Rifleman Archive
Thread: Where did the idea of rifles being slow come from?
Page 4 of 4
Cpl_Fisher
Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:07 am
#40
With the whole ALL DPS should be roughly equal debate. How is it balanced that 2 diff proffesions have the same dps, but one has much higher defenses? Its not. But if one has High Dps but low defenses, and another has low DPS, but has much higher deffenses?
In my opinion each ranged proffesion should be very distict and have its own role.
For example a pistoleer is going have a very hard time of it if he goes against a rilfeman, becasue the the rifleman has much higher ranged def and much higher DPS.
That same pistoleer is going to shine against a melee fighter, they are for close up work and have a lot higher melee def. Plus its there job to put the poor fool who thought it would be a smart idea to bring a knofe to a gun fight out of his misery.
Now the clincher, That rifleman, if he gets jumped by a melee fighter, is going to get his but wiped, because all that range def doesn't help him squat against that guy who sneaks behind him and slips a knife between his ribs
This in my opinion, is true balance, and makes the game much more fun.
Cpl_Fisher
Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:22 am
#41
now for my RL weapons 2 cents. I've never been able to fire a pistol more accurately than a rifle at anything over 2m. I've never been able to fire a pistol faster than a rifle with any degree of accuracy. (It's just so much esier for me to control the recoil of a rifle, if you have time to put two hands on a pistol, then the target is at rifle raange and should be engaged occordingly, unless you rifle was slung or something like that) Pistols for some reason or the other tend to intimidate people more than rifles esp at close range. (maybe it has something to do with the up close and personal nature of of them)
I almost always prefer using Iron sights over scopes at anything less than 300m. using Iron sights, its just so much faster to aquire your target. from 300m-500m its a lighting issue, use the scope in low light levels beacuse it takes longer aquire your target anyway. after 500m, its scope time, at that range, picking out targets take time anyway, and a scope ensures a better shot.
to sum up, a scope can let you fire 3 .308 rounds with a half an inch at 100m but who really needs this accuracy besides police in Hostage situations. at anything up to 300m, your accuracy is good enough to ensure consistent COM hits with iron sights. a scope at anything under 500m is used when you are having trouble picking out your target. (you are using it as a light gatherer more than anything else) after 500m, you need a scope to pick out and identify your targets. You really wouldn't be using an assault rifle, like the M-16a2anyway, since there effective range at point targets (i.e. individual people) capps at around 550m (there is a 30m give or take here, but that is individual weapons really)
Waste93
Fri Nov 19, 2004 3:30 pm
#42
Gooney wrote:
Ok I'll bite. Define Balance Waste.
Is it balanced that 3 professions with exactly the same xp/sp requirement have so wildly different in game viability? Should a Rifleman out class a Pistoleer to the degree it does currently in the game?
Lotof talk about mobs in your post...but what about other players... Carbineer and Pistoleer pale in comparison with rifleman in PVP performance.
See prior post. Combat balance is achieved by giving the professions a balanced chance to survive an encounter in a general sense. Situational modifiers will of course effect this.
No it isn't currently balanced. That is a problem. But DPS is not, nor can it be the balance point.
To much of balance talk is centered on PvP. However PvP is and always willbe a minority of combat. But we aren't saying that the system is currently balanced. I agree that it is currently messed up.
The main PvP issue is Mind damage. Which needs to be fixed. That is a problem with using two different buff systems and with it being the only unhealable pool. This leaves it at a much lower level and of course the favorite target. That absolutely needs to be corrected.
Balance is easily achievable if the DPS are roughly the same, the difference between the three comes from fulfilling thier rolls.
This is true if you assume that DPS figure is taken from each profession at the same range. This figure should be derived from looking at the professions performance at the optimal range of the professions weapon type.
Further, DPS is simply one aspect, there absolutly must be more stress placed upon developing rolls for each profession. The intent is there and is clear as day, anyone can see it by looking at the skill modifers, weapon stats, and profession specials. This doesnt happen in the game today because the buff/armor situation negates the necessity of utilizing your profession at its optimal range. You would see far more roll employment if grouping was more necessary.
You can't have same DPS balance while maintaining the professions roles.
