FANDOM


Forums: Index War Room Supply Weaponry Changes
Forum logo
Replacement filing cabinet This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page, other than for maintenance. If you wish to revisit this topic, please bring it up again in a new topic.

Hello! Well, With the release of Advance Warfare there has been the addition of the Supply drop variants of weapons. Currently we have the basics on most of them, Primarily their integrated attachments and stat changes. Yet we don't have images for them or a better system for the look. Here I have a slightly modified version of the supply drop variants of the ARX-160, Another edition I was planning to add to them is similar to the Mask information over on the Payday: The Hiest wiki, Having a picture of the variant and the stats more cleanly put in.

However, I do want the community input with this, just to see if everyone likes the idea and such.

Thanks for reading! Twig (Talk) wNJ2zkL.png 01:01, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

DiscussionEdit

So...i had already tried to make that happen (The colour scheme idea from your sandbox), but at the time, somebody had undone it...but anyway, seeing as we are on the subject of variants, some people may be aware that some variants also change the Mag size, and hence the Extended mag size as well, so should we also consider adding more to the Extended Mags/CoD11 Table, involving variants...anyway, i'm all for the new system already...i guess most others would be as well Personal LazarouDave image LazarouDave  01:07, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

I've talked to Sam about the idea of making it similar to the Emags pages, but we figured a template would be easier since you can edit it on-page. While this forum is here, I guess it would be a good time to talk about this stuff (I feel like I closed the other one a bit early but w/e) 4XBy83R.pngAntiScootaTwotalk  01:11, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

This was already discussed earlier in this forum, which is currently sitting in limbo since I asked Kat about making a template for it. As for the images, I've been working on transed images of the variants, which are here also. 4XBy83R.pngAntiScootaTwotalk  01:11, December 8, 2014 (UTC)

ive noticed some pages with them in tables instead, and to me that looks like the best one. War flag of the Imperial Japanese Army RisingSun2020 Personal RisingSun2013 2000px-Flag of JSDF.svg (RisingSun's Talk Page Blog Posts Contributions) 01:35, January 12, 2015 (UTC)

The source of the Tables https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1z3-syTEbrn5J2FKt_2yAEuHjsQ3DXtzbW_tTdCvAyo4/pubhtml
just use this...Personal LazarouDave image LazarouDave  01:37, January 12, 2015 (UTC)
that one looks nice. War flag of the Imperial Japanese Army RisingSun2020 Personal RisingSun2013 2000px-Flag of JSDF.svg (RisingSun's Talk Page Blog Posts Contributions) 01:43, January 12, 2015 (UTC)

As of now I've created tables with exact stats for all assault rifles pages (though for the AE4 variants we still need the number of shots before overheating). Are these tables good? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 12:47, February 1, 2015 (UTC)

I think the tables with the exact changes is the best, since it shows what truely changes instead of just "+/- 1".  I'd say we add them to all the weapon pages for AW. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 18:46, February 28, 2015 (UTC)
I'd prefer a hybrid option. Not having the +/- actually makes a bit more difficult to read, since it just throws the stats right at you instead of saying what is different to the base version. I'd prefer to see it say +2 damage and then any stat changes to make a bit easier to read. 09:28, March 1, 2015 (UTC)
I think that the exact changes option is fine as it is (I was actually planning to apply them to all weapons pages after I finished with assault rifles, but honestly that's a lot of work to do). The thing about the +/- is that it reflects the in-game create-a-class bars, which are commonly inaccurate; in fact, some of the supply drop changes stated in-game are erroneous. Another thing: regarding attachments in all games, we're not indicating either the +/- changes stated in-game. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 10:07, March 1, 2015 (UTC)
What I mean is, on the Advanced Rifling page we actually point out that it increases the max damage range. We don't just say "+500 metres" and leave it at that. I know the in-game stats can be incorrect at times, but looking over something like the ARX page, all I see is "Damage 35-20" (or something along those lines), but it doesn't help that I can't tell part which variants are +damage ones, I have to look at each stat separately to see the difference. Actually stating what the varinats do, and then saying the stat changes is much more helpful than just giving out the stats themselves. 13:41, March 1, 2015 (UTC)
Most of the time when I'm looking at the weapon variant charts, it's to see exactly what changes have been made to the new variant I just unlocked. And what would the hybrid option look like anyway? It just seems like it'd be adding unnecessary info to me. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 22:00, March 8, 2015 (UTC)
(Reset indent) One of the main reasons is also because of edits like this. Since I don't have that variant, and the in-game stat changes aren't listed, I have no idea if that's correct or not. I also think a few days ago a user was changing view kick to hip fire spread, which again I couldn't verify because the stat changes weren't listed. Just listing cold hard data is no help when it comes knowing what the stat changes are. Someone could completely vandalise those numbers, and I'd have no idea because these templates are simply unreadable for me. 14:35, April 13, 2015 (UTC) 
The Viewkick to Hipfire change was on the MP11 Goliath I think and since I got that variant I can confirm this was a mistake I made when I wrote the table.
Regarding the table, the ones I've been adding to some pages are those that do not include the + stats/ - stats. Why? Firstly, because they're in some cases erroneous: look at the KF5 Single Stack/Breakneck or the Pytaek Loophole. And secondly, I see them as plain useless. Because the stats are not the same for each weapon: for example, damage on snipers does not increase bullet damage, but multipliers and in the case of the MORS Silver Bullet penetration. Same for the ARX: damage +3 for the Steel Bite, yet it does the same damage as the Hole Puncher (damage +2), the difference is that there is a penetration bonus on the Steel Bite. Mobility, in some cases, increases movement speed, and in other cases, decreases ADS Time. Fire Rate affects the overheat time on the EM1, EPM3 and AE4. I find that pretty confusing for newbies who aren't stats pro and can't tell what each stat does - does accuracy decrease recoil or viewkick/does damage increase bullet damage or multipliers. We use colors to clearly indicate where is the + or the -.
In conclusion, I think the tables without the +/- are sufficient. For example, you get a variant, want to see what it increases/decreases? Go to the table, you see that the min. damage is increased to 35 (so that means you will 3 hit-kill at any range), but the hipspread cone is increased by 10%. That's what you want to know. You don't care about it being a Damage +1/Accuracy -1 since you don't always know what each stat means. Colors indicate clearly what stats are increased or decreased and I think they're just fine. VaultTecLogo.png Rain - Talk VaultTecLogo.png 15:44, April 13, 2015 (UTC)

