Members - Recruits
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About Exavior31

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I agree, certainly, but SU and US NEED something too! Maybe a couple more of those CCPs that everyone totally loves....
  2. Exavior31


    Headshots are fine, people only complain about it when it happens to them but don't mind it when it happens to others. Just like random crits in TF2.
  3. I'm just going to rant a bit about machine gun and 'assault rifle' weapon balance, and how their captured weapon rates effect this. As of current weapons are actually quite well balanced, all the stats on paper would put each factions weapons on the same level as one another. No clear statistical winners. However, as can be seen through captured weapons on the battlefield, some weapons are captured far more than others. This indicates an imbalance, but if its not in the weapon statistics, then where is it? The clearest example of captured weapon imbalance is in that of the MG42 and other machine guns. No other machine gun in the game comes even remotely close to being as captured as the MG42 has been. On paper it seems balanced with its peers: the MG42 offers rate of fire and accuracy but needs frequent reloading, the MT has capacity and accuracy but a slow rate of fire and stability, the m1919 has a good rate of fire and controllability but suffers in accuracy. So why is the MG42 the only one really captured, and why is the MT a rare sight on the battlefield even in the hands of soviets? Weapon Neiches. The MG42 is the only machine gun to do what players really want a machine gun to do. A machine guns role is to gun down foes with a spray of lead, close or far, with the cost of being unwieldy. Thus, Firepower and accuracy are the two necessary hallmarks of a good machine gun. The MT lacks firepower with its slow rate of fire, the m1919 has poor accuracy. The MG42 may chew through its ammo fast, but with its moderate controllability, high rate of fire and excellent accuracy, it is the only machine gun that can 'spray snipe' opponents afar while still being a menace up close. Unlike the competition. The soviets have a 'bullet hose' machine gun in the form of the DT-29, why can't that play the MG42's role? Innacuracy. The BAR or Jhonson? uncontrollability and low rate of fire. The MG42 is literally the only machine gun in the game that fills this true machine gun role to any significant extent, that is why it is captured so much. It doesn't help that both SU and US find themselves lacking real moderate-long ranged firepower, mainly because a machine gun should play that role but their machine guns don't nearly as well as the MG42 does. Assault Rifle type weapons aren't so cut and dry. Generally, each of the assault rifle type guns are significantly different from one another and play a subtlety unique role on the battlfield in comparison to their competition. So it not uncommon to see all three getting captured to varying extents by different factions. The most captured is the STG, as US players with the m1/m2 find themselves once more lacking firepower for longer ranges and SU are desperate for a automatic with range that has more than 15 bullets in the magazine, for gunning down multiple foes at once. The AVS is the second most captured, being a good 1v1 gun but with a limited capacity, while the M1/M2 is the least common capture due to being so similar to SMGs in terms of effective range. In conclusion, the weapon variance between Assault Rifle type weapons is nice. If anything on that front, I might suggest the the m1/m2 get a 20 round magazine but also gets better accuracy and controllability. Making it have good range like the STG and AVS, but making it an imbetween in terms of 1 vs many (STG) and 1 v 1 (AVS). The biggest problem revealed here though is clearly with the machine guns. Its clear that SU and US require their own 'MG42' like machine gun, that has the neccesary mix of rate of fire and accuracy while enough controllability when crouched/bipoded to do real damage at range. I can't really make recommendations for US, but I would try giving the m1919 back the 'lazer beam accuracy' it had pre-nerf, but with a more tame rate of fire. For SU I would move the MT to tier 2 (possibly nerfing as necessary) while moving the DT to tier 3. Increase the DT's accuracy at the cost of reload speed. So: -DT: Middle road ROF, middle of road controllability, higher capacity offset by slowest reload speed, middle of road accuracy. -M1919: Slowest ROF, middle of road controllability, highest accuracy. -MG42: Highest ROF, lowest controllability, middle of road accuracy. But the differences should be not nearly as vast as they are now. Just my two pennies. Feel free to shoot me down.
  4. The only rifle in the game worse than the M1a at killing infantry is the PTRD... and the PTRD is intended for armored vehicles and light tanks. Its needed a buff for ages, but RETO has better things to do, like fully model plane cockpits and redesign the UI for the 1000000000th time.