It will tak epractice and PC Players have a significant advantage ... but broadly agree for long range. 

Up close a bit harder. 

This post does not pertain to any of the artillery or guided weapons, it was simply pointing out how much of an overreaction it was for people to complain about EM Rifles being nerfed.

Yes rocket mortars are completely broken against tanks and slower attacker mechs, yes the disc launchers can hit around corners, yes the arc torrents have way too much range for their DPS, and yes the guided racks one-shotting most mechs is annoying. But that was not the focus of this post.

No one can take someone with a profile picture of a cartoon baby seriously. 

SO... let's compare the two- longarms to Em rifle's lets use level 12's  1 star to compare

Magazine: Em-1, Longarms 5 

Reload Em: 5.3 , Longarm 12 

Range Em: 165, Longarms 180

Damage per mag: Em 8132, Longarms 23, 070

So lets see less rounds less damage less range + shot delay for the Em rifle .... Why would anyone choose the EM Rifle with that info???? I choose the Em rifle to help defend the surge and slingshots that rush me ... I would have spent the money on a diff mech or weapon had I known ...  You can try and make it a skill issue if you choose but the numbers do not lie I would have never spent a Penny on the EM rifles had this change been in place at the time of purchase... 

The EM rifle nerf is awful. Before tonight, I only played this game on my phone, which I'd imagine a number of players are the same way. I tried it on my computer tonight just to see if they were easier to use that way. Here's the thing, I always played this game on my phone, I never play games on my computer, and it was so much easier to use them on my computer. To be able to be so much more proficient playing through a means that I never play versus a means that I always do is something that should not be the case. I could see if there was slight improvement, just because playing on a computer allows more finesse, but not to the extent that I experienced. Add in the fact that most of the time you're playing against bots, and their aim with EM rifles hasn't been nerfed, it seems to me that this has actually unbalanced the game. I haven't played with railguns, so I can't speak to the difficulty of hitting with them, but it is significantly easier to hit a target with a longarm that fires immediately versus the EM rifle with the buildup before the shot. To have to control a precise shot with a buildup before it fires through the clunky controls provided through a mobile game is considerably difficult.

It's also an absolute middle finger to so many players who paid for the item and upgrades based on what it was, only to now have an item significantly less effective. I'm also at a loss as to what made the developers decide that this was the weapon in the game that needed to be nerfed. The number one complained about weapon has to be rocket mortars, and for far longer. I'd say I've seen as many complaints about disc launchers and javelins as EM rifles as well. I've seen far more matches completely determined by one or two players on a team with mortars than EM rifles, and mortars require next to no aim.

I also never really felt that EM rifles needed a nerf in the first place. Sure they were powerful, but they were extremely fun, and could still be challenged by any number of means. Surge, killshot, panther, aegis, mortars, javelins, disc launchers, or just another EM rifle, especially if you do miss a shot.

Are EM rifles useless now? No, but there's nothing particularly special about them. There's nothing that makes them a preferrable weapon over something like longarms or railguns, which they did have before. I know I wouldn't have invested anything into EM rifles as they are now had they been that way when they came out, which is the whole issue with the changes, it was a waste.

You got it right! The Update was made to make the Weapon more balanced compared to other Weapons in the game, but we intentionally kept it one of the top ones.

That is not the debate tho, whether EM are weak or strong now isnt the issue.

The issue is about the scummy tactic this company use, it promote a product with certain attributes that makes it attractive to buyers, people buy into it, the company realise that said product is too good and is preventing buyers from needing to buy other newer products, so the company decide to violate that purchase agreement and break the trust of buyers, aka nerfing/scamming them.

that is the equivalent of rug-pulling in NFTS in terms of shittiness

My dear (or deer?) friend :D.... your video just proof that you are just PC user, nothing more....I can perform better :P (just kidding...rather want you in my team then opposing)

...but most common reason you buy EM is to have universal sniping rifle for mobile gaming.

On mobile you need compensation for the delay before shot and auto aim is crucial feature. If we are talking about sniper comunity with PC and mobile users together on one battlefield.

but what is more impotant is the fact that this kind of behavior is not right at all. You get what you buy, thats the rule numero uno.  

