363 réponses à ce sujet

[ToaOrka]

whateverman7 wrote...

ToaOrka wrote...

I reload cancel because it's easy and more efficient that just reloading, IE, better. If you see no point to doing better and making your gun perform better, than you obviously have no place in discussions concerning whether or not one gun can perform better than the other, since you aren't using your own guns to the best of their abilities.

Because Marksman gives percentage-bonuses to ROF and accuracy, it doesn't matter if you put these guns on something else.

If it makes you feel any wronger, here's the flat sustained (IE no reload canceling or equipment) DPS of both guns:

Phaeston: 411.3
Tempest: 477.8

What do you know, the Tempest is still better than the Phaeston.

Here, I even made an image so you can comprehend it with less effort:



Protip: Red means it's less than the other weapon, green means it's better than the other weapon.

got a break in work, i'll respond now like i said i would:

1. i do pretty well without reload cancel...like i said: i know how, just dont do it...see no point...why do it? to score a few more points?..i dont care about that

2. it does matter if you use them on another character that doesnt help accuracy/recoil/rate of fire....

3. wronger isnt a word....cute graph....like i told the other cat, i'll compare the 2 later and respond with results....till then, you can post all teh numbers you want, but what i've done in the game says the phaeston is better

on another note: i dont consider our discussion derailing the thread...the purpose of the thread is to talk about how the non harrier ARs are weak, whether that's compared to the harrier or any other weapon...that's what we're talking about, minus the lil jabs...i apologize for those and will keep it strictly about the weapons from now on

If you insist that this isn't derailing the thread, I'll continue:

1. So you don't care about making your team more likely to succeede by increasing how effective you are? This was already blatantly obvious due to the fact that even when presented with math that clearly states the Tempest is better than the Phaeston, you still insist that the opposite is true.

2. Uh, no. Considering how both in flat, sustained DPS and reload-canceled DPS with Marksman the Tempest's DPS was higher, it doesn't matter - the Phaeston's DPS will always be lower than the Tempest's unless you don't give them both the same mods. So yeah, if you give the Tempest nothing and buff the Phaeston in every way possible, the Phaeston can be better.

3. (Definition of Wronger, but yes, not perfect grammar I condede) If math cannot convince you, than nothing will. If you're getting better results with the Phaeston than the Tempest, that's good for you and you should continue to use the Phaeston, but it also does mean you're using the Tempest incorrectly.

Modifié par ToaOrka, 26 novembre 2012 - 12:10 .

[Liefglinde]

Atheosis wrote...

The truth is that the Harrier needs a bit of a nerf and many AR's need significant buffs.  Buffing all AR's to Harrier level is a terrible idea, as is nerf-murdering the Harrier down to the level of most AR's.  

Personally I would love to see the Harrier's RoF dropped from 550 to 500, its magazine reduced from 20 to 16, and its spare ammo increased from [80-100] to [96-120].  Then it would really just be a full auto Mattock, and much more balanced by extension.

Meanwhile the Phaeston, Revenant, Collector Rifle, Argus, Falcon, Striker, and Valkyrie all need 15-20% damage buffs.  The Typhoon needs a 10% damage buff as well.

I agree with your proposed Harrier changes. While I'm not sure it needs the mag size reduction, it definitely wouldn't kill the gun.

[Eriseley]

I could swear the Phaeston was more accurate than the Tempest, or more accurate while firing anyway, but it's been forever since I used either anyway.

[TheCandlejack]

ToaOrka wrote...

whateverman7 wrote...

ToaOrka wrote...

I reload cancel because it's easy and more efficient that just reloading, IE, better. If you see no point to doing better and making your gun perform better, than you obviously have no place in discussions concerning whether or not one gun can perform better than the other, since you aren't using your own guns to the best of their abilities.

Because Marksman gives percentage-bonuses to ROF and accuracy, it doesn't matter if you put these guns on something else.

If it makes you feel any wronger, here's the flat sustained (IE no reload canceling or equipment) DPS of both guns:

Phaeston: 411.3
Tempest: 477.8

What do you know, the Tempest is still better than the Phaeston.

