For those of you who say the new burst rifles are "better"

(Ritobasu) #21

If you’re talking about “burst weapons”, the sniper rifles, Sparks’ REVIVR, Phantom’s Katana all better fit that definition than what the burst rifles do. I believe SD tried to better define the roles burst rifles had in relation to the M4/Timik and the Grandeur/PDP. However, the changes just made them flat out inferior to both.

They were perfectly defined pre-CW patch already; low capacity, potentially higher DPS rifles that took skill and finesse to use to their full potential as opposed to the reliable and rock solid M4. Now they are flat out lower DPS, unless you land 3 headshots in a single burst consistently. They require even more skill and risk to perform either marginally better or flat out worse than the M4/Timik

(Amerika) #22

[quote=“Ritobasu;106027”]I’m seeing a lot of anecdotal experience and not hard evidence that burst rifles are better or unchanged. Even in the face of researched data, people are still trying to rationalize that the burst rifles are fine “because it works for me”. That’s great for you, but it’s not a valid argument for why burst rifles should remain the way they are.

The very ironic thing is that some Splash Damage moderator/community manager/developer on Reddit said the changes were intended to making burst rifles LESS tracking reliant. Why would you do that while lowering the burst RPM on the BR-16 at the same time as increasing the burst delay a significant amount? You have to track even more now, it’s hilariously counterproductive to what they were trying to accomplish[/quote]

What would you consider hard evidence? Only time provides hard evidence. The best that can be offered now is something like proof of concept videos. I have two for the BR16 and two for the Stark + many hours played with both and me doing every bit as well as I do with the M4. I’ve not said “it works for me so it’s good”. I’ve said why it works based on how it performs and given examples. I’ve also cited what people might or might not have issues with compared to what issues or likes people had with the past iterations. This is the best that can be done without more time.

The very ironic thing is that some Splash Damage moderator/community manager/developer on Reddit said the changes were intended to making burst rifles LESS tracking reliant. Why would you do that while lowering the burst RPM on the BR-16 at the same time as increasing the burst delay a significant amount? You have to track even more now, it’s hilariously counterproductive to what they were trying to accomplish

That would be ironic because I believe they would be pretty wrong in that assessment of how the new weapons work. You still need to track pretty well with the new rifles IMO but instead of just needing tracking and recoil/sway control you now need to have good timing on when to click and also be less prone to panic. Specifically in CQC situations.

I do believe they made the BR16/Stark harder to use. I just don’t believe they are worthless or weak in general.

Also, here are the proof of concept pub videos on how to fire the new guns properly. Stark 1 and [url=“https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBozZ7ckXvM”]Stark 2. [url=“https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2itKpgq5P0”]BR16 1 and [url=“https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8biXwI7nuY”]BR16 2.

Again, they are just pub videos but I played quite a few hours with each gun and pretty much every pub turned out like these against all levels of competition. And I know I need to get better at ducking out, firing and moving back which is something the burst rifles excel at.

(Ritobasu) #23

Actual number crunching like the picture in the OP. What you’re citing is just player based experience; not everyone has the same experience or level of skill as you, that’s why I’m pulling up numbers to prove my point. Overall DPS of the BR-16/Stark is now slightly higher than the automatic rifles? Definitely not true at all.

Honestly, Dirty Bomb would highly benefit from a community like what Symthic has done for the later Battlefield franchise. Statements and arguments supported by datamined numbers and charts, not “it feels fine to me” and “check out my Youtube videos”

(Amerika) #24

Actual number crunching like the picture in the OP. What you’re citing is just player based experience; not everyone has the same experience or level of skill as you, that’s why I’m pulling up numbers to prove my point. Overall DPS of the BR-16/Stark is now slightly higher than the automatic rifles? Definitely not true at all.

