the only VS LMGs that aren't just worse copies of another faction's LMGs, and the original poster wants them nerfed. Pulsar LSW is just a Carv-S with worse attachment options (and everyone loves the Carv-S, right?), the Polaris has the poor damage output of a long range LMG but gets CQC attachments (the EM1 has the same problem). They're basically T16's with an identity crisis. The Flare is either an EM6 with worse rpm, or a SAW-S with a worse recoil pattern. The Ursa at least has kick-*** velocity and barely any horizontal recoil, but it's the worst of the lot to be caught close up because of the poor rpm. It wants to handle like a SAW but doesn't have the damage to back it up. So there's 2 VS LMGs that offer something unique, 0.75x ADS speed without the NS-15M's low damage and people want them nerfed? I'm not convinced.
"Generally" Guns with low recoil have a strong FSM(first shot multipliers) and guns with lows FSM have generally a strong recoil. But it isn't a big issue with LMG's: it's mostly between 1.5 and 2X: not a big deal (just Pulsar LSW, Orion and MSWR get it over 2X) Look at the COF while moving, you'll understand why VS LMG's are so performing: all are more accurate than them NS/TR varirant while moving (ADS or hip). 200 and 167 weapons have a smaller COF (pin point accuracy for 200 and almost for 167), but mostly while immobile, where snipers or just any kind of thread shred you in few seconds. VS don't have this issue. Maybe it's VS's mobility trait, but it's a very stong and sub-rated advantage at any range. Add to this that 0.75X move mult are all on close range weapons (guns, shotguns, SMG's, close range AR/Carabines/LMG's) but the SVA-88, that makes this weapon a bit imba IMO.
I should've posted this last night but the DPS being asserted is mostly bollocks. 143 damage * 750 RPM / 60 = 1787.5 (Orion, T9-CARV, MSW-R) 200 damage * 500 RPM / 60 = 1666.7 (SAW) 167 damage * 600 RPM / 60 = 1670 (EM6, Anchor) 143 damage * 698 RPM / 60 = 1663.6 (SVA-88, Pulsar LSW, T9-CARV S) All other Vanu/Terran LMGs have lower RPMs in the same tiers. Secondly recoil because I'm tired of the NC claiming that the SAWs recoil somehow magically applies to all their guns. Also everyone has ignored the fact that the Orion got nerfed. Which considering the 10,000 CARV threads I've read about it's horizontal recoil I'd think someone might as well bring it up. SVA-88: .45 Vertical, .2/.2 Horizontal Orion: .4 Vertical, .2/.225 Horizontal - SAW: .55 Vertical, .175/.175 Horizontal EM6: .45 Vertical, .175/.175 Horizontal Anchor: .4 Vertical, .175/.175 Horizontal In other words, the Anchor and EM6 both out DPS and have better recoil than the SVA-88. The Anchor also has the same hipfire characteristics. The only thing the SVA-88 has on them statistically is first shot recoil modifier, ADS movement speed, and a good short reload for a 75 round gun. What is true is that I use the SVA-88 over the Orion now due to the horizontal recoil. 0.45 0.175/0.175
I would trade any NC LMG including Gauss Saw for the SVA-88 it is hands down my favorite LMG, it does everything well. I'm not calling for a nerf to it, but if there were any way to get the equivalent weapon on my NC and TR characters I would take it. Part of the thing with guns is how the feel to the player, stats only matter up to a certain degree, some players will find certain weapons easier to use (to kill with) than others, despite what stats suggest.
For the TR the closest is the CARV-S... which however has worse recoil, 2 more seconds of reload (both short and long) and no 0.75x movement speed... only more ammo (yay?)
