What About Battle Rifles?

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by RadarX, Jul 18, 2015.

  1. Jaedrik

    If BRs are buffed AND given to LAs, that class might become useful for something I might enjoy.
  2. Who Garou

    I have the Warden on one of my Engineers.
    It is in a secondary Anti-Personnel load-out. This is ranged weapon and not good for a battle up-close-and-personal - in my experience.
    The Warden is basically a sniper rifle for the Engineers, but the Archer does a better job of that as it can battle MAXes and vehicles as well. When I know I'm going to fight vehicles, I'm not going to be up close except to drop mines.

    I guess if I backed up an infiltrator with ammo at some location, I could use it to snipe - but then I become the easy target at that location as an Engineer has no cloaking device.

    I'm not sure of the intent of the Battle Rifle to begin with.
  3. obamacares

    I don't like the simply because the vandal does their job but better
  4. EViLMinD

    I don't use the Warden often, but it's fine as is. Just has a higher skill requirement - especially at shorter ranges.

    The devs should add BRs that can use advanced laser sights and, possibly, soft-point rounds. A cqc BR would be interesting. Compared to a slug shotgun, it/they would have a larger mag, lower DPS, higher velocity and ROF. Like the single shot SRs, I guess.
    • Up x 1
  5. GaveYouHermes

    Any reason you're against BRs in LA hands? Most classes have options for all ranges, LAs only have slug shotguns (which are pretty weak with range) or long range carbines. Which is more of medium range. Give them BRs and they can put it to use better than a heavy assault can. You could get to great perches away from the action and it would help a light assault be smarter and stay out of the fray a bit. There's too many bases and areas with places only an LA can reach, yet is too far up or away to be of any use to them.
  6. JohnGalt36

    Uh, snipers hiding on buildings and trees? You are basically advocating a sniper that is better than the infiltrator class, because they can get to better vantage points.

    Well, they are the only class with jetpacks. That comes with a tradeoff. I thought that was obvious.

    That is the problem, they aren't supposed to be able to do everything better than other classes. They have higher mobility at the cost of ranged damage.

    The point of the LA is to attack from different angles, through windows, and flank enemy buildings. LA is not supposed to be someone who flies higher than people care to look and mindlessly pop people from treetops and rooftops.

    So, in short, no. If you want to do that playstyle, I'll help you out, because that's what I do for my scout rifle directives.
    1. Pull infiltrator with desired battle/scout/sniper rifle.
    2. Pull ESF with ejection seat and stealth.
    3. Fly over desired sniping location.
    4. Eject.
    5. Profit.
  7. Spectralfx

    Tons of people have already mentionned facts about how terrible they are at mid-long range fights and have suggested tons of possible buff that I find really interesting.

    While I agree with them in general what I would like to really push up is the following:

    We are in the goddamn future but we can't get access to variable magnification scopes???


    How am I supposed to run to the nearest sudderer or redeploy just to get the right magnification for the situation at hand?

    On a sniper rifle or scout rifle, considering the cloaking devices an Infil get... I am willing to accept that even if it is total non-sense.

    While being any other class roaming around trying to get various other things done in the open .... I just don't have time or the will to bother with that broken game mechanic and go for an automatic weapon.

    Its the lack of flexibility that really kills most under used weapons in this game... people just go for the highest DPS or so because anyway ... you are so limited by certs and all that it just isn't worth it to invest in those other guns in the first place!
  8. InvolvedSpark

    I find Battle Rifles to be rather enjoyable. I've only used the Warden so far, but it seems to deal a good amount of damage, and is very accurate at medium-long range. It has a good ammo capacity, and is actually really good for stealing kills. :D Unfortunately, it does have its drawbacks. One that I've noticed, is that it doesn't deal much damage against aircraft, unlike other small arms.
  9. Erendil

    Why yes, yes I do. :D I use the Eidolon. A lot.

    No really.... I mean A LOT

    I purchased it on Launch Day and it's been my go-to weapon for everything but CQC point holds and resecures.

    Between my two VS characters I've logged over 1000 hours w/ the Eidolon and racked up 26,000+ kills. I'm well-versed in all of the versions that have reached the Live servers, including the original Eidolon back when it had only 500m/s velocity, no HVA, a minimum damage of 167, and recoil that was worse than today's SA Scout rifles.