Here, I even made an image so you can comprehend it with less effort:



Protip: Red means it's less than the other weapon, green means it's better than the other weapon.

got a break in work, i'll respond now like i said i would:

1. i do pretty well without reload cancel...like i said: i know how, just dont do it...see no point...why do it? to score a few more points?..i dont care about that

2. it does matter if you use them on another character that doesnt help accuracy/recoil/rate of fire....

3. wronger isnt a word....cute graph....like i told the other cat, i'll compare the 2 later and respond with results....till then, you can post all teh numbers you want, but what i've done in the game says the phaeston is better

on another note: i dont consider our discussion derailing the thread...the purpose of the thread is to talk about how the non harrier ARs are weak, whether that's compared to the harrier or any other weapon...that's what we're talking about, minus the lil jabs...i apologize for those and will keep it strictly about the weapons from now on

If you insist that this isn't derailing the thread, I'll continue:

1. So you don't care about making your team more likely to succeede by increasing how effective you are? This was already blatantly obvious due to the fact that even when presented with math that clearly states the Tempest is better than the Phaeston, you still insist that the opposite is true.

2. Uh, no. Considering how both in flat, sustained DPS and reload-canceled DPS with Marksman the Tempest's DPS was higher, it doesn't matter - the Phaeston's DPS will always be lower than the Tempest's unless you don't give them both the same mods. So yeah, if you give the Tempest nothing and buff the Phaeston in every way possible, the Phaeston can be better.

3. (Definition of Wronger, but yes, not perfect grammar I condede) If math cannot convince you, than nothing will. If you're getting better results with the Phaeston than the Tempest, that's good for you and you should continue to use the Phaeston, but it also does mean you're using the Tempest incorrectly.

Wronger is a word -.- It's Middle English, and I love how he doesn't care that even though the graph EXPLICITLY STATES the Tempest outperforms the Phaeston, he still goes by what the game says. Makes a whole lot of sense.

[ToaOrka]

TheCandlejack wrote...

ToaOrka wrote...

whateverman7 wrote...

ToaOrka wrote...

I reload cancel because it's easy and more efficient that just reloading, IE, better. If you see no point to doing better and making your gun perform better, than you obviously have no place in discussions concerning whether or not one gun can perform better than the other, since you aren't using your own guns to the best of their abilities.

Because Marksman gives percentage-bonuses to ROF and accuracy, it doesn't matter if you put these guns on something else.

If it makes you feel any wronger, here's the flat sustained (IE no reload canceling or equipment) DPS of both guns:

Phaeston: 411.3
Tempest: 477.8

What do you know, the Tempest is still better than the Phaeston.

Here, I even made an image so you can comprehend it with less effort:



Protip: Red means it's less than the other weapon, green means it's better than the other weapon.

got a break in work, i'll respond now like i said i would:

1. i do pretty well without reload cancel...like i said: i know how, just dont do it...see no point...why do it? to score a few more points?..i dont care about that

2. it does matter if you use them on another character that doesnt help accuracy/recoil/rate of fire....

3. wronger isnt a word....cute graph....like i told the other cat, i'll compare the 2 later and respond with results....till then, you can post all teh numbers you want, but what i've done in the game says the phaeston is better

on another note: i dont consider our discussion derailing the thread...the purpose of the thread is to talk about how the non harrier ARs are weak, whether that's compared to the harrier or any other weapon...that's what we're talking about, minus the lil jabs...i apologize for those and will keep it strictly about the weapons from now on

If you insist that this isn't derailing the thread, I'll continue:

1. So you don't care about making your team more likely to succeede by increasing how effective you are? This was already blatantly obvious due to the fact that even when presented with math that clearly states the Tempest is better than the Phaeston, you still insist that the opposite is true.

2. Uh, no. Considering how both in flat, sustained DPS and reload-canceled DPS with Marksman the Tempest's DPS was higher, it doesn't matter - the Phaeston's DPS will always be lower than the Tempest's unless you don't give them both the same mods. So yeah, if you give the Tempest nothing and buff the Phaeston in every way possible, the Phaeston can be better.

