new burst rifles

(BananaSlug) #1

soo it was buffed in last fine tuning what are your opinions

( i know there is discussion like that but i made a poll)

([GER] eclipsE) #2

it was buffed
Buffed? Just because they added a minimal “forgiveness window to Burst-Fire rifles”?
As a matter of facts they did this to pistols too, are Pistols OP now?

Lets check the buffs for Redeye then: Redeye
[spoiler]• Increased Smoke Grenade radius by ~13%
• Increased Smoke Grenade duration to 12s (from 10s)
• Increased amount of explosive damage it takes to disperse a Smoke Grenade to 225 (from 200)
• Reduced Smoke Grenade cooldown to 25s (from 30s)
• Increased maximum IR Goggle active duration to 13s (from 9s)
• Increased IR Goggle Spotted duration to 4s from 3s
• Increased XP for Spotting players to 20xp (from 10xp)
• Increased XP for a Spotted Assist to 70xp (from 50xp)
• Increased XP for throwing a Smoke Grenade to 30xp (from 15xp)
• Fixed bug where Enemy Health could sometimes be seen through Smoke
• Fixed bug where Smoke would sometimes not cover the screen when standing inside it[/spoiler]

Is Redeye OP now?

There is a reason why nobody voted on here, because this change is obsolete.
It does nothing. I own Arty and Kira (Yeah Skyhammer and some others who can “choose” to have a Burst Rifle, too) and play them regulary and i play only with Dreiss, not because i like the weapon, but because its the best out of one of the worst weapons in game there are.

(Eox) #3

Those feels really good man. It’s like wielding a less powerful shotgun, but without the crippling range issue. I think they’re okay.

(Maverix) #4

It had a much higher DPS before the CW update. So no doubt it was better before. But now I can be more forgiving of nerf that it received.

(Dawnlazy) #5

6 more damage per burst isn’t worth the loss of 26 DPS, -2% diagonal recoil when strafing to the left while eating a potato didn’t make up for the tremendous loss of DPS that the Dreiss had, how could the new burst rifles be OK?

(Amerika) #6

Because there is a difference between theoretical DPS and actual DPS. You had to perfectly click every single time to get max DPS out of the guns before. And if you use your mouse to aim and click fire it can throw off your aim. And the input window was pretty tight so you got your input eaten a lot causing you to mash even more (and some used macros). Also, if you did fire at max DPS the recoil was crazy.

Now you get high damage bursts that are easily controlled with a more consistent feel. They might not be theoretically better but they, to me and definitely a few others, feel much more consistent and usable.

(retief) #7

I didn’t use burst weapons pre containment war. However, I think the current br-16 feels pretty damn good right now. I’m a fan.

(Ritobasu) #8

They’re thankfully not garbage at CQC anymore, but I think the majority of people who used the BR-16 would’ve preferred the older version for sure

(BananaSlug) #9

it was like m4 with 1 more damage and no recoil but with bursts

(Dawnlazy) #10

Because there is a difference between theoretical DPS and actual DPS. You had to perfectly click every single time to get max DPS out of the guns before. And if you use your mouse to aim while using it to fire as well can be problematic. And the input window was pretty tight so you got your input eaten a lot causing you to mash even more. Also, if you did fire at max DPS the recoil was crazy.

Now you get high damage bursts that are easily controlled with a more consistent feel. They might not be theoretically better but they, to me and definitely a few others, feel much more consistent and usable.[/quote]

That’s why people used mousewheels and the like, it’s not because of “exploits” as some said, there was just a bug with semiauto weapons like pistols not always firing at top speed. Also the reduced RPM of the burst for the BR was just annoying, makes no sense since they said they wanted to differ these weapons from traditional ones that require more tracking. This is the unwarranted Dreiss nerf all over again, weapons that are harder to use should reward the user more, the super high DPS was doing that. Just look at the Dreiss like I said, went from being the weapon of choice for many Arty and Kira players to being a joke weapon only brought to pubs for laughs. I’m not saying they are unusable, because they’re not, but if BR-16 Fraggers and Skyhammers were a rare sight before, now they will be nigh impossible to find compared to the M4, and you bet the same would happen for Arty or Kira if they could use the M4 as well.