    I say all this not to brag, but to give you an idea of where I'm coming from, and to illustrate that I've experienced first-hand how Battle Rifles have evolved over the last 2 1/2 years as they've received COF, recoil, damage, and velocity buffs.

    Because I love the versatility of long range, semi-auto rifles. Whether you're at 2m or 200m, if I can see you, I can kill you. :cool: And my all time favorite FPS weapon is the M1 Garand from CoD2, and Battle Rifles are the closest thing I could find in PS2 to the M1 in feel and utility.

    Well.. They probably already know this.... But aside from a few starter weapons (carbines TR/VS snipers), BRs are overall the lowest scoring primary AI weapons in just about every single metric we use to measure a weapon's capabilities - whether you look at theoretical static numbers like TTK and DPS, or in-game performance metrics like KDR, KPH and KPU.

    So when I look at the metrics, and combine it with my in-game experience, it's pretty apparent to me that they need some attention.

    But BRs aren't bad weapons on their own. You CAN get kills with them.

    The problem is that no matter what range you play at, there's always a good selection of easier-to-use weapons out there that would perform the same or better in the same situation. Because of this, BR's are incredibly unpopular and are very unforgiving of mistakes.

    The NC in particular have 200-damage weapons that outshine BRs in almost any situation, and they share the BR's 3-headshot kill at all ranges. Between those and sniper rifles there's almost no reason to ever use the Warden/Guardian.

    And, with the introduction of the Archer and the buffs to Burst weapons that will be going Live soon, there is less reason than ever for any Faction to use Battle Rifles.

    IMO, the issue lies primarily in 2 areas:

    1) It has a Recoil Angle (Bias) that pulls to the right. That recoil angle makes it harder to maintain accuracy on followup shots due to the variable ROF that comes with being semi-auto. You can't simply pull down and to the left at a constant rate like you could an automatic whose ROF is fixed. So shots end up juking around your aim point at high ROF.

    It also makes BRs feel awkward to fire for new players. It can feel like you're constantly fighting the weapon when you fire it. This means they have let the weapon settle between shots, greatly reducing the ROF and the already terrible DPS and TTK.

    2)The Damage per shot is simply too low for a semi-auto weapon that needs to rely on its precision to survive. These weapons are supposed to be DMRs. As such, they should be able to operate effectively at ranges between the long range automatics and sniper rifles. So we're talking roughly 100-200m or so.

    Its STK of 4 (5 at >8m) against unarmoured targets is okay. But Nanoweave and HA OVershielded targets are a little too tough once damage starts dropping off.

    Past a measely 8m, it takes 6 shots to kill a Nano5 target, and 8(!) to kill a Shielded HA. That's a STK increase of 50% and 100% (respectively) over an unarmoured soldier. That's way too big of a jump. Landing up to 8 shots at DMR ranges on a dodging opponent (and they WILL be dodging after the first shot or two) is a very tall order.

    And quite frankly, one of the defining characteristics of Battle Rifles that separate them from ARs and carbines is that they fire full-sized rifle cartridges - you know, like sniper rifles use. But in PS2 they aren't anywhere near that powerful. For balance purposes you obviously can't give BRs sniper rifle damage, but there still is room to give them more bite vs their most problematic opponents: HAs and Nano5 targets.

    So how do we fix it?

    The Recoil issue is simple.

    Simply make its bias 0|0 so the recoil pulls straight up - like every other SA rifle in the game (except the Vandal, but it has .75x ADS movement to balance it).

    The damage increase is a little trickier.

    Option 1) Increase their maximum damage to 313 and extend their maximum damage range to 20m.

    This will reduce their STK by 2 against Nano5 and HA Overshielded heavies out to 20m, and by 1 out to maybe ~55m. At the same time it keeps its current 4 bodyshot kill against unarmoured infantry, but extends it to the same 55m range. Same thing with the 2-headshot kill range.

    This will in-effect allow BRs to defeat/negate Nano5 at short range, and reduce it at medium range, which IMO is a pretty good selling point and would give them a unique niche. Its extended 2-headshot kill range will also reward precision shooting over spamming at short/medium range, while still allowing SA Scouts to retain their "2-headshot kill at all ranges" and "3-bodyshot kill <15m" adavantages over BRs.

    Option 2) Increase the Max AND Min damage to 313, and decrease the headshot multiplier to 1.5x.