3. (Definition of Wronger, but yes, not perfect grammar I condede) If math cannot convince you, than nothing will. If you're getting better results with the Phaeston than the Tempest, that's good for you and you should continue to use the Phaeston, but it also does mean you're using the Tempest incorrectly.

Wronger is a word -.- It's Middle English, and I love how he doesn't care that even though the graph EXPLICITLY STATES the Tempest outperforms the Phaeston, he still goes by what the game says. Makes a whole lot of sense.

What do you expect? People that ignore math and basic logic are bound to be illogical.

[Kenadian]

I'd take some of the stats in the manifest thing with a grain of salt. For example, it states the Wraith is more accurate than the Claymore. But I did some comparing, there's almost no discernible difference in accuracy between the two.

[Elecbender]

Kenadian wrote...

I'd take some of the stats in the manifest thing with a grain of salt. For example, it states the Wraith is more accurate than the Claymore. But I did some comparing, there's almost no discernible difference in accuracy between the two.

Based on the pellet pattern (no smart choke or external accuracy boosts), the Wraith is more accurate.

[Eriseley]

Yeah jumped in game, the Phaeston has less reticle bloom when moving or shooting, and the lesser recoil is noticeable. I didn't check to see how each function when iron sighting and when firing from cover, but point is those tables don't cover everything, unless you're just shooting Atlas all day.

[Kenadian]

Elecbender wrote...

Kenadian wrote...

I'd take some of the stats in the manifest thing with a grain of salt. For example, it states the Wraith is more accurate than the Claymore. But I did some comparing, there's almost no discernible difference in accuracy between the two.

Based on the pellet pattern (no smart choke or external accuracy boosts), the Wraith is more accurate.

Bah, the pictures don't work anymore. Suffice to say, I couldn't see any particular difference between the Claymore and the Wraith, using both a choke and without a choke on a Kroguard and a GI.

Modifié par Kenadian, 26 novembre 2012 - 12:51 .

[BalisticCarnage]

 I use other assault rifles just as much as the harrier and I have harrier X. The typhoon and particle rifle are just better on certain classes. The particle rifle on the turian ghost is miles ahead of the harrier. The typhoon on the turian sodier is far more viable than the harrier. The other assault rifles only get used as novelties. Why do you want to make the harrier into a novelty? 

[ToaOrka]

Kenadian wrote...

I'd take some of the stats in the manifest thing with a grain of salt. For example, it states the Wraith is more accurate than the Claymore. But I did some comparing, there's almost no discernible difference in accuracy between the two.

Discernible? Debatably.
In the game's files/coding? Almost certainly.

[ZLurps]

Ares Caesar wrote...

Me1mN0t wrote...

ARs need tweaking. Don't deny it.

Most ARs should be heavier (to discourage power users, and/or give AR specializing kits more buffs, like Turian's passives) and more powerful. The difference between a Phaeston and a Harrier shouldn't be so drastic. Ammo supply isn't an issue when theres a usually a box nearby and we have unused thermal-clip packs piling up.

When I start seeing power classes toting Harrier I's (or sometimes lobbies full of Harriers) on a consistent basis, something is amiss. People are using them as crutches on gold/plat... just like they did Cloak, Piranha, etc...

I don't know. Theres just so many "good" ARs that may seem good on Silver, but when you take them to Gold they become tediously slow to kill efficiently. Compare them to the murdertrain Harrier... no wonder gold+ pugs are infested with them.

The reason for that is the low damage per bullet AND the increase of armored targets per wave in Gold/Platinum vs Bronze/Silver.

The Harrier breaks the 100 damage mark per bullet, which is key in keeping a gun effective vs armor. Most of the assault rifles are ~50-75 damage per bullet, which is simply unacceptable vs armored targets because of the damage reduction Gold/Plat. provide with armor. Its also full auto which makes "theoretical DPS" truer to realistic DPS than a semi auto or burst fire weapon which loses a lot of its theoretical DPS when transferred to real gameplay situations.

The massive increase in Atlases, Geth Primes, Dragoons, Scions, Brutes, Banshees and DECREASE in basic infantry units with only barrier/shields+health+headboxes = massive effeciency decrease in the majority of SMGs and AR's.

Its the huge design flaw in both the wave budgets/spawns and the armor damage reduction of Gold/Platinum.