" ...We decide to remove your steering wheel from your brand new car, because other poor users riding only train at it is not fair...

regards

Plarium Balance justice league"

PS( to everyone): dont bully Besticio! He has full right to be upset! 

HA-HA

I was actually pretty frustrated by the EMR having auto-aim. Even though the enemy is technically expossd they might not be exposed to EMR because their center is hidden. Still having the shot delay though is weird.

I'm missing way less often without the auto-aim. You also now have access to smaller hit boxes that missed with auto aim in the past. But before, even when locked on if the bot moved too much perpendicualarly then the auto lock would pop off right before firing. Now you just keep that reticle on target and boom.

Against bots in 5 on 5 it's still very easy to emass over 20 kills with EMs. 

I think the auto-aim made it easy for button pushers to be good with them. Now you have to have some dexterity to use them effectively. 

Honestly simply toning down the double damage and making them not as useful at close range might have been a better solution. Since the targeting laser no longer does anything, keeping the shot delay seems counterintuitive.

why you are fooling people?? sell and nerf after is a part of income here. mortar can 1shot several mechs simply standing in spawn and nothing is done with it, and you call it balance?? stop fooling people , wait for over a year and when sale goes down - nerf

I'm glad daddy can buy you a car.

SKILL ??, does it seem like a game where some rocket mortar skill prevails,, disck launcher, javelin, point and shoot, the target can escape, it will be hit anyway..., you call it skill?? , it is evident that you know nothing about the game, perhaps you are a developer who comments in secret.

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 

The Consumer Rights Act sets out your rights when you buy products, services and digital content

As with the Sale of Goods Act, under the Consumer Rights Act all products must be of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and as described.  

The rules also include digital content in this definition. So all products - whether physical or digital - must meet the following standards: 

• Fit for purpose: The goods should be fit for the purpose they are supplied for, as well as any specific purpose you made known to the retailer before you agreed to buy the goods. 
• As described: The goods supplied must match any description given to you, or any models or samples shown to you at the time of purchase.
• Satisfactory quality: Goods shouldn't be faulty or damaged when you receive them. You should ask what a reasonable person would consider satisfactory for the goods in question. For example, bargain-bucket products won’t be held to as high standards as luxury goods 

Since my em-rifle is no longer as described under the consumer rights act 2015 i have a claim.

Hopefully people have now learnt not to buy new weapons in the most severe way. It will hurt their income as people won't invest as much though fear of the nerf. 

I can't complain about spending money on em16 or my em 10 & 6 I won all of them. My complaint is I suffer (maybe "have" is better here I don't really suffer) from tremors and the auto assist was a huge help because when I'm shaking and try to fire a precision weapon I inevitably  jerk to the left or right. So it's not all about skill.

  Also let's not forget about it being a legendary weapon what's so legendary about it now? What separates it from a long arm? It deals more damage, big deal. At least with two longarm 12's you can take multiple shots and kill things reeeeeaaaal quick. 

  There needs to be a give because I'm tired of the 

Perhaps you should give a detailed explanation of what makes this so top now. 

  What makes this weapon legendary now.

  I understand you can't naysay your employers but there is nothing special about this "LEGENDARY" weapon anymore.

  That it deals a lot of damage, sure, until you're up close to a target. Then it is 

I don't agree.EM rimless damage wasn't the point.It was the AIM ASSIT that was good.Although EM rifle"s damage is high,true,but the aim assit is more important..

Bruh. 

Sorry, but did you see the meta prior to the nerf? 

It was O-N-L-Y EM rifles. It was all people used. It made for boring and stale gameplay, not to mention being a pain to play against. 

The meta was basically just:

Surge & EMs

Bastion & EMs

Panther & EMs

Redeemer & EMs 

Eclipse/Shadow EMs

You prefer it that way? 

Getting one-hit every time you come round a corner? 

EMs give you 0.7 seconds to react. Mortars give you alot more. 

Don't forget, mortars have a WAY longer cooldown than EMs. 

EMs are still really OP, IF you can hit your shots. I if you've played the game for a bit, it shouldn't be a problem. I'm assuming you've played the game for a 'bit'. So what's the matter? If you are so mad, just use mortars. It's an equal level of 'scum' in my eyes. 

I mean not to be offencive. I am simply pointing out a flaw in you logic.