    This will have the effect defeating Nanoweave at all ranges while preserving its body STK of 4 against unarmoured targets and keeping its 3-headshot kill requirement intact. It would also drop the STK against shielded Heavies to a much more reasonable 6 shots. Lastly, it will make them deadlier in that 100-200m range without overshadowing SA Scouts or Snipers.

    I would also suggest making similar damage buffs to SA Scout and SA Sniper rifles. If they receive damage boosts that lets them defeat Nano as well, that might give them the hook they need to get players to use them over OHK BASRs.

    So why not improve the recoil, COF, bloom, velocity, etc like so many people have suggested?

    Simple: Those are only minor tweaks that won't fix a fundamentally inferior weapon. It would help lower the skill floor a bit, but won't do much once you're experienced enough w/ BRs to land most of your shots anyway.

    And we've already seen the effects of such buffs in the past. For the most part they made very little difference in usage or performance.

    At Launch, almost nobody used BRs.
    Then they buffed the recoil and COF in several areas, and still nobody used them.
    Then they buffed the velocity, and still nobody used them.
    Then they buffed the minimum damage, and STILL nobody uses them.

    It's time for a different approach.

    tl:dr - BRs are versatile weapons, but for any given situation there are several other weapons that are just as good or better, and are easier to use. Remove the recoil pull to the right and increase the damage per shot, and they will be easier to use, more precise, and less gimped than they are now against Nano5 and HA overshieded targets.
    • Up x 5
  10. Ginjix

    I just don't understand why Battle Rifles aren't accessible to infiltrators, especially since most of the BR directive tree requires the infil anyway. To my knowledge the BR tree is the only weapon directive tree that requires the use of more than one class to complete. Also, infiltrators only have 2 directive weapon rewards (Sniper, SMG) while other classes have 4 (Assault/Carbine/LMG, SMG, Shotgun, BR), not including MAXs and sidearms. I can't be the only one that finds this strange.
  11. Crator

    It's too situational I think. I agree with the above quoted a whole lot.
  12. Tanelorn

    6 pages in now, my feedback probably won't be read but:

    I have used the BR since it was first released. The biggest issue was bullet velocity, but HV ammo fixes that. The issue is still damage per shot. DPS is irrelevant as a high rate of fire gives uncontrollable recoil. You get 1 shot per .75 seconds, that's the rate the reticle re-zeroes. The DPS for that rate of fire is pathetic compared to the scout rifles and other semi auto rifles. I find it VERY difficult to get kills with the BR outside of a narrow bracket of maximum effectiveness.

    I recommend a lower max rate of fire, and a higher damage per bullet. That, and probably an improved base velocity.

    I also support suggestions here about making each rifle behave in a more faction specific way.
    • Up x 3
  13. Erendil

    Awesome post, Tanelorn!

    Devs, do you see this? This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. Almost every single BR user I've ever come across in PS2 has had the same issue: the wonky recoil makes it difficult to control BRs at high ROF, forcing players to use the fire-settle method of firing which drops its already-low DPS down to the floor. Even at max ROF its only 1387 DPS, which makes it the lowest DPS of any AI primary weapon except the Phaseshift in SA mode.

    Wrel illlustrates the Fire-Settle method at 3:55 of his BR review video. Even he recommends using it :

    Please Devs, remove the recoil angle!
  14. Armcross

    Used it as counter sniper many times and it works greate for me. Unless in very extreme range we are ok on other ranges.
  15. Jolanar

    I've noticed that the Eidolon performs significantly better than the AMR-66. I have a hard time landing successive shots on the same target with the AMR but the Eidolon recoil resets much quicker and also feels significantly lower than the AMR. I can't compare to the Warden because I have never used it. The AMR just seems to require 1 more shot than is convenient to kill a target.

    On a side note, it would be nice to have a more meaningful sound when you fire the weapon. It is a DMR after all. It should sound like you mean to kill someone rather than pelt them with beanbags.
  16. Turekson

    Everything that you say makes sense. I would go with option 1) though, option 2) is not bad either but I feel it kinda breaks the small arms mechanics since apart from MCG and QCX all have 2x headshot multiplier, also I think especially sniper-ish weapons should have a high reward for headshots. In addition to all this, I strongly advocate extending BRs access to infiltrators.

    Devs, listen to this guy please.
  17. Ianneman

    Either significantly reduce the recoil, or give it to LA or increase the damage to 334.
  18. Erendil

    Not quite true. There's actually a pretty good precedence for this. Shotgun slugs - which incidentally are the next closest thing to Battle Rifles for non-infils - also have a 1.5x HSM.