Honestly, Dirty Bomb would highly benefit from a community like what Symthic has done for the later Battlefield franchise. Statements and arguments supported by datamined numbers and charts, not “it feels fine to me” and “check out my Youtube videos”[/quote]

I am a vet of number crunching to try and maximize performance as a long time member of Elitest Jerks. But at some point things on paper do not work out like they do in real play as you can’t put into numbers how good strafing out from a doorway and back to cover is on paper and other similar things. Raw DPS doesn’t factor in how little recoil/sway control you have to deal with compared to other weapons. Raw DPS doesn’t factor in how well you have to time your shots, CQC situations or panic situations either. Exactly how do you put that kind of data on a spreadsheet? An example is the M4 vs. the Timik. The Timik on paper looks to be the better weapon. In practice the Timik is considered to be worse (even though the timik does have some love by some people). Over time most people have accepted that the M4’s ease of use/predictability overrides the small RoF benefits of the Timik.

We already have all the raw numbers for the guns. How that information translates into real world play is what is important. If a really good player who has a pretty solid line of logic in how weapons perform in different scenarios while also factoring in their actual statistical numbers then I am going to listen to them. I can view what they have done, try to replicate it myself and then try to iterate on it if I think it could be done better. Or I might find out I am simply terrible with it or simply dislike it.

Raw numbers are great. I’m a stats guy by nature (as seen in other threads) and for a living I help develop business analysis software (reporting and data warehousing specifically). But at some point you can’t get all the information you need on how something performs from a spreadsheet or simulation.

(Kyskythyn) #25

Damage after ~1.12s of firing:

BR: 153 (3 bursts)
M4: 154 (11bullets)

M4 clearly the far superior weapon.

But seriously, it’s personal preference. Neither one is that much better than the other.

(streetwiseSailboat) #26

I’m a relatively new player (around 80 hours) and I’ve been maining Kira ever since I started (Pre-Containment war). I can’t say that the new burst rifles are better, but I honestly have no problem with them because I can still play efficiently without feeling like I’m losing out.

(Grave_Knight) #27

@Amerika I’m pretty sure there is no convincing these people that burst rifles aren’t as bad as they think it is. To many seem dead set in the old way of things. They’re probably the same kind of people who still think Arty sucks.

(Ritobasu) #28

[quote=“Kyskythyn;106096”]Damage after ~1.12s of firing:

BR: 153 (3 bursts)
M4: 154 (11bullets)[/quote]
Thanks for proving my point! They’re nearly the exact same DPS and time-to-kill. So… what’s the reason to use burst rifles again, even though they’re much harder to use?

Burst rifles by virtue are more difficult to use than automatic weapons, I think everyone can agree on that. So why make them even more difficult to use for less overall payoff? Sorry, but increasing the bullet damage in no way makes up for the massive decrease in overall DPS. I’m not looking for protips on how to use the new burst rifles, because anyone with a brain will realize you WILL be screwed in CQC if you miss 1-2 rounds or an entire burst. M4 has similar stats and gives you that margin of error to miss shots, just as how the OP pic explained.

>But wait, the burst rifles can do more damage way quickly if you land all headshots!

Like I mentioned before, it takes a combination of ideal circumstances to land all 3 shots to the dome (which btw is harder to do on the BR-16 thanks to the burst RPM nerf). And let’s not pretend that M4 users aren’t capable of landing multiple headshots in succession either.

>Just use cover and dart in and out! Then you’ll see that it’s not so bad and actually still good!

Umm, isn’t that how EVERY weapon in the game can be used as well? A M4 Fragger or Skyhammer can also dance in and out of cover firing a continuous stream of bullets with near equal effectiveness as a burst rifle, but they also have the luxury of jumping into the fray when the situation calls for it. That alone makes the burst rifles much less competitive than they were, and is a huge dampener on Arty/Kira’s pushing potential to play aggressively.

You already recognize why the Timik isn’t favored over the M4; because the minor rof and DPS advantages doesn’t outweight its benefits. I’m simply making the same case for the burst rifles vs M4; despite the much higher individual bullet damage increase, burst rifles don’t carry them themselves to be a reliable alternative because of

[list]
[]Higher skill needed to use them
[]Less forgiving if you miss a burst
[*]Being restricted to a cover playstyle[/list]

This is not a terribly difficult concept to grasp, even for people like @Grave Knight who have nothing to contribute to the discussion other than snarky remarks and being offended at outdated ethnic pseudonyms.

(gg2ez) #29

I put in some hours with the burst rifles and I actually found myself liking them. I never played them much pre-nerf but I wish I did.

