NERF THE WINGMAN/PEACEKEEPER
Honestly, every fight early game or even in the late game, any time you get into a gun fight, and you don't have either one of these guns, you're very unlikely to win the battle. Nerf the peacekeeper...
Forum Discussion
All weapons in the game are viable,. Some are just better than others. One person brought up the issue with sheilds, just as I did. Maybe it's not the gun's dmg output as much as it is the Sheilds/Clip size of certain weapons. Hence Peacekeeper and Wingman should be left alone IMO.
I was being self righteous towards the herb that made that "Real gamers" comment in the first place, however, I'm not sorry if you were offended.@Comanglia-ttv
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I just happen to think your opinion is wrong.
@BetOnBoogie If there's guns that are objectively better in what the other gun is supposed to be good at, while also being good at what the other gun is bad at, that makes the worse gun not viable.
E.g. Wingman vs. Mozambique. In which situation is the Mozambique viable if you could use the wingman instead? Same bodyshot damage, Wingman does far more headshot damage, has double the magazine size, far better range, can extend the magazine even further, has better DPS even with the stock magazine, reloads faster... It's literally better in every conceivable way. That's the definition of "not viable". If there's no situation in which you would choose to use this weapon over the alternative.
- Read my other posts before you give an example like that. Obviously the Mozambique is horrible....
Viable Guns (that are not the Peacekeeper/Wingman):
- Spitfire
- R-99
- R-301
- Hemlock
- Alternator
- Triple Take
- Havoc/Devotion
Yes some may need attachments, but that is PART OF THE GAME. Those guns can easily kill someone with no attachments and then you can loot their bodies or the surrounding area to find what you need. My point is simple and most will disagree, but if you really have that much trouble against these weapons (Peacekeeper/Wingman) I personally think you are just a bad player, that can't figure out a way to outplay your opponents using these weapons.
That's the point... if there's a gun that no one in their right mind would ever use if not for necessity, it's not viable. You said all weapons are viable. Hell, you could say it's so bad you're better off trying to punch people to death. I do that occasionally against people who got a gun that's not good before I got anything and win and I'm not particularly good at the game.
I excluded the Mozambique and P2020 from being viable guns...that's a given. My issue is complainin about guns that actually do their job. Such as the Wingman and Peacekeeper......
I agree that the other guns can all be used and are viable choices.
However, I do think that the Peacekeeper and Wingman tend to be the strongest "out of the box", meaning even if you don't get any attachments they're still amazingly strong. "That's the game", yeah, yeah I know, it has lots of RNG and that's okay, but even with RNG shouldn't the strongest guns be somewhat rare? There's the two legendary weapons after all. And I've seen people arguing that Wingman/Peacekeeper are still better than those.
I can totally agree with making these guns less common, as I said in one of my previous posts, but nerfing the damage is unnecessary to me. They do great the way they are in this game. Shields can be ridiculous to penetrate in this game and those two guns do a great job of doing just that. I also think that with how fast paced this game is Shields need to be high in order to increase survival. I think the Mastiff is better than the Peacekeeper, but has a high skill gap. You need to be more accurate and selective of your shots. Ultimately, some guns can be much better by simply increasing their stock clip size (R-99/R-301). I feel people are making these two guns out to be more imbalance than they actually are.
Community Highlights
- EA_Mako21 days ago
Community Manager
