AR-57 is Fortnite level.

  • I agree, given that the map is one of the many smaller ones. The same is probably true for some other SMGs as well, since it is more of an issue with the combination of hipfire accuracy and mag size.

    It's also important that guns like the AR-57 aren't even necessarily stronger than some of the assault rifles, they're just significantly easier to use.

  • That's what I think of it. My fat dog could use this gun and do good with it, and he has CCD. What is everyone else's opinion on the AR-57?

    AR-57 is a gun that is easy to use, making unskilled players look skilled. It's easy enough to stomp them with the MP9 and a little skill, though.

    Very simple solution to SMG issue. Reduce accuracy and range for SMGs. (maybe even have them do 0 damage at long range...)


    Overall, I like the accurate hip-fire in the game. It sets it apart from games like Warface, one of the reasons I play the game. However, I feel this should be more of a strength for ARs. The SMGs should have hip-fire accuracy more like the LMGs.

    latest?cb=20160225113057




    The only reason Patton called the M1 Garand the "greatest implement of battle ever devised" is because he never met the FN FAL.

    #BuffAK12

  • Would like to point out that the AR-57 is meant to be an easily accessible weapon but other SMG's kill significantly faster.
    So in retrospective, an AR-57 user isn't as much of a threat as a P90 user right now. The majority of skilled players aren't using the AR-57 anyways.

  • However, I feel this should be more of a strength for ARs. The SMGs should have hip-fire accuracy more like the LMGs.

    That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. ARs are midrange weapons, and not generally preferred for CQC.


    SMGs are CQC weapons which would normally be fired from the ready position, rather than ADS. So, it makes sense that that's how you would use them in game.


    As midrange weapons you would expect to ADS more when using an AR because you would use the additional range to your advantage.


    LMGs are suppression weapons, and should have high range and high damage at the expense of accuracy.


    Snipers should be highly accurate and lethal, but much too bulky and slow to be effective in CQC.


    As for the AR57, it's a decent weapon, but there are at least 3 other SMGs I'd take ahead of it right now, and a few ARs besides. It's really not anything special, and I've no idea why so many complain about it.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by OhEmGee ().

  • That's what I think of it. My fat dog could use this gun and do good with it, and he has CCD. What is everyone else's opinion on the AR-57?

    AR-57 is a gun that is easy to use, making unskilled players look skilled. It's easy enough to stomp them with the MP9 and a little skill, though.

    Very simple solution to SMG issue. Reduce accuracy and range for SMGs. (maybe even have them do 0 damage at long range...)


    Overall, I like the accurate hip-fire in the game. It sets it apart from games like Warface, one of the reasons I play the game. However, I feel this should be more of a strength for ARs. The SMGs should have hip-fire accuracy more like the LMGs.

    SMGs should probably have a hipfire advantage over the ARs, otherwise there would be absolutely no reason to use SMGs anymore. They're already pretty weak (just easy to use), so I don't think a range nerf would make sense either.



    Would like to point out that the AR-57 is meant to be an easily accessible weapon but other SMG's kill significantly faster.
    So in retrospective, an AR-57 user isn't as much of a threat as a P90 user right now. The majority of skilled players aren't using the AR-57 anyways.

    To be fair, the P90 and the AR-57 are very similar. AR-57 criticism usually applies to the P90 as well.


    OhEmGee I would be careful with the whole 'rock-paper-scissors' mentality in this game.

    Sure, each class should be somewhat effective at their designated range, but the truth is that this can get pretty frustrating if the maps don't allow you to use certain weapons at that range. For instance, BF1 is partially so frustrating to play because no matter which kind of gun you play, you'll regularly get into situations where your opponent wins merely because of the optimal range of his gun.

    Some other FPS solve this issue by having useful secondaries that complement the primary at another range, usually having high kill potential, much like the primaries, but also low ammo, so you can mostly just use them as a fallback device.

    An example for this is the Deagle in CoD4 Promod, which is both strong at range if you're an SMG player and strong at close range if you're a sniper player, but you'll only be able to kill a single person before it runs out of ammo.

    The secondaries in Ironsight are all terrible or at least feel terrible because of the lack of buffering on semi-autos.

  • I totally agree, and wouldn't want any weapon to be useless just because you're not in the optimal position. At the same time though, I don't see much point in having weapon classes if SRs can be effectively quick scoped in CQC or you can ping off headshots across the map with an SMG.


    There is a middle ground, I hope, where having the right weapon for the situation can give the upper hand without completely negating counterplay.


    Personally, I find the secondaries pretty handy in a jam, especially the shotties.

  • Quick scoping doesn't need to be ineffective for SRs to be balanced in CQC.

    To name another example from Promod: Quickscoping could be very effective, even in CQC, but the snipers had very low RPM (something like >1s delay between shots), meaning that if you ran up to people in close range, you could kill exactly one person (given that you hit that shot!) and then would get overwhelmed by the rest. I think this is the right way to go to balance snipers, because then certain mechanics won't feel bad while remaining balanced. Granted, this requires better secondaries too.


    Regarding secondaries: Tac-Ops, the SPAS, the crossbow and possibly the python can be viable, but they all feel kind of mediocre.

    Tac-Ops RPM is too low, so you easily max out its RPM, meaning that you need to slow down to hit max RPM because of the lack of buffering. Other than that, it's a great gun at close range.

    Python RPM is fine, but the recoil is impossible to handle and because of the low ammo it's rather unviable for hipfire.

    The SPAS is great - if it works. Sadly it's very unpredictable and you'll often randomly tag people, making it a very risky (and hence frustrating) gun to use.

    The crossbow is pretty good, but most weapons in the game would benefit from a decent close range secondary instead, considering the maps. There's also no visual feedback for bolt drop or travel time, so learning to use it is a bit tricky.

    In general, some of the secondaries can be viable, but they all feel frustrating to use.

  • Why not simply tweak hipfire, both buffing and nerfing?


    Basically, make the inaccuracy increase exponentially, such that the accuracy on the first few shots are better than before, but then makes continuous fire more of a liability than before.


    This would reward the player for hip firing in CQC with an SMG, but not so much at mid-range, where ARs are likely to start dominating the SMGs in terms of practical TTK. (accuracy of SMGs becomes too unreliable to maintain their "textbook TTK" value).


    With the laser sight attachment, this "effective accuracy range" will be increased instead of increasing the base accuracy.




    Also, I have been running experiments with the guns and noticing something really weird:

    > First of all, why does the P90 have a static recoil pattern? Its only the P90 has this and it makes it possible to fully compensate it's recoil

    > Secondly, it looks the hipfire is following a pattern. There are some instances where some guns gets near-perfect accuracy once every 2 shots in some guns. In others, its once every 3 or 4 shots. not really sure if this is RNG luck, or something intentional.


    Personal suggestions:


    >Bring back the old scope.

    >Remove SP bullets. Permanently implement AP bullet effects on all guns to fix the crappy penetration mechanic. (removing the bullet attachment slot along as well).

    >With the bullet attachment slot now gone, implement a 3rd attachment slot in its stead.

  • I don't think the inaccuracy increase needs to be exponential to achieve what you're trying to achieve (we're looking at an expected value after all) - and for obvious reasons it should have sensible start values and a cap.

    I'm not even really sure if what you suggested isn't already in the game - does the accuracy not get worse when hipfiring for a bit? I never realized this.

    One also needs to be careful with how this interacts with ADS firing: The inaccuracy timer should slowly reset as if you aren't hipfiring while firing in ADS so that you can switch from ADS back to hipfiring in situations where enemies get too close.


    In regards to the scope: I think holding your breath is also weird. Several people I know have commented that it feels off and not how they would expect it to work, but can't quite figure out why (Is it because of the delay after scoping in? Maybe because of how it drags the scope to the center?).


    Solid suggestions.

  • I'm not even really sure if what you suggested isn't already in the game - does the accuracy not get worse when hipfiring for a bit? I never realized this.

    Yes it does get worse, but it follows a ln(x) curve. I'm suggesting an ex curve instead, and there will be a cap, of course, on the maximum inaccuracy it can reach.

  • Im being honest here, im using the AR-57 since the beginning. Why? Fits my rushing playstyle. Lots of bullets, decent rate of fire and moderate damage.

    Maybe im a little offended because you guys are literally saying i don´t have any skill because i play with the AR-57.

    Truth is i consider myself to be a decent player, i don´t care about recoil, i don´t care about hipfiring. The Mag size is atleast my selling point.

    99% I aim down sight and the weapon just clicked with me. Ofc i tried other weapons but i don´t like any of them, main reason is the mag size.


    I strife left and right most of the time when im aiming, never standing still and thats one reason why i need the extra bullets.

    Is the AR easier to use? Honestly, for me all weapons are easy to use except snipers, never liked it and almost never play with them.


    But i guess it´s the same as in other games. MW3 for example, Mp7 was called OP but everyone was fine with the Scar-H which was even more powerful.

    Why should i use a different gun that everyone else could use if they want?


    If you want changes that are making sense then start with the types of weapons.


    Using Sniper=decreased movement speed, decreased aim speed, decreased climbing speed.

    Using Assault Rifles= decreased movement speed but faster than sniper rifles, moderate ADS speed, faster climbing-/vaulting speed than Snipers.

    SMGS = Faster movement speed, faster ADS, faster vaulting, decreased damage.


    You cant just nerf one weapon because you dont like it or you don´t consider it skillfull. If you want real balance, ALL weapons + behavior should be nerfed and customized. BUT there´s another problem with all of this: Map size. Most maps aren´t big enough to use all of these benefits.


    Most maps are pretty small and a smg is good enough except you want to shoot across the whole map

    Movement, Aim, Control, Reflexes, Knowledge, Experience, Instinct, Prediction and Luck - all of these factors are needed to be a good Player.

    Not every Player who´s better than you uses hacks or cheats, keep that in mind and you´ll have a much better time while playing.


    My PC: RTX2080TI, i9-9900K @4.7Ghz, 32GB RAM @3200Mhz

  • please note to not reply on threads that are older than 60 days. Necromancy isn't something that should be practiced on the forum. Please create a new thread, if you wish to share a comment about a specific topic