Forum Discussion

CloverDeuce's avatar
CloverDeuce
Seasoned Ace
3 years ago

Weapon nerfs and buffs

Sorta a rant for be, but it seems that all the nerfs and buffs of weapons are centered primarily around damage. I do not know coding or the time and work related to coding but it seems to me that only one aspect of weapons are being addressed concerning nerfs/buffs. IMO it seems that these are just easy fixes and not centered in anything realistic or actually addressing the real problem in a lot of cases. I am not asking for a mil-sim game, but c’mon, put some effort into it.

Take the K30, there was nothing wrong with the damage of the ammo, the problem was the accuracy at mid and long ranges, but the nerf was a uniform reduction of damage. This actually does nothing to fix the real problem, which is players getting lasered by an SMG at 200 meters. Just takes a couple extra bullets now.

And my personal pet peeve, who was complaining about the M5A3 close combat ammo(or the MP9 ammo for that matter)? Why was that change made?

Also, different ammo types will affect the range, rate of fire(RoF), handling and accuracy of a gun, but getting hit by a bullet should still be getting hit by a bullet. I struggle with understanding the thought process behind Armor Piercing ammunition doing less damage than standard ammo against personnel. Require AP ammo to use a heavy/long barrel and have it affect ADS speed, RoF and handling, BUT don’t tell me that a round that will penetrate armor isn’t going to do AT LEAST the same amount of damage as standard ammo.

Close combat ammo should give a higher RoF with reduced damage and range.

High power ammo should have sustained damage with more accuracy at distance, but the ROF and handling of the weapon should be reduced.

Do the developers have an actual reference when coding the firearm parameters? It would be extremely beneficial to have some 1st hand knowledge of the effects they are trying to make. Go to the range and blow off some rounds.

In general:

SMG are quick kills in CQ, but the accuracy should go down hill fast with range.

Shotguns in CQ should be 1 shot (within 10m) and also decline fast with range. Their RoF and reload should also be longer. (Slugs are a separate issue)

AR should be effective Close to Mid with the appropriate ADS for each sight and barrel length.

Marksman Rifles should be effective Mid to Long, with penalties to the ADS at close ranges unless hip fired, regardless of the sight mounted on it. Barrel length is a factor on any gun concerning ADS and handling. MR should also have a little more punch than their AR counterparts.

Sniper rifles are the same as marksman, but should be more effective at longer ranges. Because of the higher calibers, RoF and handling should always be a factor. ADS needs to be factored into the length and weight of sniper rifles. Sorta tired of getting tapped by some guy doing a constant jig at 1200 meters who can ADS instantly after every shot.

Please review whatever algorithms you are using to calculate the weapon specifications and adjust accordingly, and please remember that reducing or adding damage is NOT always the correct fix.

discussion

3 Replies

  • RMEChief's avatar
    RMEChief
    Legend
    3 years ago
    @CloverDeuce you are not wrong.

    The AP rounds should do more damage to infantry.

    I am not a dev either but I think it comes down to the result of the buff or nerf, not how they got there.

    So if nerfing a weapon makes it kill slower, does it matter if it is from more spread, less damage, slower projectile speed, or more recoil?

    I think the damage reduction is the simplest one and the one that has the least secondary effects or variance between players.

    If you add recoil to lower TTK, that may not impact great players who can control recoil better. Things like that.

    These are my assumptions and all my comments are within the guidelines of this forum.
  • Pantleon's avatar
    Pantleon
    3 years ago

    I agree they nerfed these guns the wrong way, should have reduced the effectiveness at range not the close range damage.

    But, i have no problem understanding why they would nerf the M5A3 and MP9 when they are already nerfing the K30. These guns perform so similar on paper it would be like nerfing the Condor and doing nothing about the Hind.

    Mp9(200.222ms) and K30(200.169ms) ttk difference is a fraction of a ms. MP9 have better accuracy and less recoil when you ADS. K30 is better when you hip fire.

    M5A3 with short barrel and close combat ammo was a beast. It killed faster(195ms) with more accuracy and less recoil while ADS.

    I would not be so salty about this nerf, if the close combat ammo on my M5A3 wassn't locked due to a bug and the fantastic people at EA support sorted it out in only 7 months, just in time so i could enjoy the gun for 2 weeks before these MOTHERfathers nerfed the thing.

    PBX is looking good right now.

  • CloverDeuce's avatar
    CloverDeuce
    Seasoned Ace
    3 years ago
    @Pantleon Not bothered too much by the M5A3 and MP9, just irritating. You are correct, and I agree that because of how they looked on paper, they nerfed in line with the K30 nerf. Problem is, the K30 nerf was the wrong solution, which impacted the other 2 guns that I don't believe anyone was complaining about. So, DICE misunderstanding the problem with the K30 has now resulted in changes made to 3 guns, and the K30 is still OP at range..

Featured Places

Recent Discussions