RSC Smg

Comments

  • WetFishDB
    2377 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2020
    I think it depends what you mean by "balance".

    Personally, I'm not at all interested in having an equally used weapon distribution across the player base. If the guns are balanced in terms of efficacy, they're balanced. It totally doesn't matter if the whole community wanted to use one weapon. See M16 in BF3, objectively worse than M416 since 30hz netcode made the TTK disparity from RPM exactly the same except the M416 had less hrec and a faster reload. Still, everyone thinks the M16 is better for some reason. Probably because it had more machine-like firing audio, or was just an iconic gun, or maybe because it was the starting weapon. This is incidentally why in newer games the ROF steps are now synced with tick-rate...the balancing that was done on RPM with that gun was actually rendered null & void by the limitations of the tick-rate.

    In any case, you can give guns higher or lower ease of use via vertical recoil, consistent reloads (see Automatico, no empty reload variance to consider), big magazines, rof (due to saturation factor - see SMG-08)

    But guns don't get better stats in other areas due to high vertical recoil for example, since you would then make the gun over-powered. Vrec is perfectly controllable since it applies in one direction, not opposing directions, and all the top players would just use the gun with the highest vertical recoil to get best stats in other areas, and simply just adjust their vertical sensitivity so it is countered with the most comfortable mouse movement. Designers give guns various recoil values for diversity of  feel as much as anything else, the recoil per second values in BF1 are fairly consistent across all automatic weapons anyway, there's not really any huge outliers - it's more so on LMG's but that's since they are designed with camera-game in mind, not rhythm-game; e.g the point of the Bar is to feel the "recoil" of the pitch movement, the point of the 1907 is to feel the shot timing / rhythm etc, but the balance is done as if both of these are handled optimally.

    Now, that's not to say you can't define "balance" as "all guns in this game are used equally by all the players", but the only way to do that would be to have factually imbalanced weapons as far as efficacy at killing.

    This is incidentally how Treyarch have always balanced guns in CoD. To quote Vahn directly "Guns used a lot will be nerfed, guns used little will be buffed", which is exactly why they always have very uniform usage stats in their games by the ned of the support cycle at the cost of objectively overpowered guns used by the "informed" players. The BO2 FAL is so OP because it was balanced by usage (not a lot of CoD players like clicking semi autos) as such it is so ridiculous OP for a fast clicker it is basically game breaking.

    Compare that to the M1A1 in BFV, which is balanced as if every player can click at 450 RPM equally and fully counter the recoil etc. Considering how many people use auto-fire mods on the semis in BFV (thanks to spreadless SAR design) and it's still not problematically overpowered is testament to that. Imagine if other weapons were balanced against that weapon factoring in "ease of use".
    I'm sure many would have slightly different definitions of 'balance'.  I guess I was asking what you were referring to, but I agree with your statement that if guns have broadly aligned 'efficacy' then they are balanced.  But efficacy is "the ability to produce a desired result", and I do think that efficacy therefore SHOULD include variables such as recoil, spread, magazine size, reload time etc, as those do fundamentally alter the ability to produce a desired result.  I guess part of the challenge is there are many different 'desired results' in games like this.  Is the desired result to kill one person, a squad of people, someone close or far away and so on.  Weapons should be situational, there should be pros/cons to them.  When one gun is objectively better than another in all scenarios, then that's definitely not balanced.

    And I do think for the most part BF1 they've done a good job.  Most guns are situational, have their strengths and their weaknesses.  For example, I think the AL .35 is amazing in 1v1, no doubt, or for a slightly more conservative/passive play style (or when you have competent team mates).  I really enjoyed getting 100 stars with it, but I did have to rely on my secondary quite a bit.  But the low magazine means that if I'm having to aggressively push an entrenched objective or have flanked a squad on my own, something like the Fedorov or 1907 would probably be way more effective.  There's a clear trade off between the guns.  Neither one is objectively better than the other.   The latter have bigger magazines, are better at wiping out squads, but obviously less effective at 1v1s.

    When it comes to the RSC SMG, I do find it a bit of an outlier.  I can't find a scenario where I'd really prefer it over ANY other gun.  It's theoretical TTK at any range is only negligibly shorter than the SMG08, but the SMG08 has a massive magazine and lower recoil.  Theoretically the RSC SMG is the better gun in 1v1, but practically it really isn't.  The SMG08 is probably as good 1v1, and has the added squad melting capacity.  Sure the RSC has the single fire mode, but the SMG08 can be burst fired to achieve a similar effect.  There's just no contest really.  That's why you see all the high pinging sweats on close quarter Conquest maps all running SMG08 and not RSC SMGs. 

