what do you think of the new burst rifles?

(Amerika) #41

Jesus, 100 FoV in Dirty Bomb is like 140 FoV in a game like Q3. That’s some serious fisheye view you got going on there. Do you just prefer the feeling of speed at that FoV or ? I personally play at 74 because it’s closer to what I played with in Q3 and it makes shooting people easy at the cost of making the game feel a tad slower.

(watsyurdeal) #42

Honestly the BR 16 isn’t so bad, it maybe could use a slight tweak to accuracy so each burst is consistent and well grouped together.

I’m totally behind this.

I just want my Stark AR back. [/quote]

Seconded, absolutely, same damage as before with maybe an ever so slightly rate of fire, so people can’t abuse the mouse wheel so easily.

(avidCow) #43

Jesus, 100 FoV in Dirty Bomb is like 140 FoV in a game like Q3. That’s some serious fisheye view you got going on there. Do you just prefer the feeling of speed at that FoV or ? I personally play at 74 because it’s closer to what I played with in Q3 and it makes shooting people easy at the cost of making the game feel a tad slower.[/quote]

It doesn’t feel like 140 in Q3 at all. Perhaps that’s due to my usable screen size being (1280x960) cropped on a 20" screen.

I can’t aim properly with a smaller fov, it just feels weird. And yes, I like the sensation of speed.

http://i.imgur.com/dwB8Uj5.gif

Maybe I should make a FOV toggle for long range.

(GiantGiant) #44

I aalso use 100 FOV, and don’t have problems shooting long range

(Arkii) #45

I find the BR is still workable but the Stark not so much, get caught up close and your in for alot of pain esp if its an auto user.

I don’t really see the motivation for these changes, the bursts didn’t really seem out of wack to me. (Granted I mainly play as Kira so I could be blinded with a dash of bias).

(bizarreRectangle) #46

I don’t know how you guys use burst rifles. I disliked burst rifle users simply cause they seemed like fully automatic yet it’s more accurate and has more dps. I’m not saying they were op but something wasn’t right.

Now, they’re a lot less spammy. Just cause they reward good aim doesn’t mean they are restricted to long range, I don’t know why people go by that assumption. New stark is a bit clunky and slow, but it hits like a fucking milk truck. Br 16, is a little faster and a little less dmg. I tried them out and I had a blast with both of those guns. It takes a little getting used to that’s for sure.

Only reason you would say the gun is bad is if you try to spam that thing.

(UcheeMadaa) #47

I’m gutted about the adjustment, my squad would nearly always consisted of Fragger (Br-16) and kira/Arty (Stark). In my opinion the guns are both next to useless against most other weapons in terms of overall performance. I find that their scope of usefulness has been restricted to a very specific distance between yourself and the enemy.
Without sounding too whiney, they have ruined my favourite charecters in the game.

(FalC_16) #48

I used to love BR-16 on my Arty or Fragger. I can see now that I consciously select different mercs to play, because of the recent update. I am really disappointed to be honest. Maybe its just a matter of getting used to it, but it feels like they added some new guns to the game that sound differently and the good old BR-16 was removed.

I think the mid-range to long range engagements were fitting to these guns. They never felt to be OP in comparison to Timik or M4 for the long range action. Close range was very difficult even before the “update”. That is why I do not understand why this update took place.

(Sir_Slam) #49

It was a change that I didnt feel was needed at all, excluding the mousewheel thing, and if that was what the patch was for…nuking a fly on the wall much?

I was ok with them. Im still “ok” with them. But honestly, why even bother now when the M4 just outshines everything? Skyhammer supposedly has the best air support and the best rifle, and a decent chunk of health. Wtf is Kira for right now beside from blocking C4 access, which honestly is “meh” at best. With Stoker being put out, shes kind of in a weird place. Oh, you can destroy generators with the orbital strike sometimes? … woo.

Arty is kind of in the same boat, but at least you can be a sneaky b-stard with those strikes, and he comes with the ammo packs instead of the station.

(watsyurdeal) #50

Honestly the BR 16 isn’t too bad but the Stark feels terrible by comparison. I feel like if it were dealing less damage but had a shorter delay it’d be pretty strong.

(tome_weng) #51

[quote=“bizarreRectangle;103301”]I don’t know how you guys use burst rifles. I disliked burst rifle users simply cause they seemed like fully automatic yet it’s more accurate and has more dps. I’m not saying they were op but something wasn’t right.

Now, they’re a lot less spammy. Just cause they reward good aim doesn’t mean they are restricted to long range, I don’t know why people go by that assumption. New stark is a bit clunky and slow, but it hits like a fucking milk truck. Br 16, is a little faster and a little less dmg. I tried them out and I had a blast with both of those guns. It takes a little getting used to that’s for sure.

Only reason you would say the gun is bad is if you try to spam that thing.

[/quote]

I’m fine with (at least one of them) supposedly rewarding good aim, but I think it’s very important to give arty and kira, for the sake of their viability, who have no other options, a weapon that at least mimics an automatic weapon. Automatic weapons will objectively always be better, I don’t think anyone can really dispute that. In this case I don’t think the spammyness of the weapon is necessarily a bad thing.

If we are going to say they reward good aim do they enough? With the BR You get 6 extra damage per burst and three extra bullets. That means at point blank range you can one shot a 100 hp merc or two shot a rhino, if all three shots land on the head. Any amount of damage fall off , one shot missing or one shot hitting the body will take away that one shot kill. That’s pretty much it. Obviously mercs with lower health will die to one or two bursts more often but given this game has passive health regeneration and lots of medics about this isn’t a massive benefit either.

As for the Stark it has its rate of fire almost cut in half for an extra 3 damage per burst compared to the new BR (which doesn’t open any new full-health killing options) and a higher burst rate of fire, which doesn’t change its dps.

If a player with perfect aim would be able to do significantly better with the original burst rifle compared to the new one then that is not rewarding good aim as far as I am concerned.

(avidCow) #52

You can’t jump and shoot with the stark much, if at all. It immediately goes full bloom and is rendered useless and it takes about a second to revert to full accuracy. Just another thorn in your side when others are bunny hopping around and spraying you down with SMG and assault rifles.

I’ve had more luck watching narrow channels and plinking approaching enemies as they move towards you. Any situation where you have to track a target sideways at long range is terrible for this weapon. You need to be extremely precise (just try it with the spasmodic ADS recoil) to hit with a full burst because of the spray and recoil, and then hope you’ve got enough time to get another burst out before the target ducks into cover. You might only deal 18 dmg, or a perfect shot might deal 108 (minus falloff dmg) which makes the overall feel very flaky and unreliable.

(Maverix) #53

So i’m curious as to why some people are wanting the BR-16 to remain unchanged, and the stark to have it’s CQB attributes returned. Normally you would want a gun with a scope (the stark) to be used mainly for long distance engagements, while a gun with iron sights (the br-16) would be used for CQB.

(Dawnlazy) #54

I want BR-16 back to exactly where it was before, it was perfect. The Stark could have its damage further increased to like 20 per bullet.

(avidCow) #55

I know, right, but the scope on the stark is generally dreadful and visually highly obstructive. The way it bounces rapidly is confusing and an eyesore. If it is supposed to be for long range it would benefit from higher magnification, a larger aperture relative to screen size, and less visual ‘noise’ when shooting.

(Gh0st1e) #56

The BRs were never complained about and this was a completely unnecessary nerf. They are still (mostly) usable but are not nearly as rewarding as they should be.

A lot of people are comparing this to the dreiss nerf but to me this is more like the melee movement nerf that got implemented a while back. The devs are punishing everyone in order to punish a few exploiters. Treat the source not the symptoms devs.

(tome_weng) #57

I’d be equally happy if the new Br stats were moved onto the stark and then the Br changed back, it just seems easier to change only one.

This would also let skyhammers and fraggers keep one of the new supposed long range assault rifles. Since originally the stark was slightly weaker than the Br and meant for more long range shooting this would also give them a little nerf in close quarters to better fit the vision some people seem to have of them being for medium to long range.

As for the scope from what i’ve seen most people find it little better to use than iron sights at range if not worse.

(Grave_Knight) #58

…so I bought Kira (I try to buy at least one merc in Rotation, she was the only one I didn’t already have) and played around with the BR-16. Yeah, it’s definitely less spammy but other than that doesn’t really seem that much different than before. So I’m not sure what people are complaining about.

(Lord) #59

I think the new BRs sucks. Maybe the BR-16 still great because the changes are less important than the STARK AR… This STARK is not good… Nexon, did you tried it before patched it ? 'Cause seriously the damage are not incredible, but the firing rate is completely ugly, in 1vs1 you always lose the duel. It’s not comprehensive ! I love the design of the STARK, I used it during 2 entire days and I can now say that she is the worst weapon in the game, pistols are still better to use than the STARK. Please ad a great mechanic on these BR :slight_smile:

(FalC_16) #60

the thing is that this game is all about hip fire. There is very small or no impact on accuracy when hip-firing. Again just my feeling. The old BR-16 on hip-fire worked so well even in long range combat…At least for me. Increasing the time between bursts was not a right way to balance her strength imho. Maybe accuracy spread for long range combat when hip firing?