(Amerika) #11

I just don’t agree with that at all. You see…this is just like the Dreiss “nerf”. People went crazy about the RoF nerf on the Dreiss. But anybody who actually used the Dreiss extensively, and I did, knew that you simply couldn’t fire the Dreiss at max and hope to hit a damn thing with it. The only time it could be used was if somebody was literally in your face. The change made it so that people could fire it at near max RPM and have the gun be more consistent for them. They made it easier for people to use it as opposed to it being nerfed.

That’s pretty much what has happened with the BR16 and the Stark. They traded in a max theoretical DPS that couldn’t be achieved realistically while having any kind of control and made the guns fire in a way that is more manageable. While at the same time removing temptation for some players to macro fire it and use an anti-recoil script.

I have been playing Stoker almost exclusively for a few weeks now and I have almost exclusively played him with the Stark over the M4 after the first few days. Not because I want to play something different. I just feel it’s better in a lot of situations I find myself in now that the gun has some power and control to it. I’m thinking about switching to BR16 Skyhammer for a while too and see how that goes. I’m that impressed with the new burst rifle mechanics.

You really shouldn’t look at numbers as much as you do actual performance and how mechanics work in game. Sometimes a nerf isn’t much of a nerf. It’s like the people who went nuts over a few of the SMG first bullet accuracy nerfs. A 10% change to something that is already extremely accurate and only changing that first bullet or first three (and none of the rest), barely changes the gun. It was a paper nerf to get people to try other guns more than it was a true nerf. It did work out. More people use more of the SMG’s now. However, people need to think about these things before they get too upset in my opinion.

(Gung-ho) #12

The old high ROF BR-16 was carnage - I can understand why they had to nerf it. It’s not an enjoyable weapon like before but it does seem balanced now. It can incite some rage being able to one shot lights (triple head shot from a single burst)

On a plus side Fragger can use it now without being heavily constrained by ammo availability (the fast shooting BR-16 was too ammo thirsty for it to be effective on Fragger unless you could depend on your team mates for ammo).

(Ritobasu) #13

Really want that 857RPM for bursts on BR-16 back. I’d be willing to sacrifice damage and reduce the burst delay slightly to reduce the amount of tracking needed. As it is now, if you attempt to hit the maximum rate of fire possible, the spread gets noticeably terrible beyond close range and headshotting becomes nigh impossible. I’d like to believe the higher DPS will be balanced by this

I’d also push the burst fire RPM of the Stark up to 900 and also lower the damage to compensate. Make this gun much more accurate and easier to control than the BR-16, higher damage per burst, still having relatively good accuracy while magdumping. The only limiting factor should be its high burst delay and the shitty iron sights

If SD want to reduce tracking, burst fire RPM shouldn’t have been lowered at all but increased. If they want a true “point-and-click” weapon, look at the AN-94 from Battlefield 3. Two round bursts at 1200 RPM, it was almost like using a DMR rifle (akin to the Grandeur and PDP) but with AR stats. Extremely difficult to achieve its true 1200 RPM, and you’d have a hell of a time actually hitting things accurately past close range.

(Dawnlazy) #14

It didn’t make the gun better at all, the maximum spread is still ridiculously high, the reason why it feels like it spreads less at first is because of the reduced RoF, you could simply shoot it at this speed and have the same performance. And it’s still really bad when hipfired for more than a few shots, it was always an ADS specialized gun. The nerf was most certainly not small, 60 RPM is huge, and I haven’t seen anyone take it to high level play afterward, and even in pubs the majority of Arty and Kira players used the BR-16 while Redeyes prefer the PDP. Such a drastic reduction absolutely killed the gun for most of its long time users.

[quote=“Ritobasu;110012”]Really want that 857RPM for bursts on BR-16 back.

