140 réponses à ce sujet

[RedJohn]

2 Claymore shots is faster than 4 Raider shots.

[Cirvante]

Ledgend1221 wrote...

Cirvante wrote...

Ledgend1221 wrote...

Magniflyer wrote...

Why would I call you crazy if I can have a double Claymore shot?

You mean quad raider.

Crutchmoar double shot using only AR damage bonus (70%) 2 shots = 4449 damage.

Raider quad shot using only AR damage bonus (70%) 4 shots = 5400 damage.

That's 1k extra damage about.

Bear in mind that you can fire off those four shots lighting fast and can take advatage of lag.

Claymore headshots would like to disagree with your math.

Multiply both sides by and what do you get?

You wanna tell me that you can score 4 raider headshots in quick succession? Vid or GTFO.

[Ledgend1221]

RedJohn wrote...

2 Claymore shots is faster than 4 Raider shots.

Not by by any signifcant margin.
You then reload cancel and get off an extra shot while the raider gets off an extra two shots 1 second later while the AR lasts.

Claymore does 2801 damage.
Raider does 3400 damage.

Unless the time amounts to the claymore getting an extra shot off under AR while the raider cannot, it's still behind in damage.

[Ledgend1221]

Cirvante wrote...

Ledgend1221 wrote...

Cirvante wrote...

Ledgend1221 wrote...

Magniflyer wrote...

Why would I call you crazy if I can have a double Claymore shot?

You mean quad raider.

Crutchmoar double shot using only AR damage bonus (70%) 2 shots = 4449 damage.

Raider quad shot using only AR damage bonus (70%) 4 shots = 5400 damage.

That's 1k extra damage about.

Bear in mind that you can fire off those four shots lighting fast and can take advatage of lag.

Claymore headshots would like to disagree with your math.

Multiply both sides by and what do you get?

You wanna tell me that you can score 4 raider headshots in quick succession? Vid or GTFO.

You want to tell me no one can do it?

[Tallgeese_VII]

Raider is excellent weapon, and it might do more total damage than Claymore...
but some players prefer shooting less than shooting more if possible.

It`s definitely easier to land 2 Claymore shot compared to 4 Raider shots when using AR especially without Stabilization mod.

[RGB]

I like using him as a rapid-fire detonator with CS (which is an overlooked skill) that has a great on-demand weapon buff if I need it. I usually skip frag grenades though. So many grenade users out there that it's just not worth the headache. I also use the Wraith on him if I'm going shotgun, but most of the time I prefer an AR.

[Ledgend1221]

Plus(Now correct me if I'm wrong, I'm just going by what nardia tells me.)
The AR cooldown on a Raider X using a smart choke and HVB is 3.33 seconds.
The AR cooldown on a Claymore X using a smart choke and HVB is 5 seconds.

[Tallgeese_VII]

Ledgend1221 wrote...

Plus(Now correct me if I'm wrong, I'm just going by what nardia tells me.)
The AR cooldown on a Raider X using a smart choke and HVB is 3.33 seconds.
The AR cooldown on a Claymore X using a smart choke and HVB is 5 seconds.

I believe they are both bugged weapon with weight mod.
So it does not matter a lot.

[Red the Aloof]

So the last evolution, both of them are bugged? In other words, you lose points by speccing into it?

I dislike the frag grenades but have considered a no fitness build on him recently just to get those frags.

[Wizard of Ox]

Destroyer, Turian (vanilla, not that stupid flying cabal wannabe) and BatSol are better. But by a pretty slight margin.

[Cirvante]

Ledgend1221 wrote...

You want to tell me no one can do it?

I bet Jay_Hoxtatron could do it really fast. Especially when fencing with Cerberus.

Claymore can pop heads at a much greater distance and it's much easier to land those headshots in quick succession (same goes for canopy on Atlas or boss weakspots in general). Claymore wins. Always.

[RedJohn]

Ledgend1221 wrote...

RedJohn wrote...

2 Claymore shots is faster than 4 Raider shots.

Not by by any signifcant margin.
You then reload cancel and get off an extra shot while the raider gets off an extra two shots 1 second later while the AR lasts.

Claymore does 2801 damage.
Raider does 3400 damage.

