Have only noticed the issue on these two guns mentioned, but they are doing 27 damage instead of the stated 33 damage. As such, these guns are really lackluster until their damage is fixed. Is there any update regarding this - are the devs aware?
I’ve tested a handful of the guns and found this issue. I hope it’s addressed especially in the case of some of the smg’s as they become very lackluster needing 6 or more shots to kill someone at close range.
m1014 deal low dmg too, some assault rifles have this problem too.
-- damage falloff on most guns starts at around 0-10 meters mark and that is why 10m target gives these results, this is idiotic--
Almost >half of the damage numbers in the tooltip don't match actual damage numbers. If you have a fair amout on guns unlocked you can test them in the shooting range on 10m target.
For example:
-RPKM tooltip:33 real:27
+M60: tooltip:33 real:33 (match)
-SGX tooltip:25 real:20
-UMG40 tooltip:25 real:21
-USG90: tooltip:20 real:18
-SG553 tooltip:33 real:25
+M4A1 tooltip:25 real:25 (match)
+CORD tooltip:20 real:20 (match)
-QBZ tooltip:25 real:21
-SCW tooltip:33 real:20
Generally, assault rifles seem to be all correct. There's many more of these cases.
Perhaps those numbers are based on something like 5 meter range, but then again - that's messed up if falloff begins at 10m range already, that doesn't make sense at all.
Also, I don't think devs are aware of it at all and almost nobody seems to care about it either, the issue gets little to no traction. I think I will make a full report today on all the numbers and send them an email too.
I think this is one of the biggest issues right now and yet, nobody knows it exists.
This was also a bug present in the Beta, but there was nowhere to share feedback so I couldn't make any kind of report on it.
The SCW Submachinegun shows 33 damage, actual damage is 20.
I get what you're saying, obviously there's a dmg falloff that's not explicitly stated anywhere yet. It makes sense that SMG's generally have a shorter falloff than AR's and LMG's. But when you compare within these categories, it just doesn't make sense for the higher damage, lower ROF guns (like NVO and RPKM) to have shorter falloff ranges than their lower damage, higher ROF alternatives (M433 and DRS - both of which do their listed damage on the 10m range target).
That means that using these guns (some of which are ofc much harder to unlock than the default unlocked guns) in any engagement over the ~5m or so listed value falloff range would be objectively worse DPS in the vast majority of situations. It makes no sense game design wise to grind and unlock something that gives you less DPS than the starting gun, which is why I'm leaning on this being a bug.
Would appreciate official clarity on this.
That's another thing, I've rarely seen it mentioned compared to some other things (granted, there's priorities to everything). Hopefully people spread the word and we get a statement on this at least.
Just tested on a bot, NVO does 33 dmg at point blank. So the issue here isn't really the listed value, that's shown correctly. It's the point I made above re: dmg falloff comparative to their equivalent alternatives. Ex:
M433 damage values (at 1m, 10m, 20m, 35m, 50m, 70m): 25, 25, 25, 20, 20, 20 - ROF: 830
NVO damage values (at 1m, 10m, 20m, 35m, 50m, 70m): 33, 27, 27, 21, 20, 20 - ROF: 654
It just doesn't make sense that the default level 1 AR does significantly more DPS after a range of 5m due to the higher ROF compared to the NVO. That's like 90%+ of engagements with an AR.
I too noticed I got 3 hits point blank to guys over and over and over with the RPKM and they were all not DEAD>
