Help us improve Answers HQ! Take Survey No, Thanks

It's not the design of the guns that sucks - it is the low damage vs. gear.

by TheReal_USA_MAGA
Reply

Original Post

Accepted Solution

It's not the design of the guns that sucks - it is the low damage vs. gear.

★★★★ Guide

Hi All,

 

I have loads of end game guns - some of which have amazing rolls.  This issue I have with them is they just aren't hitting that hard.  A Razza's Ripper with 400 weapon damage should be a tornado of death.  It is less than meh on GM3.  I'm reduced to only using the priming guns like Jarras and Ralners - and I used them only to prime and as stat sticks.

 

If they upped the damage of each Legendary weapon by a good deal - I think that just makes sense.   I wouldn't put this in the category of massively time consuming.  Just up the base weapon damage buff of each Javelin and have that buff apply to each gun held.

 

If the devs only want to look at this for future feedback for Anthem 2 - that is fine.  But a looter SHOOTER should have guns that are actually fun to use in the end game.  Radical and disruptive concept I know...

 

Thanks for reading,

 

USA

Message 1 of 13 (2,040 Views)

Accepted Solution

Re: It's not the design of the guns that sucks - it is the low damage vs. gear.

★ Pro

@TheReal_USA_MAGA 

 

Two cents worth

How about a universal component dedicated to enhance all gun damage.

 

Cheers,

Beer

View in thread

Message 10 of 13 (1,893 Views)

All Replies

Re: It's not the design of the guns that sucks - it is the low damage vs. gear.

★★★★★ Guide

Yeah. A looter shooter should have things good for end game. But you know what it also needs? End game. Not throwing any shade here. Just pointing out a much bigger (and more obvious)  problem

Message 2 of 13 (2,015 Views)

Re: It's not the design of the guns that sucks - it is the low damage vs. gear.

[ Edited ]
Champion

Pretty sure the devs didn’t call their game a 'looter shooter' pretty sure it was always called an action game. That being said, they had in the past mentioned that they wanted to be sure to get guns to a more competitive state. Likely including some of that in what they are reworking now. Personally, I don’t really care much that weapons aren’t the main focus... plenty of games out their already where guns are the main thing. I like watching my ability animations.... reloading animations... meh.

And you talk like guns just need a big buff... that’s not all that's needed, a big buff to guns would mean that abilities would need a nerf. Or you’d be making GM3 even more trivial than it already is.

What happens if you attempt to mostly use guns to kill things, does it take longer than abilities? Or can you not use them at all without being killed by enemies first? If you use an acid debuff or an interceptor/colossus debuff, does that help? Maybe those abilities should only apply a debuff that affects gun damage? What do you think?

Do gun-based loadouts need to be buffed? Probably, but just because guns aren’t the fastest way to kill things doesn’t mean it’s completely broken. Players often just don’t have any patience for anything that isn’t 'best' or 'fastest' or most efficient.

________________________________________

Just another gamer hoping to help.
Love playing RPGs, MMOs, and Action games.
Like watching most other games.

I'm not employed by EA.
Message 3 of 13 (1,995 Views)

Re: It's not the design of the guns that sucks - it is the low damage vs. gear.

★★★★ Guide
@ChiraaKitteh Actually in general the guns just suck from a damage perspective. It could be something that just has to do with GM2 and GM3 balancing. Well rolled guns are still good on GM2 - once you get to GM3 the only ones worth holding are the ones that prime.

Your perspective that it is ok to have a game where guns are secondary is a reasonable perspective for sure. I wonder how many people just don't find the game fun once the gunplay drops dead on GM3 though? People love their guns. If you have a well rolled gun and then it is just useless on GM3 that kinda sucks. The Machine Pistols, Pistols, and Sniper Rifles are the absolute worst. But every gun besides those that prime could use a big boost.
Message 4 of 13 (1,969 Views)

Re: It's not the design of the guns that sucks - it is the low damage vs. gear.

★★★★ Guide
@Silversurferguy Yeah I'm not so worried about content right now. I see that as a 2.0 thing to be working on. I would rank stability (certainly PS4 disconnects are an absolute train wreck right now) and second I would rank getting some upward path to level 40. Third I would rank boosting the guns globally.

Getting the game stable is a tough one. But upping the level cap and boosting the guns to what they should have been all along don't strike me as some major time sink. The level cap expansion and getting the gun damage suitable for GM3 could be considered a 'Test and Learn' for the second game.
Message 5 of 13 (1,967 Views)

Re: It's not the design of the guns that sucks - it is the low damage vs. gear.

[ Edited ]
Champion

@TheReal_USA_MAGAThey aren’t going to do anything like an increased new level cap and rebalancing guns until the rework is live, so you think they haven’t been clear enough about that? That stuff is a ton of work.

________________________________________

Just another gamer hoping to help.
Love playing RPGs, MMOs, and Action games.
Like watching most other games.

I'm not employed by EA.
Message 6 of 13 (1,959 Views)

Re: It's not the design of the guns that sucks - it is the low damage vs. gear.

★★ Pro

GM3 Strongholds can get quite challenging unless I use my Colossus which is using Ralner's Blaze. GM3 Freeplay allows me quite a bit of freedom for my Ranger and Storm Javelin as I use Divine Vengeance or even Death From Above depending on my mood. Basically I think the Guns need Good rolls, but the intro of Level 80 Pre-Cataclysm weapons made me feel like I could use any weapon in GM3 Freeplay. 

 

Basically I think OP has a point maybe a little buffs could be made to other weapons, but not too much until you are on God Mode or anything. 

Message 7 of 13 (1,923 Views)

Re: It's not the design of the guns that sucks - it is the low damage vs. gear.

★★★★ Guide
@ChiraaKitteh your comment that increasing the level cap and that adding a global buff to guns in the game is a 'ton of work' just doesn't seem correct. You could be right but adding a 50% damage buff to each Javelin when using a weapon (once you reach level 30 or 40) doesn't sound like some herculean thing. They have base modifiers for Javelins now. Could be just a simple number change in an existing formula.

Increasing pilot level caps is frankly a breeze for most studios. That is part of the reason why all games at some point these days enjoy a level cap increase at some point.

This isn't rocket science but it isn't purely easy either (the answer is probably somewhere reasonably in-between easy and mildly annoying for a couple of devs).
Message 8 of 13 (1,903 Views)

Re: It's not the design of the guns that sucks - it is the low damage vs. gear.

[ Edited ]
Champion

@TheReal_USA_MAGAPersonally I think that would be a dumb thing to do before a revamp... that’s the kind of thing you do FOR the revamp. When leveling more gives you extra skills or slots or something. Please give me an example where a studio increased a level cap just to tide folks over until a revamp was released.

 

Edited because the forum autocorrect wants to put a negative on everything <shakes fist>. Get off my lawn autocorrect!

________________________________________

Just another gamer hoping to help.
Love playing RPGs, MMOs, and Action games.
Like watching most other games.

I'm not employed by EA.
Message 9 of 13 (1,894 Views)

Re: It's not the design of the guns that sucks - it is the low damage vs. gear.

★ Pro

@TheReal_USA_MAGA 

 

Two cents worth

How about a universal component dedicated to enhance all gun damage.

 

Cheers,

Beer

Message 10 of 13 (1,894 Views)
Twitter Stream