The Harrier is good sure, but the majority of fully automatic weapons are crap/poorly designed for higher difficulties.

Ultimately the original poster makes a valid argument in that these subpar weapons need to be brought up to Gold/Platinum worthy status (Instead of nerfing one of the better designed guns in the game).

QFT

[whateverman7]

ToaOrka wrote...

If you insist that this isn't derailing the thread, I'll continue:

1. So you don't care about making your team more likely to succeede by increasing how effective you are? This was already blatantly obvious due to the fact that even when presented with math that clearly states the Tempest is better than the Phaeston, you still insist that the opposite is true.

2. Uh, no. Considering how both in flat, sustained DPS and reload-canceled DPS with Marksman the Tempest's DPS was higher, it doesn't matter - the Phaeston's DPS will always be lower than the Tempest's unless you don't give them both the same mods. So yeah, if you give the Tempest nothing and buff the Phaeston in every way possible, the Phaeston can be better.

3. (Definition of Wronger, but yes, not perfect grammar I condede) If math cannot convince you, than nothing will. If you're getting better results with the Phaeston than the Tempest, that's good for you and you should continue to use the Phaeston, but it also does mean you're using the Tempest incorrectly.

1. keeping it about the weapons, so no comment.

2. naw, not mixing and matching mods...i'm going off using the same mods on both, and what they do in the game...in the game, bars come off faster with the phaeston

3. keeping it about the weapons, so no comment

[whateverman7]

TheCandlejack wrote...

Wronger is a word -.- It's Middle English, and I love how he doesn't care that even though the graph EXPLICITLY STATES the Tempest outperforms the Phaeston, he still goes by what the game says. Makes a whole lot of sense.

just to clarify: when i say i go by the game, i'm not talking about what the game says...i'm talking about what the weapons do in the game....

[Computron2000]

whateverman7 wrote...
yea, you're right, since i choose not to reload cancel, i have no idea what i'm talking about ...so i'll stop and concede since you're the pro

Eh reload cancelling can be done with movement. Thats what i use, storm speed. If you know how to do it, there is basically no real choice. You have to deliberately not run as soon as you are able to not reload cancel

[whateverman7]

Computron2000 wrote...

Eh reload cancelling can be done with movement. Thats what i use, storm speed. If you know how to do it, there is basically no real choice. You have to deliberately not run as soon as you are able to not reload cancel

i know this...does relaod cancel happen when i play? yes...do i purposely do it? no...

edit: to keep thread on track, the reason reload cancel came up is because it was used as a reason why a gun was better than another...and i dont think it should be used in the comparison

Modifié par whateverman7, 26 novembre 2012 - 02:23 .

[TheCandlejack]

whateverman7 wrote...

TheCandlejack wrote...

Wronger is a word -.- It's Middle English, and I love how he doesn't care that even though the graph EXPLICITLY STATES the Tempest outperforms the Phaeston, he still goes by what the game says. Makes a whole lot of sense.

just to clarify: when i say i go by the game, i'm not talking about what the game says...i'm talking about what the weapons do in the game....

WHEN THE CHART STATES THAT THE TEMPEST OUTPERFORMS THE PHAESTON, IT OUTPERFORMS THE DAMN PHAESTON! DOES THAT MAKE SENSE FOR YOU??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Or is simple math too hard for you?

Modifié par TheCandlejack, 26 novembre 2012 - 02:28 .

[Ares Caesar]

Liefglinde wrote...

Atheosis wrote...

The truth is that the Harrier needs a bit of a nerf and many AR's need significant buffs.  Buffing all AR's to Harrier level is a terrible idea, as is nerf-murdering the Harrier down to the level of most AR's.  

Personally I would love to see the Harrier's RoF dropped from 550 to 500, its magazine reduced from 20 to 16, and its spare ammo increased from [80-100] to [96-120].  Then it would really just be a full auto Mattock, and much more balanced by extension.

Meanwhile the Phaeston, Revenant, Collector Rifle, Argus, Falcon, Striker, and Valkyrie all need 15-20% damage buffs.  The Typhoon needs a 10% damage buff as well.

I agree with your proposed Harrier changes. While I'm not sure it needs the mag size reduction, it definitely wouldn't kill the gun.

If there was a Harrier nerf, that is probably the best suggestion I've seen so far, as its mostly a DPS nerf, instead of the more common flat damage nerfs. The fact that you'd also increase the base ammo capacity is another part of the "balance" I find to be very acceptable in union with the RoF+mag decrease.

I still think its fine as is, given that its weakness (ammo capacity) becomes much more pronounced on Gold and Platinum where the health totals increase, and the basic enemies with headboxes decrease while highly armored(high health total) boss units increase dramatically. On those difficulties the limited ammo capacity becomes a clear handicap that isnt quite as obvious on Bronze/Silver.

I believe it just gets used so often because its barely light enough to not destroy cooldowns on power based builds, and for weapon based builds it can be pumped with enough passives+powers(ammo and abilities) that its strong there as well. Its also one of the most satisfying assault rifles in the game, because it has an awesome gun sound, it hits hard like you'd expect an assault rifle to, its accurate enough for ranged combat, but with full auto it can be used for CQB as well.

I dont think the Harrier is so much a "crutch" weapon as it is simply a middleground between many of the other great weapons in the game. Plenty of the best weapons have something better to offer than the Harrier, they just have a more glaring weakness, while the Harrier is sort of a "jack of all trades(@s$ kicking)" gun.

Modifié par Ares Caesar, 26 novembre 2012 - 02:38 .

[whateverman7]

TheCandlejack wrote...

WHEN THE CHART STATES THAT THE TEMPEST OUTPERFORMS THE PHAESTON, IT OUTPERFORMS THE DAMN PHAESTON! DOES THAT MAKE SENSE FOR YOU??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Or is simple math too hard for you?

why are you getting so emotional?...no need for that...now to answer your question and keep it thread related: 

that chart is nice, but i dont play the game by a chart....that's my whole point...yall are going off spreadhseet info, i'm going off what happens in the game.... by that chart, it says the tempest is more accurate, yet a poster above just said he jumped in the game and the phaeston is more accurate...does that mean he's wrong? should we only go by charts and not what we experience in the game?....like i told the other cats, i'm going to compare the 2 tonight and i'll tell what happens....when i'm done, if i'm incorrect, i have no problem saying so....

[Computron2000]

Anyone realised that some of the newest maps have good grenade regeneration but lousy ammo (eg hazard dagger). Anyone thought that it wasn't a bug? If the devs wanted people to feel the impact of less spare ammo, they don't need to nerf the harrier at all.

Some of the peeps here really don't think outside the box

[TheCandlejack]

whateverman7 wrote...

TheCandlejack wrote...

WHEN THE CHART STATES THAT THE TEMPEST OUTPERFORMS THE PHAESTON, IT OUTPERFORMS THE DAMN PHAESTON! DOES THAT MAKE SENSE FOR YOU??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Or is simple math too hard for you?

why are you getting so emotional?...no need for that...now to answer your question and keep it thread related: 

that chart is nice, but i dont play the game by a chart....that's my whole point...yall are going off spreadhseet info, i'm going off what happens in the game.... by that chart, it says the tempest is more accurate, yet a poster above just said he jumped in the game and the phaeston is more accurate...does that mean he's wrong? should we only go by charts and not what we experience in the game?....like i told the other cats, i'm going to compare the 2 tonight and i'll tell what happens....when i'm done, if i'm incorrect, i have no problem saying so....

There was no emotion in that, it was me posting big to catch your attention  and I can say that the Tempest most definitely outpeforms the Phaeston damage wise both close and long range. The recoil doesn't really matter, it's the crosshair size.

[Tyrannus00]

TheCandlejack wrote...

whateverman7 wrote...

TheCandlejack wrote...