You seem toindicate thatDPS is dependent on range. DPS calculations do not factor in ranges at all. Nor is damage increased or reduced for range. DPS assumes a hit in its calculations. So range mods aren't a factor either.
Here is why DPS balance isn't the way it works and why it destroys the distinct roles. If you gave all three professions about the same DPS. Would they be balanced? Pistoleers would still have a much higher defense stats than Carbineer and Rifle. So no it wouldn't be balanced. You would then have to give everyone about the same defensive stats. Now Carbineers have a large number of state attacks that the others don't. So it still wouldn't be balanced. So you would have to give everyone about the same state attacks.
End result is that you have three nearly identical professions with the only real difference being their ideal range. So all three would have the same role but just at different ranges.
Balance isn't achieved by making everything 50/50. It's done by a rock/paper/scissors approach where different profession have distinct advantages in certain situations.
First part is true, but only because the current combat system neither encourages nor allows in practice the use of profession rolls. In a group, rifleman would remain outside the engagement area "Sniping" the target being tanked by melee types or pistoleers. Carbineers would be busy setting states, while the rifleman unhindered blasted with his big rifle.
There can be no snipers for a host of reasons. Hallmark of snipers is the one shot kill. Something you don't want in the game for obvious reason. They are also long range precision shooters. Accuracy between the three professions is nearly the same at Master. Also there is no 'long' range in the game. 64m is rather short and is shorter than the standard rifle range. Also at the speeds players and MOBs move this distance is much shorter than the name would indicate. The other standard of snipers is concealment. The closest to this is /concealshot which does have this ability but only in PvE combat. The last factor for snipers is observation skills. Which there is none in SWG. So on all facets of snipers, this role fails.
Ive got no axe to grind, no vested interest in this either way. I would like to see balance returned or introduced in the game. I want it to be fun. I want asall combat professions to be viable in PvP not justthe 4 or so like it is now.
I want balance too. However you can't balance the way that you describe. To do so destroys the idea of roles for the professions. As if you equalize DPS you have to do the same to defenses and state attacks. Otherwise you haven't 'balanced' anything. That would destroy the professional roles.
Rifles are suppose to be damage dealers. Carbineers are the state attackers. While Pistoleers are the defensive template of the ranged profession. That is their role. We just have to make changes so that Carbineers and Pistoleers can achieve their role. Which currently they can not because of a number of factors that were introduced in the game.
You've also built a contradiction. Here is how you defined the profession roles.
Rifles-- Slow, Heavy Hitting, Long Range
Carbineers --Medium speed, Medium Damage,Medium Range
Pistoleer -- Fast ,Low Speed,Short Range
Now if DPS is to be equal for balance. How can the 'role' of Rifles be heavy hitting? It can't be since all three professions would have about the same damage output. For Rifles to be heavy hitting it has to be a significant difference. If it were the same then all three would have the same role in regards to damage. You can't have it both ways. You can't have the role of Rifles be heavy hitting while giving everyone the same damage.
Message Edited by Waste93 on 11-19-2004 04:24 PM
Cpl_Fisher
Fri Nov 19, 2004 7:51 pm
#43
Hotrodg wrote:
This entire thread, while entertaining, has no in-game value.
True, but its one of the few active threads on any of the boards. No one seems to be reguarly posting on the rifleman/commando/Valcyn forums. except for the corrospondents and Ryubushi's tank thread.
DarthMarksman
Sun Nov 21, 2004 2:56 am
#44
BrerLapin wrote:
@ DarthMarksman
Ermmmmm I dont know where you get that idea, GPMG & yankee equivalent are hardly lighter & more manueverable & the weight of the ammo certainly isnt lighter. I see what you mean but I think youve miss interpretted the use of the word static.
I meant less useful when moving, not emplaced ¬.¬ Althought having said that the T-21 certainly does look like it needs a big powersource.
I'm not saying that is the case in all rifles. I have felt the weight of solid wood stocks, and their mand made material equivalents and have felt the difference in weight. When firing the weapon it was negligible, but I understand your point. It goes without saying that the ammo is not lighter.
As far as the context of "static",I did misunderstand you. Static to me, means "not moving". Stationary. If you mean the Rifle being less effective in terms of accuracy while in motion, that can be applied to any firearm, not just rifles.
Page 4 of 4