Welcome to symthic forums! We would love if you'd register!
You don't have to be expert in bit baking, everyone is more than welcome to join our community.

You are not logged in.

Hey! If this is your first visit on symthic.com, also check out our weapon damage charts.
Currently we have charts for Battlefield 3, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2, Medal of Honor: Warfighter and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

Posts: 41

Date of registration
: Feb 21st 2012

Platform: PS3

Location: Australia

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

51

Wednesday, March 7th 2012, 3:34pm

Re: Is USAS really all that bad? Realism & My thoughts.

Of course they didn't do the shotguns justice if they made shotguns realistic the only weapons you'd ever see in FPS are shotguns and Sniper rifles, since people dont have an actual life in the video game, they're going to take way more risks and the shotgun rewards the close up player, and would be insanely slow if they worked at their effective distances.
shotgun balance just doesn't work properly

I think frag rounds are the main reason the gun is overpowered you quite often get out gunned by AR users at like 8-10 meters while using buckshot, the increase in damage over distance will probably fix that though apart from those people who cant aim for crap anyway and use USAS rounds all the time.

Although I"m not sure how the range buff will work since the damage is taking such a hit, mainly concern for the 870 there though 12slugs will probably be decent on that after patch as well.

Posts: 22

Date of registration
: Jan 26th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

52

Wednesday, March 7th 2012, 4:21pm

Re: Is USAS really all that bad? Realism & My thoughts.

Quoted from ""Aenonar""

It's a close range shotgun that for some reason can snipe effectively 2-300 meters even with explosive rounds with around corner capabilities.

That's precisely what frag is supposed to do. It's what it does in real life.

Honestly, the only place I regularly see USAS + frag is Metro.

I really don't have a problem with it. Metro is square hole, USAS is a square peg. It fits into the situation perfectly.

Complaning that it's OP like that is like saying it's wrong for a square peg to fit into a square hole better than a round peg does.

Quoted from ""Aenonar""

The USAS is basically an 11 round assault rifle

You're really comparing a USAS to an AR?
Well, I did the same.
(All charts are at 10m, scale px/deg is 200)




Look at the hit ratios.
You can land two consecutive shots with the M16, more if you control the recoil. That's enough for a shot kill with headshots, or a 4 shot kill with bodyshots. At 800rpm.
The M16 has a minimum spread of 0.2 and an increase of 0.1


With a USAS you can get a two shot kill using slugs, but you are only at 275rpm. Thing is, you've only got a 34% chance of that second bullet hitting. Maybe a little bit more if you try to control the recoil, but unlikely due to the strength of the recoil.

Even if you do manage to control the recoil and get your crosshairs back on target, the spread increase of the USAS is 0.6, the same as its minimum standing ADS spread.

Basically, the second bullet fires with double the spread of the first. Double. (not only this, but the spread decrease is lower than an AR, so you're waiting longer to get back to minimum spread. It's not like single firing with an AR at all.)

I find it hard to credit your statement that the USAS is too accurate.

It's nowhere near an assault rifle. Look at that chart there for the M16; with uncontrolled recoil on a 4 round burst, you've got no value under 50% for hitting a target at 10m.

Oh, and your 'data' videos for USAS accuracy?
Please don't use frag, the explosions obscure where the shot actually lands, rendering your point moot.

Posts: 88

Date of registration
: Feb 18th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

53

Wednesday, March 7th 2012, 5:42pm

Re: Is USAS really all that bad? Realism & My thoughts.

Quoted from ""Legendsmith""


Look at the hit ratios.
With a USAS you can get a two shot kill using slugs, but you are only at 275rpm. Thing is, you've only got a 34% chance of that second bullet hitting. Maybe a little bit more if you try to control the recoil, but unlikely due to the strength of the recoil.
...
I find it hard to credit your statement that the USAS is too accurate.

Do you know if this chart is representative of how the normal pellet spread is with buckshot and flechettes as well or is this only viable for single shots, like slugs and frags?

I can't figure out how to shoot most effectively with shotguns. Not in a consistent manner anyway. I tend to shoot for the head but the spread seems to negate this, but I don't notice a large difference from shooting dead center mass to put as many pellets on target as possible.

And I guess this is for a 0.4 spread auto shotgun, what does the pellet spread look like for a 0.2 ie the pump action? Is it tight enough to warrant shooting for the head or should one still go for dead center mass? Since you only get one shot you need to make it count.
Platform: PC
I have signatures turned off.