I never understood SAW recoil complaints anyway. Assuming we're comparing upgraded guns, the SAW literally only requires that you pull down on the mouse while firing, it's easy! Having to pull down 'more' is not an increase in difficulty, people! Now its poorish moving accuracy even during ADS is an actual downside, and its cof bloom is kind of high, but not so high that you can't kill people in one burst at mid range. Excellent point about the superior moving ADS accuracy of VS LMGs, though. 0.35 on all LMGs except the Pulsar at 0.4, while TR has mostly the same guns but 0.4 on all except the T32 Bull and MSW-R which have 0.35 like a VS gun. The NC also has two guns with good ADS accuracy, Anchor and GD-22S, but it also has the SAW with 0.5, the worst LMG for moving accuracy. I still love NC LMGs and respect TR LMGs a lot but that is an advantage I hadn't considered for VS LMGs, and as you say, it synergizes nicely with the ADS speed of the Orion/SVA-88. Now if only the aesthetic design of VS LMGs was less dull. Been using the NS-15M just to have something better to look at. NS-15M gives all empires a 0.75x ADS speed/0.35 moving accuracy option, but of course, at 625 rpm it doesn't nearly put out as much damage as the VS LMGs. Total dream to keep under control though.
625 is a typo on the spreadsheet; apparently through testing it's been confirmed that the NS-15M in fact has equal RPM to the Polaris/T16/EM1, and thus it's 652 (a transposition of numbers on data entry, perhaps?). The Orion is inferior to the MSW-R and only the faster ADS speed really balances it against it. I'd rather have a CARV or SAW than the SVA-88 personally; I just use the Orion for nearly everything. While it is a very effective gun, I don't think it's anywhere near as good as its stats would suggest. In fact, if there were some way to filter out all the people who are terrible at using default guns because they're new I would bet you that the Orion would outscore it (as probably would the SAW, which has a very steep learning curve but is godlike in good hands). I'd remind you that the Polaris and LSW score highly on kills/hour and the Orion/MSW-R score low. But I would never, ever, EVER argue that the Polaris and LSW are better than the Orion/MSW-R. Not ever. They simply AREN'T. The stats of the GD-22S and MSW-R seem to be skewed downward by the large number of people that own them, and as the three default LMGs being ranked in the bottom of kills/hour (despite being among the best LMGs in terms of actual value) proves, that can influence stats one way or another. Witness the Polaris having a high kills/hour but very few people owning it; one could perhaps argue that the Polaris is only used by a smaller number of more competent players due to the entry barrier to owning it, while the Orion is free (and thus owned by a lot of bad players) and the MSW-R is only 100 certs (giving it a lower entry barrier). The SVA-88 is a good weapon with a lot of good properties, but there are many reasons why it would appear to perform better than other weapons that might actually be better than it is. Even then, so what if it's one of the better LMGs in the game? Why can't Vanu have that? TR has a superior Orion and a 100-round 750 RPM gun; NC has the SAW and a bevy of excellent 167 damage options. And Vanu have a high-kicking but incredibly versatile mobile platform that trades a bit of DPS for the ability to fight well in all circumstances. This sounds like, you know, factional differentiation to me.
The MSW-R is a good gun, but depending on playstyle 0.75x ADS can do a lot more for you than adv laser and SPA. 0.75x and 0.5x is night and day when you're peeking corners.
This is true and an advantage for the Orion, but the MSW-R is better at ROUNDING corners (since it doesn't have to ADS as often and can respond to hipfire threats more readily), and I personally believe it to be better in field engagements due to SPA slightly bettering the damage. It's certainly an either-or, however my personal experience is that the MSW-R tends to perform slightly better. The corner-dancing you're describing is absolutely a place where the Orion is unparalleled and shouldn't be overlooked, for sure.
MSW-R have already the worst LGM's projectile velocity and SPA don't help it in open field . Orion is way more verstalite with this average projectile speed. Aslo the 0.75ADS move mult is applied while using ADS: not in CQC. MSW-R is performing slightly better at those range while Orion is slightly more balanced a close to medium range. But those weapons are balanced: Adv laser sight+ PSA for a decent projectile speed+0.75X ads move mult looks fair, no matters the certs is required (the game isn't balanced around cert cost or would definitely become a P2W).
