A Simple Poll About The Weapon System

[mrnok14l]

It seems rather too lengthy to go over the weapon system under the influence of the upgrade system, I so thought let's just do a simple poll about it. Results: http://pollmaker.vote/r/2F4GD5PG

Feel free to disclose and explain your choice down below.

 

[mrnok14l]

I chose 3 Gasnades, though I'd say I'm more so on the bad side of things.

I don't like the upgrade system for dumbing down a lot of the options, for instance: making a battle rifle - per say - like the SCAR-H ending up being no different than a stats exchange of weight and mag size with an assault rifle like the AK-12.

In terms, the diversity there once exist is no more nor the same because the differences we previously have between a tier-3 and a tier-4 have diminished. And with their upgraded final form being ultimately the same, the weapon meta is now at a point where - what weapon you'll wind up choosing doesn't really matter, so picking up and using different option is not as tactical nor as fun as what it used to.

Practically speaking, the system as it stands enforces you to upgrade a lot of what were unnecessary for this procedure because they are nerfed across the board, yet by doing do it takes away your choice as you will no longer have that much dosh to invest on alternatives, meaning the gameplay also stales in one way or the other.

From the perspective of a Commando player, the game now plays like: saving for AK-12 because the rest sucks >> upgrade AK-12 because the rest won't be as good >> upgrade AK-12 >> game ends.


Still, I think a system that could alter the performance could bring a lot of potential to the weapon system in general, such as: Instead of some linear stats upgrade, why not remove the damage penalty on the Railgun with the upgrade? or reduce the weight by 1 block on AR15VR to make it ever more so a neat little carbine? It doesn't has to be a pointless arms race of stats, it could literally be a 'upgrade' of any (useful/meaningful) kind.

In conjunction with the weapon system as a whole: I'd say that the upgrade system should only exist if the weapon meta could remain self-supporting and natural, meaning no weapon should be worthwhile only when upgraded and no weapon should be edged out as of the upgrade of others; and that it could develop the specialty - like deepening the niche/value in each option - so upgrading itself is healthy for the whole meta, instead of being worthwhile on those that's already worthwhile due to things such as cost-effectiveness.

 

[Servalion]

I chose 3 Gasnades, though I'd say I'm more so on the bad side of things.

I don't like the upgrade system for dumbing down a lot of the options, for instance: making a battle rifle - per say - like the SCAR-H ending up being no different than a stats exchange of weight and mag size with an assault rifle like the AK-12.

In terms, the diversity there once exist is no more nor the same because what weapon you choose doesn't really matter with their final form being ultimately the same. And the game executes this concept in a poor way by making the outcome - hence each upgrade - all in themselves the same and meaningless.

Practically speaking, the system as it stands enforces you to upgrade a lot of what were unnecessary for this procedure because they are nerfed across the board, yet by doing do it takes away your choice as you will no longer have that much dosh to invest on alternatives, meaning the gameplay stales in one way or the other.

From the perspective of a Commando player, the game now plays like: saving for AK-12 because the rest sucks >> upgrade AK-12 because the rest won't be as good >> upgrade AK-12 >> game ends.


Still, I think a system that could alter the performance could bring a lot of potential to the weapon system in general, such as: Instead of some linear stats upgrade, why not remove the damage penalty on the Railgun with the upgrade?

A solid way of stating the state of things. Its true, the straight damage upgrades currently removes a lot of the balance, order and diversity of many, if not most weapons. What we need are performance upgrades, not simply straight damage.

Like its been said, the current system is just a placeholder to be refined as we continue along.

I think the best solution would be to revert the previous T4s back to their T4 status, and limit the option to upgrade damage to just once per weapon, if at all. Multiple performance upgrades per weapon would be ideal in the future, but until then, if we're stuck with only one upgrade avenue per weapon, it ought to be something that visibly impacts and improves how they perform, rather than just generically boosting raw damage. Furthermore, it will give weapons even more diversity while returning to a tiered system of weapon hierarchy. The natural order must be restored.

 

[oldmidget]

SCAR has more damage, better ammo price, better recoil(IMO), singlefire instead of burst, quicker bash, quicker reloads, higher full auto RPM, weighs 1 block less, and has higher stumble power.

but really, if were talking about commando, try the tier5 9mm with backup. Its 90 damage i think. basically a 15 round deagle.

 

[Ralex]

I gotta say, my biggest complaint is how all the tier 4's are now tier 3's. I'm not sure if people agree with me on this, but i'd much rather have them be where they were originally, and only be able to be upgraded once. Also, shouldn't the medic's weapon's names be adjusted to fit their tiers? Like if the med-ar stays as a tier 3, shouldn't it be the HM-Tech 302 instead of the HM-Tech 401?

 

[mrnok14l]

SCAR has more damage, better ammo price, better recoil(IMO), singlefire instead of burst, quicker bash, quicker reloads, higher full auto RPM, weighs 1 block less, and has higher stumble power.