The exact changes option is completely fine for me. Just the +/- tables we have now will suffice(although not all weapon pages have been modified to reflect that). The only thing I really want for weapon pages in general is to display their range (when necessary) in meters, alongside inches, since the United States, Burma, and Liberia are the only countries which dominantly use the Imperial system of units over the metric system of units. Didikins (talk) 01:02, April 6, 2015 (UTC)

I suggest adding the stats for the base variant, namely damage, range, rate of fire, and magazine/extend magazine capacity, basically anything that isn't changed by a percentage, possibly as another entry in the table. To make it easier to determine how changes to those stats effect the weapon.

On a side note, a small problem I feel obligated to point out is, there is almost certainly a mistake on the IMR article. In the disadvantages sections on several variants that reduce the range, the range is different on the Impact variant verse the Pillager and Feedback variants, which I have a gut feeling should all be the same. Since there is only a difference in the decimal point placement and several variants on most weapons usually have the same changes. I would change it myself, but I don't know which stat is correct. Zeta1127 of the 89th Legion (talk) 05:57, April 13, 2015 (UTC)

These numbers reflect exactly the in-game stats; the 87.04 value on the Pillager/Feedback is a mistake by Sledgehammer that was not patched yet. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 11:24, April 13, 2015 (UTC)

NoteEdit

I thought I'd just add to this discussion by noting that the effects of the differing stats on Variants are noted on this page. I'm only bringing it up because I haven't seen anyone take note of it yet in this discussion, and there seems to be confusion among what the actual effects of each stat change are. Personal MLGisNot4Me DragonbornDremYolLok  19:46, April 14, 2015 (UTC)

We should probably put a link to that somewhere by the supply drop tables, since I always forget about that page and I doubt many anons eve know it exists. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 16:42, May 21, 2015 (UTC)

On a side note, I feel that it isn't necessary to point out every erroneous create-a-class stats in the supply drop tables (such as this and this). While we can mention some of them in the main page's weapon description (like the Loophole's description here), there are many inaccuracies in the CaC menu (similarly to attachments stats inaccuracies in previous games). I think we can stick to the stats that are present in the tables. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 14:58, May 21, 2015 (UTC)

Why not? Side-notes like "Handling -3 acts as Handling +3" are still helpful, especially if you come to the SD variants table and wonder "where the hell is the Handling -3" without always reading the full article. VaultTecLogo.png Rain - Talk VaultTecLogo.png 15:02, May 21, 2015 (UTC)
How are they helpful when they aren't even a very accurate measurement of what is increased/decreased and sometimes things like handling and mobility change different things depending on the type of weapon being used? Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 16:42, May 21, 2015 (UTC)
There's nothing wrong with pinpointing inaccuracies made by the game. We have it in the multiplayer section for the Pytaek, but I think it is more noticeable in the SD variants table. VaultTecLogo.png Rain - Talk VaultTecLogo.png 16:59, May 21, 2015 (UTC)
Personally, I like us showing the +/- shown in game. Granted, they might not be all that accurate, but that's what we ahve the raw data for, and we can easily side-note any inaccuracies. But mainly I like it because it makes it just that bit easier to read. Seeing just "Positives" and then a bunch of random numbers can be a bit daunting. If I see the variant is a +Damage variant, then I know the stats are going to be damage related. And since +damage may catch my eye, since I may be looking for a +damage variant, I can easily check between +damage variants to see which I like most. Having raw data works, but can also be a bit daunting for the reader. I mean, take a look at our chat on Ext. Mags. It's really helpful, but having all that raw data in your face can also put a lot of people off.

Closed - Forum is dead; tables will stay how they are. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 19:16, September 14, 2015 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.