I wouldn’t say they’re better, I’d just say they’re fine.

(Juja) #30

[quote=“Ritobasu;106472”][quote=“Kyskythyn;106096”]Damage after ~1.12s of firing:

BR: 153 (3 bursts)
M4: 154 (11bullets)[/quote]
Thanks for proving my point! They’re nearly the exact same DPS and time-to-kill. So… what’s the reason to use burst rifles again, even though they’re much harder to use?

Burst rifles by virtue are more difficult to use than automatic weapons, I think everyone can agree on that. So why make them even more difficult to use for less overall payoff? Sorry, but increasing the bullet damage in no way makes up for the massive decrease in overall DPS. I’m not looking for protips on how to use the new burst rifles, because anyone with a brain will realize you WILL be screwed in CQC if you miss 1-2 rounds or an entire burst. M4 has similar stats and gives you that margin of error to miss shots, just as how the OP pic explained.

>But wait, the burst rifles can do more damage way quickly if you land all headshots!

Like I mentioned before, it takes a combination of ideal circumstances to land all 3 shots to the dome (which btw is harder to do on the BR-16 thanks to the burst RPM nerf). And let’s not pretend that M4 users aren’t capable of landing multiple headshots in succession either.

>Just use cover and dart in and out! Then you’ll see that it’s not so bad and actually still good!

Umm, isn’t that how EVERY weapon in the game can be used as well? A M4 Fragger or Skyhammer can also dance in and out of cover firing a continuous stream of bullets with near equal effectiveness as a burst rifle, but they also have the luxury of jumping into the fray when the situation calls for it. That alone makes the burst rifles much less competitive than they were, and is a huge dampener on Arty/Kira’s pushing potential to play aggressively.

You already recognize why the Timik isn’t favored over the M4; because the minor rof and DPS advantages doesn’t outweight its benefits. I’m simply making the same case for the burst rifles vs M4; despite the much higher individual bullet damage increase, burst rifles don’t carry them themselves to be a reliable alternative because of

[list]
[]Higher skill needed to use them
[]Less forgiving if you miss a burst
[*]Being restricted to a cover playstyle[/list]

This is not a terribly difficult concept to grasp, even for people like @Grave Knight who have nothing to contribute to the discussion other than snarky remarks and being offended at outdated ethnic pseudonyms.[/quote]

Totaly agree @Ritobasu

You’re arguments are really fine but, im sure any “important person” is reading this, and if they are doing it, they won’t change it because there’s a little number of people who doesn’t like the changes. Im sure if more people read this they will be 100% agree with you and me, i don’t know how SD thought the bursts weapons were bad balanced. I think if they want to fix some “broken weapons” they should count with the opinion or testing of pro players who really know about the gameplay with weapons in the game.

(Szakalot) #31

[quote=“Ritobasu;106472”]
>But wait, the burst rifles can do more damage way quickly if you land all headshots!

Like I mentioned before, it takes a combination of ideal circumstances to land all 3 shots to the dome (which btw is harder to do on the BR-16 thanks to the burst RPM nerf). And let’s not pretend that M4 users aren’t capable of landing multiple headshots in succession either.

>Just use cover and dart in and out! Then you’ll see that it’s not so bad and actually still good!

Umm, isn’t that how EVERY weapon in the game can be used as well? A M4 Fragger or Skyhammer can also dance in and out of cover firing a continuous stream of bullets with near equal effectiveness as a burst rifle, but they also have the luxury of jumping into the fray when the situation calls for it. That alone makes the burst rifles much less competitive than they were, and is a huge dampener on Arty/Kira’s pushing potential to play aggressively.[/quote]

It is indeed true that M4 is effective at all distances. But burstrifles are better in peeking scenarios due to frontloaded damage, just like a sniper rifle; or a shotgun. In the time the burst happens BR16 has higher DPS than M4. If you can peek so that you only expose yourself to fire during your burst, you would do a lot better.

I do agree though that the reward (long-range peek-burst) is not rewarding enough for the huge weakness in close quarters. My preferred buff would be to decrease recoil during the burst, so well-aimed shots are more likely to score the multikills. Or give burst rifles a significant accuracy bonus when not moving

(Grave_Knight) #32

Wait! Where did you get your math!? It seems really off because the Stark can fire 2.5 bursts per second.