    Now, if the RSC SMG were to have really low recoil - then I'd actually think it was better balanced.  It would actually have it's own role within the SMGs.  I could see why people would then use it to be a 1v1 monster, but obviously with the tradeoff of losing the squad melting capacity.
  • TheNoobPolice
    1667 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2020
    I think you may have misunderstood my points a little.

    Some things that also benefit ease of use are also part of balance, such as rate of fire (since it affects DPS), magazine size or reload time (since it affects downtime) etc...but it's not the fact that they also affect ease of use in itself why they are incorporated into the balance mathematically, but rather those other impacts they have.

    Vertical recoil just is one that doesn't really for the most part have any balancing impact, since it doesn't change anything about the weapon to make it objectively better or worse, since the vrec can be fully compensated by the player.

    Reducing recoil would do nothing to help the RSC SMG because that's not it's issue, the issue is down time in lieu of an appropriate balancing factor relevant to the issue that downtime causes. The expected trade-off for high downtime is that since you can't engage multiple enemies, your 1v1 therefore needs to be basically "overpowered", a bit like the RSC rifle, 1906 or 8.35 are in their respective ranges, making those 1v1 engagements swift so you can quickly retreat to cover, take the down-time hit and then reload.

    The RSC SMG lacks the DPS to counteract its high down-time, and this relates directly to it's place as a close-range weapon where engagements are even more frequent and you need even faster recovery from a 1v1. Having less vrec would do nothing here, since it is even less impactful in close range situations.
  • Greeny_Huwjarz
    4737 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Two excellent posts. You are both right, coming at it from different perspectives.

    How come you managed to do that without being rude to the rest of the community or telling us how great you are at the game?
  • Forkbeard84
    1978 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2020
    Oh nevermind, it's an interesting discussion.
    Post edited by Forkbeard84 on
  • PSJackman4
    471 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    How has this necroed thread lasted this long? 
  • Forkbeard84
    1978 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    How has this necroed thread lasted this long? 
    Because the community is still figuring out the RSC, haha.
  • Greeny_Huwjarz
    4737 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    TheGM86 said:
    Being good at being outside combat ranges and not directly engaging players is not a relevant upside to god players who actually affect the round outcome.


    Another meme, but still no clearer to understanding where you have anything valid to add to the debate. 

    Perhaps you could lets us know how you feel about the gun?  I really struggle with the RSC SMG, so I'd be interested in your view given that our stats with the gun are almost identical. 
    Thought not ;-)


  • SyfruitCamelia
    323 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    How has this necroed thread lasted this long? 
    Because the community is still figuring out the RSC, haha.
    the "community" is a joke

    they think the Helriegel and Sweeper are overpowered guns due to them being the most popular in pub stomping


  • MarxistDictator
    5340 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Yeah but any gun is out of place compared to the SMG 08/18, it’s like a BF3 gun in the middle of the otherwise slower TTK game and it has the ammo to mow entire squads. They pretty much made all the SMGs irrelevant except for 4 which is why I keep mentioning the RSC SMG as at least providing some different areas it can excel in. The entire rest of the category bar those guns are just redundant downgrades of those powerful weapons. It also has significantly less horizontal recoil (which is random), first shot recoil/spread multiplier, better damage and faster flying rounds. There is also no accuracy penalty for firing before it finishes centering up nor does it aim in slower. It is a lot better than the SMG in medium range, in closer distances obviously no.

    This is basically the whole point of the gun, and what I keep doubling back to, only to find out that apparently 3 hits to kill at 300 RPM is apparently much better for wear than 3 hits to kill at 450 RPM, full auto and much better hipfire. It’s obviously not the same discussion, by mentioning this gun is worth using I’m apparently making a case for it being the best gun in the game. No, I’ve only said over and over again that it’s better than most of the SMG kit and actually has some reason to exist alongside the MP18/SMG-08/Thompson meta the game has. You can do something outside what those guns are good at and still be really good in close range. Which is good on assault because his only other comparable option the Ribbeyrolles runs out of ammo after 6 kills with all the spraying you have to do and it’s 4 spare mag count.
  • CSO7777
    2019 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    How has this necroed thread lasted this long? 
    Because the community is still figuring out the RSC, haha.
    the "community" is a joke

    they think the Helriegel and Sweeper are overpowered guns due to them being the most popular in pub stomping


    They are actually examples of weapons that are easy to use and are totally opposite of the RSC. None of them are OP, they are both solid guns and very "forgiving" to play, mostly due to having "large" mags. Also, they are somewhat versatile and not niche weapons (like the RSC, Model 8 Marksman, Selbslader 1906 etc).

