Aller au contenu

Photo

In a world without reload cancels...


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
34 réponses à ce sujet

#26
Dr. Tim Whatley

Dr. Tim Whatley
  • Members
  • 7 543 messages

MasterReefa wrote...

Gallowspole



#27
Argent Xero

Argent Xero
  • Members
  • 2 891 messages
Huh?

#28
Guest_TchOktChoky_*

Guest_TchOktChoky_*
  • Guests

ArgentN7 wrote...

Huh?


Reload canceling

Modifié par TchockTckocky, 15 juillet 2013 - 05:19 .


#29
Kirrahe Airlines CEO

Kirrahe Airlines CEO
  • Members
  • 4 739 messages

Kocka007 wrote...

The man with the PPR lives


Essentially.

#30
Argent Xero

Argent Xero
  • Members
  • 2 891 messages

TchockTckocky wrote...

ArgentN7 wrote...

Huh?


Reload canceling

LOL! @ 15:00

I was using the Asari Vanguard with the Widow for a few games after you guys left, I'll be sure to practice it.

Modifié par ArgentN7, 15 juillet 2013 - 04:22 .


#31
me0120

me0120
  • Members
  • 6 419 messages

ComradeShepard7 wrote...

Tokenusername wrote...

ToaOrka wrote...

I'm assuming single-shot weapons would become
less popular, but even without reload canceling, the
Claymore can be pretty damn effective.

I've hear it would be 64% less effective without reload canceling. Serious scientific studies have been made.


Actually it is about a 40.5%-41.4% reduction in effectiveness if you aren't reload canceling vs if you are reload canceling. And it should be noted that all those numbers are based on me using it and therefore it will be a bit different for other people.


The effectiveness extends beyond sustained DPS. Without reload cancelling you take a ton more damage going from mook to mook.

#32
ComradeShepard7

ComradeShepard7
  • Members
  • 1 261 messages

me0120 wrote...

ComradeShepard7 wrote...

Tokenusername wrote...

ToaOrka wrote...

I'm assuming single-shot weapons would become
less popular, but even without reload canceling, the
Claymore can be pretty damn effective.

I've hear it would be 64% less effective without reload canceling. Serious scientific studies have been made.


Actually it is about a 40.5%-41.4% reduction in effectiveness if you aren't reload canceling vs if you are reload canceling. And it should be noted that all those numbers are based on me using it and therefore it will be a bit different for other people.


The effectiveness extends beyond sustained DPS. Without reload cancelling you take a ton more damage going from mook to mook.


Yes but we were talking about only the effects on how fast you can fire which is the only thing that we can really quantify.

#33
Nitrocuban

Nitrocuban
  • Members
  • 5 767 messages
My Valiant X doesn't even care bout such pitifull things.

#34
Credit2team

Credit2team
  • Members
  • 5 582 messages

ComradeShepard7 wrote...

Tokenusername wrote...

ToaOrka wrote...

I'm assuming single-shot weapons would become
less popular, but even without reload canceling, the
Claymore can be pretty damn effective.

I've hear it would be 64% less effective without reload canceling. Serious scientific studies have been made.


Actually it is about a 40.5%-41.4% reduction in effectiveness if you aren't reload canceling vs if you are reload canceling. And it should be noted that all those numbers are based on me using it and therefore it will be a bit different for other people.


someone should make a thread about this

:whistle:
:innocent:
:P

#35
hostaman

hostaman
  • Members
  • 1 741 messages
In a world without RC ?

It would make little difference.

Despite the reverie displayed on the BSN for the Claymore and Javelin, they are weapons seldom seen in Lobbies both public and private.

It seems the majority of the player base just thinks meh...


A similar story to the hallowed GI.  One of the least popular charaters.


It's round about now that somebody posits that popularity is not relevant......but the ton of vids showing all manner of charaters and weapons soloing Gold and Plat is proof enough that the so called OP weapons and kits are not all that.

IMHO as always :bandit: