devtrackers.gg
Last week I made a thread covering the current balance, especially concerning how Vault weapons fit in, which was the whole point of the rebalance after all. I came to the conclusion that, in the AR class, only the ACW actually is actually relevant at the moment.
The other vault ARs are basically in a worse state balance-wise than they were before the rework, mostly because their damage drop-offs are worse due to the removal of the heavy barrel, while their spread has also been nerfed, making them lose the niche they had.
There is also no coherent design visible: We have the G36, which is a 4HK at 750rpm, and we have the M416, which is a 5HK, also at 750rpm. You would probably need a spreadsheet in your office to spot the discrepancy.
Now, with the patchnotes out, we have more info on what will happen to the SMGs and LMGs. Basically it is all that I have predicted, but I will grant them that it came far earlier than I expected, but in this case it really is not a good thing:
So let us start with the SMGs:
Currently SMGs have one big issue and that is that they do not have a niche. Currently they still have better sprint to fire times and starting hipfire spread than all other weapons, but they also have worse damage drop-offs and they only have a 1.25x headshot multiplier. This means that they also have worse ammo economy.
Many ARs, but especially the hard-hitting ones everybody is using, have near SMG hipfire, which will make them break even alongside their better damage model and especially the headshot multiplier.
To visualize this let us look at three assorted SMGs and the LCMG, which you would normally do not associate with close range performance:
So what we can see here is that an LCMG with Short Barrel (690 rpm), has basically the exact same performance up close than the SMGs (1200rpm with a 6HK, 900rpm with a 5HK and 690rpm at a 4HK). Yes, SMGs will get to fire faster, but any accidental headshot on the LCMG will reduce the bullets required by 1 (25%), the SMGs will always need to 4-6 hits. And this is the LCMG, the ARs have better hipfire and a higher ROF. The only SMG that could currently beat the LCMG up close is the PBX, since it has a 4HK at 850rpm.
All of this is before we even account for the upcoming spread changes that will not make performance of SMGs better. SMGs right now already have worse base and moving spread than ARs did before the nerf and they will likely retain that. So we will have SMGs that aren't significantly better than LMGs and ARs in their supposed niche, but are significantly worse outside of it.
Now of course there could be damage adjustments alongside, but this update is predominantly aimed at vault weapons, and the PP-2000 and AKSU will not become a 3HK or their drop-offs made longer. So it is even more unlikely that they will give the K30 a 5HK or the MP9 a 4HK range. Hence the imbalances that existed since the first SMG nerfs will only be made more severe.
We see a similar trend with the LMGs:
Currently and since release AOW LMGs are basically big-mag ARs. I have no issue with this at all. We are playing a 128p game after all. We need to be able to hit many people at longer ranges. It stands to reason. Still, like SMGs, the class has always had slightly worse spread models. With the incoming spread nerfs these differences will likely be retained or made more severe.
Interestingly the LMG class has always housed some of the best allrounders the game had with the LCMG and RPT, which will likely still be decent after the update. Both had very good damage models at a decent ROF. Compared to the current best ARs you traded some close range performance for saturation and long-range capabilities. This is an acceptable trade. With the new nerfs this will likely tilt more in favour to the ARs.
However, the LMG also always housed some of the worst weapons that never filled a niche, like the M60, M240B, XM8 and the worst offenders: The Type 88 and RPK. It is beyond my comprehension how anyone could believe that weapons that have both a worse ROF and damage values need to coexist.
That said, we will likely see damage buffs to the Type 88 and RPK, giving them a 4HK range comparable to the ACW, but this will still make them worse at all ranges compared to the ARs due to lower ROF and spread. The M240B will likely see the same route.
If this is the case the XM8, Avancys, PKP and especially the M60 will be much worse off though, because their damage and drop-offs will likely not be changed. How is the M60 supposed to have a niche at 550rpm, when many other LMGs and especially ARs have better performance all around?
Supposedly they want to encourage the use of the bipod, but I have some news for them in that regard. The ACW can mount a bipod and I think the G36 also has that option. Further, the bipod already gives good worth, if you know how to create the opportunities for themselves. That being said, in a game that has maps focused around having coverless plains as the main feature, I do not know if bipod is a playstyle you would want to encourage at all. Making guns worse in all regards does not precisely encourage me to use a niche playstyle, it encourages me to pick another weapon class. Maybe, if you wanted to see more bipod use, make it an inherent attachment on LMGs alongside the other underbarrel options and/or make it auto-deploy, which is not mentioned in the patchnotes at all, but was present in previous titles and already is in the game with the PKP (at least back when I used it).
Now, we do get AOW attachments as well, while the vault attachments will be removed. As I have iterated a thousand times, this has basically no impact, as the attachment system is offering a lot of bad choices first and foremost. The biggest benefit once again is the access to the wrapped suppressor, but the flash hider gave the same effect (now you know). Additionally we are losing the heavy barrel on some guns (the AKS), which might not get it's drop-offs adjusted. Hence it could be worse-off.
Tl;dr: As always the changes will not bring anything of much value. Some performances might increase (like the RPK and Type 88, if they gain a 4HK), but they will lose in other areas and the whole weapon class will be worse off than before. Nobody at DICE has a spreadsheet on their desk, this much is clear and their telemetry-based balancing just creates new FOTM weapons at best. Instead of small balance changes that would affect all weapons positively (an attachment rebalance, like removing the malus) would go a long way in eliminating the bad choices. Basing weapons on common grounds in terms of damage and ROF would also achieve this. Instead the piecemeal balancing creates imbalances and cements them on a monthly basis, while it has also halted implementation of new content in the form of additional vault weapos for months now. It also creates a lot of overhead.
I will probably do another thread when we have to definite values of the damage changes, and I might also do some wallsprays today to get a better look at the spread changes, once they hit.
External link →