Unless the time amounts to the claymore getting an extra shot off under AR while the raider cannot, it's still behind in damage.

Numbers are meaningless in this case

Claymore has more range, and it's more accurate

So if you are aiming to a target at mid range not all the Raider bullets will hit , with every shot you make there will be more damage lost.

Human Soldier Claymore WINS. 

[Ledgend1221]

Tallgeese_VII wrote...

Ledgend1221 wrote...

Plus(Now correct me if I'm wrong, I'm just going by what nardia tells me.)
The AR cooldown on a Raider X using a smart choke and HVB is 3.33 seconds.
The AR cooldown on a Claymore X using a smart choke and HVB is 5 seconds.

I believe they are both bugged weapon with weight mod.
So it does not matter a lot.

Forgot about that, nevermind then.
Though it's still about a one second lead for the Raider going by the base CD values.

[ISHYGDDT]

but... inferno grenades.

[mumba]

That's because the vanilla soldier IS the best soldier.

[RedJohn]

ISHYGDDT wrote...

but... inferno grenades.

Inferno nades are the best in the game for me.

It's better for bosses, but Frag ones clean up the spawns ( of mobs ) faster because it's instant damage.

[Ledgend1221]

What is this accuracy nonsense!?
Having a shotgun and not getting in the targets face? Madness!
Sure accuracy is great, but when a Shotgun has to use that to try and get in the lead?
It's like arguing that it doesn't matter your car can't go from 0-60 in 1.2 seconds because that wouldn't be legal.

[Cirvante]

Ledgend1221 wrote...

What is this accuracy nonsense!?
Having a shotgun and not getting in the targets face? Madness!
Sure accuracy is great, but when a Shotgun has to use that to try and get in the lead?
It's like arguing that it doesn't matter your car can't go from 0-60 in 1.2 seconds because that wouldn't be legal.

My M-300 Claymore sniper rifle dismisses your claim.

[Dr. Tim Whatley]

Nothing crazy about that, and I prefer the claymore over the raider on her for accuracy. Oh, frag grenades rock.

[Innocent Bystander]

Ledgend1221 wrote...

What is this accuracy nonsense!?
Having a shotgun and not getting in the targets face? Madness!
Sure accuracy is great, but when a Shotgun has to use that to try and get in the lead?
It's like arguing that it doesn't matter your car can't go from 0-60 in 1.2 seconds because that wouldn't be legal.

Raider is great and all, but his "toothbrush" approach to accuracy makes it a lot less desirable for a lot of kits (non-TC and non-BC types).

[Ledgend1221]

Cirvante wrote...

Ledgend1221 wrote...

What is this accuracy nonsense!?
Having a shotgun and not getting in the targets face? Madness!
Sure accuracy is great, but when a Shotgun has to use that to try and get in the lead?
It's like arguing that it doesn't matter your car can't go from 0-60 in 1.2 seconds because that wouldn't be legal.

My M-300 Claymore sniper rifle dismisses your claim.

I'll take damage any day.

[ISHYGDDT]

Ledgend1221 wrote...

Cirvante wrote...

Ledgend1221 wrote...

What is this accuracy nonsense!?
Having a shotgun and not getting in the targets face? Madness!
Sure accuracy is great, but when a Shotgun has to use that to try and get in the lead?
It's like arguing that it doesn't matter your car can't go from 0-60 in 1.2 seconds because that wouldn't be legal.

My M-300 Claymore sniper rifle dismisses your claim.

I'll take damage any day.

Headshots > Than a bit more damage on a body-shot.

 If you are anywhere outside of melee range, you aren't getting all the Raider pellets on the head of anything.

[Cirvante]

Ledgend1221 wrote...

Cirvante wrote...

Ledgend1221 wrote...

What is this accuracy nonsense!?
Having a shotgun and not getting in the targets face? Madness!
Sure accuracy is great, but when a Shotgun has to use that to try and get in the lead?
It's like arguing that it doesn't matter your car can't go from 0-60 in 1.2 seconds because that wouldn't be legal.

My M-300 Claymore sniper rifle dismisses your claim.

I'll take damage any day.

No, you would have taken the Claymore in that case, unworthy peasant.