By the amount of stats that TWI had forgo to... rush the system to test, I think it shows how much they wanted us to have it, which scares me. #ThisIsNotDaWae

but really, if were talking about commando, try the tier5 9mm with backup. Its 90 damage i think. basically a 15 round deagle.

Tried, not a fan. It requires too much investment as well as trouble (for not spending dosh on quote unquote real weapons) with too little results that are already achievable.

Though, I'll admit it's crazy that 9mm dualies could perform like that, sadly it is just not fair as soon as the cross-comparison starts, so my opinion will go against this.

 

[PurpleFanta]

I voted for both 3 and 4, I like it, but It NEEDS some work lol. Right now I find myself ending with 1 gun and hardly anything to spare, maybe a second if I'm practically carrying.

Just being raw damage is, I know a starting point, but it really needs to be worked beyond that like they said they are going to.

My biggest gripe right now is that medic has 3 tier 3 weapons. All of medics weapons feel pretty same-y now. It needs something new to make it feel different, like a crossbow or some bio weapon. It just feels like 3 similarly powered shooty guns and the hemogoblin. If that makes any sense at all.

 

[Bluntman420]

I voted for both 3 and 4, I like it, but It NEEDS some work lol. Right now I find myself ending with 1 gun and hardly anything to spare, maybe a second if I'm practically carrying.

Just being raw damage is, I know a starting point, but it really needs to be worked beyond that like they said they are going to.

My biggest gripe right now is that medic has 3 tier 3 weapons. All of medics weapons feel pretty same-y now. It needs something new to make it feel different, like a crossbow or some bio weapon. It just feels like 3 similarly powered shooty guns and the hemogoblin. If that makes any sense at all.

Agreed for the most part. I do find myself with a couple weapons. The thing that this system does is that it makes you update based on need. Also, the hemogoblin is awesome when upgraded. That said, the rest of medic is kinda bland.

It's not bad but I voted for 3 because it is just kind of ok right now. I think that some of the nerfs were a little much and i do think that tier 4's should've just been left at tier 4. Also, the upping the boomstick and other tier 2 weapons in price is a pain in the arse. I do really enjoy fully upgraded weapons and un-upgraded weapons aren't all that bad as backups. My two favorites right now are the nailgun and xbow.

 

[oldmidget]

By the amount of stats that TWI had forgo to... rush the system to test, I think it shows how much they wanted us to have it, which scares me. #ThisIsNotDaWae




Tried, not a fan. It requires too much investment as well as trouble (for not spending dosh on quote unquote real weapons) with too little results that are already achievable.

Though, I'll admit it's crazy that 9mm dualies could perform like that, sadly it is just not fair as soon as the cross-comparison starts, so my opinion will go against this.

To be fair TWI said upfront the system isnt necessarily fully fleshed out, and that they want to make upgrades effect other stats as well. And i can get the 9mm to tier 5, with 1 other tier 5 by the end game. but ammo is a definite concern, thats why ive been pairing with SCAR when i do decide to go that route.

I feel like this entire system would have been more well receive if it had been just for endless. Thats where it seems like itd be balanced for. But i do want the system for regular game mode too, only tweaked like you said.

 

[mrnok14l]

And i can get the 9mm to tier 5, with 1 other tier 5 by the end game.

It's kind of alarming to be honest. It means the system is hardly usable below medium/long length, even not at all if the team is taking casualties.

 

[Gladius]

I didn't look deep into the latest update yet. My first impression about the weapon upgrade system:


The good thing about it is that weapons get more viable off-perk. Example: When the gunslinger perk was initially released in v1015 the .500 magnum revolver needed 13-14 headshots to take down a fleshpound on-perk. This was lowered in v1035 to 8-9. Now with the latest update, a fully upgraded 500 mag OFF-PERK needs 12 headshots for a FP. So this is on the damage scale where it is comfortable to do a takedown and that off-perk.

The question now is just what is the point of damage buffs in the first place, when you make everything viable on every perk anyways? Imo it would have been more interesting to design the off-perk system around perk effects, so that weapons behave differently on different perks. For example a firebug causing bulletpanic. SWAT doing shotgun-snare etc.


The bad thing what I don't understand is why the maximum damage on-perk had to be increased too. There is a constant power creep with new weapons and that just dumbs the game down to the point where new zeds have to be released to get back some difficulty. Which leads me to what I think about the EDARs but this gets off-topic now.

 

[mrnok14l]

A solid way of stating the state of things. Its true, the straight damage upgrades currently removes a lot of the balance, order and diversity of many, if not most weapons. What we need are performance upgrades, not simply straight damage.

Like its been said, the current system is just a placeholder to be refined as we continue along.

I think the best solution would be to revert the previous T4s back to their T4 status, and limit the option to upgrade damage to just once per weapon, if at all. Multiple performance upgrades per weapon would be ideal in the future, but until then, if we're stuck with only one upgrade avenue per weapon, it ought to be something that visibly impacts and improves how they perform, rather than just generically boosting raw damage. Furthermore, it will give weapons even more diversity while returning to a tiered system of weapon hierarchy. The natural order must be restored.

Refined the statement a little, fret not, the main point should remain the same.