    Players of all skill-levels can benefit from using these guns (because they are "easy" to use), which makes them popular.
  • Forkbeard84
    1978 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Yeah but any gun is out of place compared to the SMG 08/18, it’s like a BF3 gun in the middle of the otherwise slower TTK game and it has the ammo to mow entire squads. They pretty much made all the SMGs irrelevant except for 4 which is why I keep mentioning the RSC SMG as at least providing some different areas it can excel in. The entire rest of the category bar those guns are just redundant downgrades of those powerful weapons. It also has significantly less horizontal recoil (which is random), first shot recoil/spread multiplier, better damage and faster flying rounds. There is also no accuracy penalty for firing before it finishes centering up nor does it aim in slower. It is a lot better than the SMG in medium range, in closer distances obviously no.

    This is basically the whole point of the gun, and what I keep doubling back to, only to find out that apparently 3 hits to kill at 300 RPM is apparently much better for wear than 3 hits to kill at 450 RPM, full auto and much better hipfire. It’s obviously not the same discussion, by mentioning this gun is worth using I’m apparently making a case for it being the best gun in the game. No, I’ve only said over and over again that it’s better than most of the SMG kit and actually has some reason to exist alongside the MP18/SMG-08/Thompson meta the game has. You can do something outside what those guns are good at and still be really good in close range. Which is good on assault because his only other comparable option the Ribbeyrolles runs out of ammo after 6 kills with all the spraying you have to do and it’s 4 spare mag count.
    This is making more sense but I'll point out your position has migrated from where you started.  Its ok we should all change our positions if needed based on new knowledge and reflection.

    As you know IMHO, all these things you talk about might be advantages of the RSC or unique characteristics of it, but I'll never get over only having 9 bullets and having to reload twice to get them.  
  • TheGM86
    939 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    TheGM86 said:
    Being good at being outside combat ranges and not directly engaging players is not a relevant upside to god players who actually affect the round outcome.


    Another meme, but still no clearer to understanding where you have anything valid to add to the debate. 

    Perhaps you could lets us know how you feel about the gun?  I really struggle with the RSC SMG, so I'd be interested in your view given that our stats with the gun are almost identical. 
    Thought not ;-)


    This is some bonafide mind breakage right here. quoting yourself in a conversation with somebody who isn't here and asking a question that was already answered pages ago. All signs point to Elmer's Glue being a staple of your diet.

  • Greeny_Huwjarz
    4737 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2020
    TheGM86 wrote: »
    The RSC SMG is a really fun gun to use so I am not surprised that min max munchkins would flee from it in terror to use weapons were all they have to do it drag their face across the keyboard for their lauded 0.98 k/d as they pat themselves on the back for a job well done.

    So this is your total contribution? It’s a fun gun to use? Combined with another of those terribly patronising posts about the wider community.

    That’s all you’ve got to say? Help me understand this better please.

    I am terrible with this gun. It’s one of my worst guns in terms of stats. Ive provided detailed reasons why in this thread. I note that my stats with this gun are almost identical to yours.

    Let me ask a different questions as you refuse to answer the the last one.

    Are you a min max munchkin?
    Post edited by Greeny_Huwjarz on
  • MarxistDictator
    5340 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Where did my position migrate to? From the start it’s been that this gun is underrated and not nearly as bad as most think, and then I keep pointing out why that is. The RSC isn’t the best gun in the game but it’s far from the worst and I honestly think 4 SMGs are worse overall in comparison because they do nothing better than the meta SMGs do, while not being able to play any differently than they do either. Making it above-average for the class of otherwise one dimensional and boring CQB sprayers that lose all their damage in the span of a fart.
  • Titan_Awaken
    1344 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Ahh, the RSC SMG; been a long time since I heard that name. I used it for a solid death or two before dismissing it entirely.

    Heh, this tumultuous lil thread may just be the catalyst to give the gun another shot (no pun intended lol).
  • Greeny_Huwjarz
    4737 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Ahh, the RSC SMG; been a long time since I heard that name. I used it for a solid death or two before dismissing it entirely.

    Heh, this tumultuous lil thread may just be the catalyst to give the gun another shot (no pun intended lol).

    Let us know how you go......
  • Lastel_of_Pejite
    31 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    It's my fault for starting the debate. I shouldn't do that, now I regret what I done before.
  • PSJackman4
    471 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    AW2k2 said:
    It's my fault for starting the debate. I shouldn't do that, now I regret what I done before.
    lol
  • ashar_saleem121
    1399 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    This gun is the ultimate challenge gun for me. When I'm feeling really full of myself, have little to no respect for the opposing team or just want the thrill of emasculating people using a worse gun, I'll use the RSC SMG.

    Conversely, as I start doing poorly, I'll move from this to the Ribeye, to the Hellriegel to the SMG08 (on assault class. For medic its the Federov optical) Luckily, nowadays it barely ever gets to that point.

    But I know full well what the RSC SMG is. It's a difficulty modifier. It can be used to make the game harder for yourself. Not many people are actively willing to do that to themselves, hence the low usage.
Sign In or Register to comment.