It’s .07 seconds delay between each shot. With a .26 second delay between bursts so that’s .4 seconds per burst.
(.07 * 2) + .26

That should be 135 dps, not 122.42 dps.
2.5 (3 * 18)

I did a little more math and found that the 857 RPM doesn’t take the .26 delay per burst into account (makes sense if you actually look how RPM is calculated, it also doesn’t take reloading into account and other things). It only measures how many shots you get off with a .07 second delay between each shot. (The real RPM is like 450 and even that doesn’t take reloading into account.)

I’m gonna apply the same math to the BR.
(1 / (((1 / (800 / 60)) * 2) + .217)) (3 * 17) = 138.964 dps

By the ways it took me a long time to build this equation (I really need to study more math). The delay between each shot for the Stark AR hasn’t changed (makes sense since the RPM hasn’t changed either) but the delay for the BR from .07 seconds to .075 seconds.

And because I like this long equation more I’ll redo the Stark using it.
(1 / (((1 / (857 / 60)) * 2) + .26)) (3 * 18) = 134.992 dps.

Just to be clear the DPS is round to the nearest thousandths.

(Jams by Betty) #33

Are you dense? All the math is covered in the OP.

(Grave_Knight) #34

The math in the OP makes no sense. Where are they getting the delay time and the shoot time? I can tell you where each number in my equation comes from.

(seconds in a second / (((seconds in a second / (rounds per minute / seconds in a minute)) * number of delays between rounds per burst) + delay per burst in seconds)) (number of bursts * damage per round)

To better explain how to formula came to be:
RPM / 60 = Round per second.
1 / RPS = Delay per round.
1 / ((DPR * 2) + Delay per burst in seconds) = Burst Per Second.
3 x Damage Per Round = Damage Per Burst
BPS x DPB = Damage Per Second

The calculation works best if you do all at once instead of trying to do it in stages.

EDIT: I decided to explain each number more. The actual formula is below.

(1 / (((1 / (X / 60)) * 2) + Y)) (3 * Z)
X=Round Per Minute
Y=Delay Per Burst
Z=Damage Per Round

(Jams by Betty) #35

Like you’re a reliable source.

(Grave_Knight) #36

Like you’re a reliable source.[/quote]

Well if you can do better than do it. Or very least show me the flaws in my math.

EDIT: Find it interesting that there are only three posts to your name two of them dedicated to argue against me.

(Jams by Betty) #37

Bullet delays are listed on the wiki.

http://dirtybomb.gamepedia.com/WeaponStats

His math checks out.

(Grave_Knight) #38

[quote=“Jams by Betty;106621”]Bullet delays are listed on the wiki.

http://dirtybomb.gamepedia.com/WeaponStats

His math checks out.[/quote]

The bullet delays weren’t updated. Everything else was. Look again, their numbers are relatively the same as mine (they round to the nearest whole number for the DPS).

EDIT: OH! That’s where he’s getting that number. The delay between bursts already takes the delay between rounds into account. It’s not “(.07 x 3) + .26”. The last bullet in a burst is the end of the burst, you don’t count the delay after the burst because you’ve already shot three bullets there is no need to wait for another bullet. The correct formula would be “(.07 x 2) + .26”.

(torsoreaper) #39

Burst rifle from a mechanics standpoint is much worse at range than the full autos because I can tap fire a full auto but burst is always set on burst.

It might be better if I could swap fire modes but as it stands I don’t play any burst fire guns. I guess I don’t play shotgun either but that’s just because they suck past 10 meters.

(Grave_Knight) #40

Crap. Someone came out with a much simpler formula to show the DPS of each gun.

BR-16: 317/(60/8002+0.217) =139 DPS
Stark AR: 318/(60/8572+0.260) = 135 DPS

3 * X / (60 / Y * 2 + Z) = Damage Per Second
X=Damage Per Round
Y=Rounds Per Minute
Z=Delay Between Bursts

The formula was written by goroyoshi on the DB Subreddit.