If SD want to reduce tracking, burst fire RPM shouldn’t have been lowered at all but increased.[/quote]

Agreed, for the first time I’m actually liking the Stark more than the BR since it retained higher RPM on the burst. I really want the BR-16 to go back to exactly the way it was, but the Stark can stay more or less like this and be further tweaked with time to consolidate itself as a different weapon.

(Amerika) #15

It didn’t make the gun better at all, the maximum spread is still ridiculously high, the reason why it feels like it spreads less at first is because of the reduced RoF, you could simply shoot it at this speed and have the same performance. And it’s still really bad when hipfired for more than a few shots, it was always an ADS specialized gun. The nerf was most certainly not small, 60 RPM is huge, and I haven’t seen anyone take it to high level play afterward, and even in pubs the majority of Arty and Kira players used the BR-16 while Redeyes prefer the PDP. Such a drastic reduction absolutely killed the gun for most of its long time users.

[quote=“Ritobasu;110012”]Really want that 857RPM for bursts on BR-16 back.

If SD want to reduce tracking, burst fire RPM shouldn’t have been lowered at all but increased.[/quote]

Agreed, for the first time I’m actually liking the Stark more than the BR since it retained higher RPM on the burst. I really want the BR-16 to go back to exactly the way it was, but the Stark can stay more or less like this and be further tweaked with time to consolidate itself as a different weapon.[/quote]

Yes, the nerf was small. As I said, you couldn’t fire it at max RoF and hoped to hit anything. The only time that helped was if somebody was literally in your face and you clicked as fast as possible. There is a huge different between theoretical DPS and practical. This is one of those cases.

(Dawnlazy) #16

How is 60 RPM small? Plus the weapon was clearly meant for heavy ADS use. Just ask anyone who dropped the weapon after that patch, you’d aim down sights and fire at top speed constantly since the only thing it had going on for it was high DPS. Do you really not think there is a real reason why so many people switched to the BR-16 shortly after the patch?

(Amerika) #17

How is 60 RPM small? Plus the weapon was clearly meant for heavy ADS use. Just ask anyone who dropped the weapon after that patch, you’d aim down sights and fire at top speed constantly since the only thing it had going on for it was high DPS. Do you really not think there is a real reason why so many people switched to the BR-16 shortly after the patch?[/quote]

If you did that you didn’t hit anything. It’s that simple. You didn’t fire at max RoF unless you wanted to miss a lot. You keep looking at the numbers and not at the reality of how the game works.

(Dawnlazy) #18

How is 60 RPM small? Plus the weapon was clearly meant for heavy ADS use. Just ask anyone who dropped the weapon after that patch, you’d aim down sights and fire at top speed constantly since the only thing it had going on for it was high DPS. Do you really not think there is a real reason why so many people switched to the BR-16 shortly after the patch?[/quote]

If you did that you didn’t hit anything. It’s that simple. You didn’t fire at max RoF unless you wanted to miss a lot. You keep looking at the numbers and not at the reality of how the game works.[/quote]

No I mean you aim down sights and then fire at top speed.

(HoopleDoople) #19

I think the devs finally found the sweet spot with the burst fire rifles. Pre-nerf the burst fire weapons were a bit annoying to use and, if used to their full potential, OP. Pre-bugfix the burst fire weapons were fun to use but a little ineffective. Now the burst fire weapons are fun, balanced, but still extremely powerful in the hands of a player who can aim well.

I like the BR-16 so much its supplanted the M4 as my assault rifle of choice. Fortunately I had a silver Fragger B52 loadout gathering dust. As annoyed as I was when I traded up for it, I’m now dominating matches with it in ways I never could with the M4.

(GottaBeGreg) #20

I liked the CW updates original, more risk reward than spam based version, and I do not like how they feel now at all. Simply a personal feeling, not going to ground it in fact because its merely a preference, but I liked that you had to be patient with the gun instead of being a trigger happy gun monkey. Reminded me of the ORIGINAL (Original meaning before their change into spam weapons) burst rifles from way back, when they were actually difficult to use but super rewarding. Those were the days…