Hi All, As I understand it's more or less accepted that all weapons of the same class in Planetside are balanced - or at least in theory they are all meant to be balanced. Looking specifically at TR LMGs, the MSW-R and the TMG-50 are both, in my opinion, equally good at what they're intended to do. They are - or at least they are intended to be - balanced. Whilst I may have preference based on my play style, in no way would I claim that the TMG-50 is in anyway an intentional upgrade to the MSW-R or any other LMG, not even the standard T9 Carv for that matter. In reality, if a weapon is seen as too good/bad owners of said weapon can and do expect their purchase to receive the relevant buff or nerf (OK, maybe they don't want their favorite weapon to get nerfed but you see my point). So, working off the above assumption, how can it still be justified that the MSW-R is 325 certs but the TMG-50 is 1000 certs? This goes for any weapon class and any faction, whether for Vanu carbines or NC SMGs. I suspect, this is all a hangover from a time gone by when maybe the devs did envision certain weapons as point blank upgrades to other options within a given class. However, if we now live in an Auraxis where the devs are committed to a grand weapon balancing act - as I believe they are - surely the time has come to put a flat price on different weapons within a class? Of course exceptions for special weapons is more understandable. What do you think?
I would guess its to fill gaps left due to faction difference, but thats a guess. I say this solely from the perspective of snipers (I don't know how other weapons are affected) but basically, the VANU and TR start with semi auto snipers, and the NC with bolt actions. To compensate for that, the NC get access to a cheap semi auto and the vanu/tr get access to a cheaper bolt action. It wouldn't suprise me if a faction that starts with a really slow firing weapon on a class, would then have a faster firing weapon cheaper, and vice versa, but that is only a guess as I don't really play most classes and when I do, I use SMG's or my trusty battle rifle (as thats where my experience lies and ironically i play better with a battle rifle or smg over an assault rifles, carbines etc.)
They were released under the explanation of being practical sidegrades. Obviously, a CQC weapon operating at the same proficiency as a long range weapon is fishy but that doesn't really come up in practice fortunately. The first iteration of weapons that were available at launch have a range of pricing models that lead up to 1000 certs / 699 DBG. (Used to be 1000/700 flat at one time.) All standard-Depot weapons released after the first iteration follow a 1000 / 799 or a 1000 / 699 model. Nonstandard camo weapons will never cost certs. For nonstandard camo, the price is not consistent and follows no general rule; for example, the NS-11CG and the NS Baron G5G are both 1999, but the NS-11CB is 1499 and the NS Baron G5B is 1399. If you go back in the day, using TR Carbines as named examples: the Burst was 100 / 250, the Jaguar and the AMC were 250 / 500, the S-variant was 500 / 700, and the Lynx was 1000 / 700. Now it's: AMC, Jaguar, Burst at 650 / 499 and S-variant, Lynx at 1000 / 699. There's nothing really to be drawn from this. On one hand the system has the weapons in roughly the same order but the pricing model is condensed. On the other hand, the S-variant isn't closer to the "top-most progression" of the old system which - price being your explanation of progression - would be the Lynx. At the same time, the S-variant isn't near the base of some sort of progression, as suggested by the new two-tier model. The 100-250-500-1000 model ignores concepts such as range viability, damage output, and control. The inclusion of the Jaguar and the AMC in the same tier suggests that range viability had nothing to do with the decision. The only thing we can conclude is that the developers were mindful of "faction equivalents" being the same price. From this, I hypothesize that prices were assigned in something of an arbitrary manner and bringing them closer together by making a four-tier Carbine system into a two-tier one is evidence that the original pricing was not well thought out, building artificial expectations of weapons. The fact that some tier exists might be either vestigial or is seen as a hook. All weapons may as well be priced 1000 / 799 unless you believe that there really is some kind of progression to be had.
there are noviceesk weapons and more advanced versions of weapons ... for example TR and VS have a sniperrifle for 325 certs ... that´s for example an entryversion weapon meaning new players can get that weapon and be effective with it early than having to sepend the additional 675 more certs (excluding what certs you may need for attachments) ... every other weapon that is 1000 certs is a weapon for when you have played the game a bit longer and are experienced enough to go for different loadouts ...
It's an interesting thought and there may be something to it. However, in the specific case of the MSW-R and the TMG-50, it doesn't work. TR heavy's start with the high rate of fire T9 Carv. The MSW-R is also high rate of fire and the TMG-50 is the TR's only slow firing-high bullet damage LMG. Very interesting. Makes me wonder if the devs are slowly but surely going in the direction of having a flat price. I suspect probably not haha, but you never know. So, when you say advanced, are we talking about weapons with a high skill floor/more specialised? I'm inclined to agree with you if that's what you mean?
more about the skillfloor as you can have specialised weapons early that still are new user friendly for ranged, cqc or supression .. there are some oddball weapons though .. best example would be the default gauss saw nc heavies get to then eventualy cert into the gd 22s (325 certs), em1 (650 certs) or gauss saw s (650 certs) f.e. em6, anchor (each 1000 certs) and the default gauss saw are weapons more suited for people with good aim imo (higher skill requirment) ..
I'm unfamiliar with NC, but doesn't the Gauss Saw have a reputation for having an unusually high skill floor for a default weapon? I may be well off on that one. In terms of the TR, it would make sense, since the lower tier weapons are very similar to the default T9 Carv.
yes pretty much ... people suggested the em1 or gd 22s to be rather the NCheavy default weapon the gauss saw is super unwieldy for sustained fire, only effective in short burst of 5 shots as well best decked out in attachments first (better no HVA) ... but it´s a monster in ranged combat as its first shot is superaccurate going were you actualy want it to .. it´s a weapon were you need good triggerdisziplin ... it also is the LMG with the highest killpotential ...
Makes sense; more than once I've been obliterated by a skilled Guass Saw operator in an astoundingly short time. However, isn't the Guass Saw being the default NC LMG a big mark against the idea that weapon prices are linked to skill floor? Or do you reckon that the devs were just inconsistent in this particular area? Also, it doesn't seem to make sense that the TR Lynx carbine would be deemed top tier. In my opinion, the Lynx is one of the nicest and easiest carbines to adjust to - in other words, I think it has a low skill floor. Granted, this may just be due to my personal play style. Again, this could just be an exception to the rule.
well as said there are some oddballchoices made by the devs were i am scratching my head why said thing is the case .. so yes i would consider nc gausssaw a exception to the rule in a similar way why does the nc sniper start with a boltactionrifle that can oneshotheadshot were the tr and vs have a semiauto sniper that only can twoshot headshot even though all factions have an equivalent of those weapontypes .... so with the exception of the nc heavy and nc sniper all classes across all factions start with similar weapontypes suited for the same role i think ...
Remember back when canister was useless and cost 1000 certs, while marauder was really good and cost 250 certs?