It's perfectly fine. Bullet velocity is a highly overrated statistic at any meaningful engagement range. Nobody complains about SMG velocity, and SPA has an unremarkable penalty in exchange for better damage. Now, if you were also using a Suppressor, it could create some issues, but don't use a Suppressor. SPA is pretty much a straight upgrade or non-detrimental in 99% of circumstances where you'd use the MSW-R.
If SPA reduce the projectile velocity by 5% (not sure about the value) MSW-R projectile velocity would be around 551m/s. As Orion projectile velocity is 615ms/, it would be a 11% difference that require a bit more anticipation. I agree that it's overrated anyways! Orion still have 0.75X ads move mult that is awsome in any case.
The MSW-R doesn't even have the worst velocity on an LMG, that spot belongs to the EM6. And I pretty much only use high velocity anymore on my NS-11C because I actually want my bullets to be faster and its recoil is so trivial I don't care about making it worse. Also I mostly use it at range as LA, if I break it out. But on LMGs I kind of regret the certs spent on HVA. Take the Flare, I don't really care about hitting 143 damage at 80m instead of 75m, and 600m/s speed is good enough. The bonuses are useful but I consider them only a sidegrade and would rather not have the extra recoil...especially at ranges where HVA makes a damage difference, I'd rather have less jump to keep a burst on target easier, it let's me be sloppier. Meanwhile SPA's velocity reduction is rather small and even with mid range guns I more frequently fight in ranges where SPA's improvement of the early damage curve is nicer to have. At these ranges fights tend to be shorter also, so the damage edge starting at 10m is sort of appealing.
No experience with the SVA-88, but as much as I agree the Orion VS54 is beastly good, I find a lot of the remaining VS arsenal kinda lackluster, so I'm okay with this.
Congrats on making the first "SVA-88 is OP thread". Pretty sure that's a first. Sure it's effective, but VS doesn't get a descent 167 dmg LMG, in line with the TMG-50/EM6 at least, so maybe we get an okay LMG to compensate? Mobility being a VS trait gets them the ADS bonus. It's not like the Orion/SVA-88 get a super fast reload to go along with their ADS movement speed like the NS-15M. Overall I think the factions are pretty balanced when it comes to LMGs with the only notable exception being Vanu's lack of solid 167 guns. The Flare is okay, and I looove the Ursa, but I'm not going to pretend that they're on the same level as the TMG-50 or EM6.
The Flare and The TMG/MT-50 are clones. 2 differences: flare have very sligh more Horizontal recoil (0.025),better COF, SPA access and is twice less expensive. TMG/MT-50 get 15m/s bullet speed more. I trade it when you want . Ursa get slight less RPM than TMG/MT-50 but better COF (as many VS weapons), less vertical recoil, shorter reload time and much better bullet velocity. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AuOojvNLMApVdEtIU1NKenEzNzZOSWNaanFqSUVxLWc&type=view&gid=12&f=true&colid0=17&filterstr0=LMG&colid1=4&filterstr1=167 @ 10m&colid2=8&filterstr2=75&sortcolid=-1&sortasc=true&rowsperpage=250
Have to point out tho, currently TR only hold the RoF only over the NC, just like the VS do, when it comes to VS vs TR, the only thing we have is magazine capacity. I have been looking through guns in VR training. I think TR as far as heavy assault goes, and I think even in carbines we have nothing that the Vanu can't match in regards to RoF. It kind of sucks because NC have the hardest hitting weapons which cannot be matched by TR or VS. VS have the great accuracy and better strafe, also no bullet drop,unique to them. while TR it seems have nothing that can't be found on the VS. Aside maybe from the MCG but that weapon still needs work
Ignore the stats sheet. The Flare can't hit the broadside of anything past 50m, and it's much less reliable in CQB. The VS use the Flare because it's all they have and the Flare is cheaper than the Ursa so everybody buys it thinking it's the cats pajamas. The TMG-50 is the indisputable King of the LMGs. The EM6 is close (used to be closer) and if you know what you're doing it works really well, but no, trust me, if you swapped the TMG-50 for the Flare you'd be hoisted by your own petard (TR would kick you out). The Ursa is great. I just Auraxiumed with it in fact.