WHEN THE CHART STATES THAT THE TEMPEST OUTPERFORMS THE PHAESTON, IT OUTPERFORMS THE DAMN PHAESTON! DOES THAT MAKE SENSE FOR YOU??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Or is simple math too hard for you?

why are you getting so emotional?...no need for that...now to answer your question and keep it thread related: 

that chart is nice, but i dont play the game by a chart....that's my whole point...yall are going off spreadhseet info, i'm going off what happens in the game.... by that chart, it says the tempest is more accurate, yet a poster above just said he jumped in the game and the phaeston is more accurate...does that mean he's wrong? should we only go by charts and not what we experience in the game?....like i told the other cats, i'm going to compare the 2 tonight and i'll tell what happens....when i'm done, if i'm incorrect, i have no problem saying so....

There was no emotion in that, it was me posting big to catch your attention  and I can say that the Tempest most definitely outpeforms the Phaeston damage wise both close and long range. The recoil doesn't really matter, it's the crosshair size.

Well frankly Candlejack I'm just sayin'

[TheCandlejack]

Tyrannus00 wrote...

TheCandlejack wrote...

whateverman7 wrote...

TheCandlejack wrote...

WHEN THE CHART STATES THAT THE TEMPEST OUTPERFORMS THE PHAESTON, IT OUTPERFORMS THE DAMN PHAESTON! DOES THAT MAKE SENSE FOR YOU??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Or is simple math too hard for you?

why are you getting so emotional?...no need for that...now to answer your question and keep it thread related: 

that chart is nice, but i dont play the game by a chart....that's my whole point...yall are going off spreadhseet info, i'm going off what happens in the game.... by that chart, it says the tempest is more accurate, yet a poster above just said he jumped in the game and the phaeston is more accurate...does that mean he's wrong? should we only go by charts and not what we experience in the game?....like i told the other cats, i'm going to compare the 2 tonight and i'll tell what happens....when i'm done, if i'm incorrect, i have no problem saying so....

There was no emotion in that, it was me posting big to catch your attention  and I can say that the Tempest most definitely outpeforms the Phaeston damage wise both close and long range. The recoil doesn't really matter, it's the crosshair size.

Well frankly Candlejack I'm just sayin'

I just felt like being an ass for a post

[Ares Caesar]

whateverman7 wrote...

TheCandlejack wrote...

WHEN THE CHART STATES THAT THE TEMPEST OUTPERFORMS THE PHAESTON, IT OUTPERFORMS THE DAMN PHAESTON! DOES THAT MAKE SENSE FOR YOU??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Or is simple math too hard for you?

why are you getting so emotional?...no need for that...now to answer your question and keep it thread related: 

that chart is nice, but i dont play the game by a chart....that's my whole point...yall are going off spreadhseet info, i'm going off what happens in the game.... by that chart, it says the tempest is more accurate, yet a poster above just said he jumped in the game and the phaeston is more accurate...does that mean he's wrong? should we only go by charts and not what we experience in the game?....like i told the other cats, i'm going to compare the 2 tonight and i'll tell what happens....when i'm done, if i'm incorrect, i have no problem saying so....

For what its worth, I'm pretty sure the Weapons Manifest thing that people are referring to uses the ingame "stat bar accuracy" which is NOT true/exact. Cyonans sheet more clearly indicates the real accuracy/spread on most weapons.

docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc (credit Cyonan for his awesome work on keeping guns up-to-date)

The Phaeston is more accurate than the Tempest (as in the spread of the bullets is smaller with the Phaeston). The ingame "bars" are simply inaccurate. (which is why its stupid that Bioware didnt use a Bar+Numbers method like ME1 had).

[capn233]

Eriseley wrote...

I could swear the Phaeston was more accurate than the Tempest, or more accurate while firing anyway, but it's been forever since I used either anyway.

For some reason people above are using the stat bar accuracy numbers to compare the accuracy between the two weapons, when all that number does is determine the size of the bar in the little graph when you select a weapon.  Stat bar numbers are pointless for comparing anything in this game except for how the graph looks.

Tempest:
Min Aim Error: 2.9
Max Aim Error: 5
Min Zoom Error: 0.6
Max Zoom Error: 3.5

Phaeston:
Min Aim Error: 1.5
Max Aim Error: 3.5
Min Zoom Error: 0.3
Max Zoom Error: 1.2

But the premise that the Tempest is better than the Phaeston overall is valid largely because it weighs less than half as much, has more base damage per shot (better against armor), and more rate of fire (so more DPS).