    But really we shouldn't even be focusing on the HSM. We should be looking at what the final damage per shot is from a HS, and the subsequent STK.

    Currently it's 250 * 2 = 500. My option #2 would be 313 * 1.5 = 469. Both options give it 2 HS kills against infils at all ranges, and 3 HS kills against other infantry anywhere past 8m. Option #2 means you lose the 2 HS kill <8m vs other infantry, but in exchange it does enough dmg on a body shot to effectively ignore Nano at that range. So it's a (minor) trade-off, and IMO a good one.

    To give you an idea of how short 8m is in-game: it's the length of a Harasser.

    Yep I agree, and at first I struggled with this too.

    Option #1 was designed to preserve its current long-range ability while giving it more survivability at close/medium range (<55m), where most combat takes place. This option makes them more versatile in more sitautions, and it rewards close/medium range precision shots.

    I designed Option #2 to improve its long-range ability only with body shots (so as to not step on the toes of sniper/scout rifles), while at the same time specifically preserving their headshot reward/ability as much as possible. It doesn't change at all from the current Live version, except against non-infils at ranges <8m. So you'd still get almost exactly the same headshot reward as now.

    Snipers are long-range headshot monsters. I see BRs as long-range body-shot monsters. :cool:

    I agree. There's no reason why they shouldn't have access to BRs.

  19. Turekson

    Oh, this I did not know. I hardly ever use shotguns.

    I agree with what your saying and have zero problems on your logic behind option 2). I think you have actually found two options that are nicely balanced between each other. It's just that I see BRs as the little brothers of SRs - more nimble and agile but lacking in punch as smaller siblings often are, but still sharing the same genetics. For this vision your option 1) fits like a glove. It's like solid gold.

    Option 2) would fill a niche though, they could make a separate weapon for it. A large caliber rifle or a smaller caliber slug firing shotgun? They could even make BRs function differently for each faction to add a little of that sweet asymmetry.

    How I feel this should now proceed is that people on this thread would just vote on either of your options. :D
    • Up x 1
  20. EnsignPistol

    Hoo boy, battle rifles. I haven't Auraxiumed my Warden yet, being about 700 kills in, but I have thought a great deal about the thing. Honestly, it's not the damage output that's at issue (though it probably wouldn't hurt if their maximum damage was increased, so that their 2 headshot kill on non-infiltrators carries out a certain distance), but rather some nuances of their accuracy, especially recoil angle and bloom per shot. For weapons geared towards longer range combat, battle rifles have the worst recoil angle in the game in terms of severity (though at least it isn't variable) by a considerable margin. Getting rid of that entirely would probably be the single biggest improvement you could make, but at the very least put it somewhere in the single digits. Beyond that, I feel that the relatively high bloom per shot, moreso than the minimum cone of fire, is what holds the weapon back in the accuracy department. A 20% reduction, from 0.2/0.1 hip/ADS bloom to 0.16/0.08, the next margin up from the NC 200 damage profile guns, would make the gun feel better at numerous ranges as well. I suppose making initial ADS accuracy better would at least make sense; I personally find it odd that my AC-X11 is more accurate on the first shot when standing still, but even just 0.03 for stationary ADS would be about as accurate as it really needs to be in my book, especially with lower bloom per shot.

    About the only thing I could imagine asking for beyond that is a buff to hipfire, perhaps taking 0.25 off of each cone of fire, 0.5 if you're feeling frisky. This would more squarely put the battle rifle in a position to pick up where most assault rifles leave off in the hipfire department, as well as distancing it from the heavier, more powerful semi-auto scout rifle that it currently shares hipfire accuracy with. If you really want to boost damage on top of this, though, I suggest looking at a damage model in the area of 315 @ 10m -> 225 @ 70m. 315 maximum damage ensures that, while it's still a 4 bodyshot kill against non-Infiltrator targets (who now die in only three), it remains four bodyshots even through max rank Nanoweave armor up close, and it carries its two-headshot kill out to around 50 meters (while remaining two headshots against infiltrators anywhere beyond that). The counter-sniping niche is thus retained, perhaps moreso due to your ability to drop Infiltrators even faster up close, and you get a noticable improvement in your effectiveness against both hardened targets up close and rewarding precision shot placement at distance.
    • Up x 1