Aenonar

Data Analyzer

(2,796)

Posts: 7,863

Date of registration
: Dec 16th 2011

Platform: PC

Location: Sweden

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 20

  • Send private message

54

Wednesday, March 7th 2012, 5:55pm

Re: Is USAS really all that bad? Realism & My thoughts.

Quoted from ""Legendsmith""

---


Except that you missed that frag round don't have to physically hit the target.. Start aiming at the feet and you've suddenly got 3 hits or near hits (though 2 round burst is more effective), and the near hits also cause damage if there's an object nearby in any direction.

M16 deals 17 dmg per round, frag ~40. Plus high suppression.. So yeah...

Note that Plotic doesn't actually mimic in-game performance completely accurate unfortunately... Try firing AN94 2 round burst in game and in plotic for example. In plotic 50 meters it says you'll hit chest + ~head which is about 30-40cm, but in game it's more like 5-10 cm apart... Plus it doesn't account for user correction. And when in doubt, just single shot. All you need is like 0.2 seconds in between each shot and you've got the first shot accuracy back ;o


Quoted from ""Legendsmith""


Oh, and your 'data' videos for USAS accuracy?
Please don't use frag, the explosions obscure where the shot actually lands, rendering your point moot.


Eh, the round lands in the middle of the puff of smoke, it actually shows up better than any other round would in that quality... ;o

Quoted

(14:06:57) Riesig: I should stop now. People might get sig material again

Posts: 66

Date of registration
: Jan 5th 2012

Platform: 360

Location: Germany

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

55

Wednesday, March 7th 2012, 7:31pm

Re: Is USAS really all that bad? Realism & My thoughts.

Quoted from ""Witchalok""

In my opinion DICE managed to create a very fun weapon - the USAS with frags.
It is extremely effective at ranges where a shotgun should not be. Also the kills (and multi-kills) with it tend to be quite spectacular.
At the same time, it does not take a lot of skill to use it.

Because of these two things (fun + easy to use) I strongly believe that they should have left it out of multi-player and only feature it in single-player.
I have not played the single-player campaign so I do not know if it makes an appearance, but I would love to be put in a level with 100-200 bad guys and an USAS.

In multi-player, I think that they could have passed on the frag rounds completely and also on the USAS. Yes frags are fun, but they are also too unique (being able to kill be the splash alone), so they are hard to balance.
Plus the USAS (before B2K) was the only full auto shotgun, completely outclassing all the other semis.

I think we should have had 2-3 pump action and 2-3 semi-autos.
M870, NS2000, Spas 12 / Saiga, M1014, DAO-12

I think DICE did a good job in BC2 balancing the shotguns (the slugs were a bit OP), why did they have to screw up in BF3?


+ 1

Playing on the box sometimes 70% of the players are using USAS.
Even on bigger levels and it soooooo boring to play. -:'(-
XBOX Gametag: Kool Snaip
PTFO!

Posts: 88

Date of registration
: Feb 18th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

56

Wednesday, March 7th 2012, 7:58pm

Re: Is USAS really all that bad? Realism & My thoughts.

It's sad that the difference between platforms is so big. The game might have the same title, but the issues we face are so different that it seems moot to discuss anything without sorting it in platform specific sub-forums.

I can't recall the last time I was shot with frag rounds, almost no one uses shotguns in the servers I'm in (PC, mostly British, Danish, German and Dutch) and the USAS is quite a rare occurence, as is the FAMAS.
I have never played 12 v 12 on Caspian (that sounds ridiculous and somewhat lonely).

Are the ones discussing the most, in this topic on the same platform or are you comparing PC with console?

It's odd 'cause it never occurred to me just how different the two platforms are, but seeing 12 v 12 Caspian sort of opened my eyes I guess. That map definitely plays best with 24 a side.
Platform: PC
I have signatures turned off.

Posts: 18

Date of registration
: Feb 26th 2012

Platform: 360

Location: Brooklyn

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

57

Thursday, March 8th 2012, 2:11am

Re: Is USAS really all that bad? Realism & My thoughts.

USAS itself isn't to bad. BUT add those fag rounds and you have a seriously OP and annoying weapon. They do more damage and out kill rockets and grenade launchers.

They need to be seriously downgraded.
It's not the size of the dog in the fight. It's the size of the fight in the dog.

Posts: 18

Date of registration
: Feb 26th 2012

Platform: 360

Location: Brooklyn

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

58

Thursday, March 8th 2012, 2:13am

Re: Is USAS really all that bad? Realism & My thoughts.

Quoted from ""Beyertech""

It's sad that the difference between platforms is so big. The game might have the same title, but the issues we face are so different that it seems moot to discuss anything without sorting it in platform specific sub-forums.

I can't recall the last time I was shot with frag rounds, almost no one uses shotguns in the servers I'm in (PC, mostly British, Danish, German and Dutch) and the USAS is quite a rare occurence, as is the FAMAS.
I have never played 12 v 12 on Caspian (that sounds ridiculous and somewhat lonely).

Are the ones discussing the most, in this topic on the same platform or are you comparing PC with console?

It's odd 'cause it never occurred to me just how different the two platforms are, but seeing 12 v 12 Caspian sort of opened my eyes I guess. That map definitely plays best with 24 a side.


Comparing PC to console is pointless. PC is the platform it's meant to be played on.Full stop.
In terms of the console getting some smaller maps for the reduced amount of players..... I'm all for it! ;o)
There isn't enough people on the map to be as fun as it should be.
It's not the size of the dog in the fight. It's the size of the fight in the dog.

Witchalok

Grounded in reality

(301)

Posts: 945

Date of registration
: Mar 6th 2012

Platform: PC

Location: Bucharest - Romania

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 7

  • Send private message

59

Thursday, March 8th 2012, 9:26am

Re: Is USAS really all that bad? Realism & My thoughts.

Quoted from ""Ill skillz 1881""


Comparing PC to console is pointless. PC is the platform it's meant to be played on.Full stop.
In terms of the console getting some smaller maps for the reduced amount of players..... I'm all for it! ;o)
There isn't enough people on the map to be as fun as it should be.


Well it's pretty clear the the PC is the leading platform.
However the reason why it was so completely eludes me.

Take a look here http://www.vgchartz.com/gamedb/?name=battlefield+3.
Assuming these are correct (and I have no reason to doubt that it is) then BF3 sold 1.42 million copies on PC, 4.53 million copies on PS3 and 5.32 on the X-box.

So in total it sold almost 7 times more on consoles than on PC. Why we got the sub par treatment, I don't know.

Concerning the map size compared to 24 players, out of the vanilla maps I find all of them playable, except Firestorm and Caspian.
Firestorm is just too big, period, Caspian is playable with action happening mostly at two of the flags.
Curiously, Kharg Island is very playable sometimes for the same reason. A and D are very far from B and C who are close together (i think the PC version has 5 flags so they might be have different letters).
So one side gets A, one gets D, and then all hell breaks loose at B and C.

Coming back to the USAS with frags however, it's not unusual to see it used even on these three maps, which are supposed to be large, open maps.
It's mostly because the aiming on consoles is harder than on PC (or slower at least), so these weapons sometimes kill faster than the M16 for example, as you don't really have to aim it. Just hip fire in the general direction and kill with the splash. You target will be too disorientated by the explosions + to suppressed to aim and kill you before you kill him.

In any case, Metro + Bazaar (only has 3 flags on consoles) + Seine (only has 4 flags) are a frag fest.

Riesig

Random Signature Generator

(814)

Posts: 5,065

Date of registration
: Mar 8th 2012

Platform: PC

Location: Philippines

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

  • Send private message

60

Thursday, March 8th 2012, 10:38am

Re: Is USAS really all that bad? Realism & My thoughts.

I therefore conclude that due to the slight inaccuracy and the amount of players able to play consoles widely varied that the easy gun called the USAS-12 with frag rounds cater to spray and pray having some fun.

Of course it's damn effective, that's why it's used.

As a PC player, I've used it, I sucked at it. But I mainly play CQ Large 32vs32, go figure. THAT THING IS UTTERLY USELESS ON THE BIG MAPS But noooo, they have to nerf that thing to smithereens because some meat grinders just play on Metro all day.

Can we have hope of using shotguns as a BF3 CQ Large weapon? I hope so.

Here's something I thought of : Get the shotgun to act like real world counterparts or at least a fraction of it where it still does considerable damage beyond 10 meters with a spread effective enough to at least cause X damage at 20Meters per shot.

Or use the shotgun as a secondary weapon. That's a nice idea. But they won't. Seriously, who played the engineer here on BF2. The SHOTGUN SUCKS ASS. You're literally rifle-sniper-lmg food.
I'm a tsundere tentacle