Discovery Gaming Community

While adding damage per energy to the weapon pages on the wiki, I couldn't help but notice how terribly inadequate some weapons are.
I originally didn't want to make a separate thread about it, but my post in the wiki thread turned out to be longer than expected, so I will.

I'm sure it's been discussed to the death anyway, but eh......here goes.

Some guns suck, hard.

I'm talking about weapons that combine low efficiency and low damage output.
Salamancas, Kalashnikovs and Black Widows may be inefficient, but at least they deal lots of damage.

But things like Fury 5, Suncannon D, Gaia's Angel......what the hell went wrong here? How can a faction that presumably bases their weapons on civilian technology come up with something that uses more power and deals less damage than a Purple Goddess (and in the case of the Fury and Angel, also a Flashpoint)?

The Gaia's Angel in particular is simply woeful, I mean I get that a group of environmentalists isn't going to have top-class weapons, but just compare it to a Heavy Flashpoint.
1881 vs 1966 dps, 529 vs 458 eps, identical in every other way except refire rate.
How can it be possible to make a gun that much worse than openly available civilian technology, and why would anyone use it?

The worst part though is in the description: "Gaian weapons are more energy efficient, but have a slower rate of fire."
A blatant lie, not only does the Angel have an atrocious damage per energy ratio, but the overall energy consumption is considerably above average as well.
It should be changed to "Gaian weapons have a slower rate of fire, but sacrifice damage and energy efficiency." or maybe simply "Gaian weapons suck massively, go buy Flashpoints."

The very similar Fury 5 is also only slightly better.

I understand that some guns will always be better than others. And I understand that no matter what, some guns will always be considered the worst.

What I don't understand is how a gun can be both incredibly weak AND use tons of energy, that just doesn't seem right.

This is being addressed in 4.87. It can't be solved sooner.

Great to hear AD. Are there any details available regarding this? Just curious.

Gaians have 90% on sair stuff. Go shopping.

No details known to me. Ask Blodo.

tl,dr.
Just look at faction 3.03 and 5.88 guns.
Junker 5.0s too.

(04-26-2013, 03:55 PM)Curios Wrote: [ -> ]Gaians have 90% on sair stuff. Go shopping.

Corsair guns are so energy-hungry, being designed for Corsair ships, that with the technerf and tiny Gaian powerplants, using Corsair weapons means your core drains at an insane rate.

It's funny... Your argument is valid, while pretty much none of your examples are.

Class 9 guns damage range goes from 1.8k to 2.3k, and yes, that is a problem especially now that civilian guns are balanced to the range of 2k DPS. Actually... I'd personally find it humorous if one of the balance devs suddenly appears in this thread and goes "We told you so!" since lets face it, people have been complaining about how crap civilian guns used to be, and now that their damage is buffed up to a decent range, obviously any faction whose guns are not as good as flashpoints/goddesses use those instead, and there's absolutely no way of fixing that. Civilian guns either need to be at the very bottom of the tech list, or there will be faction guns worse than Civilian guns, with people complaining in either case.

But that aside, I personally see nothing wrong with the guns you listed as examples. Sure, maybe the Gaia's Angels could use some adjustment considering the fact that their only ship of their own is a heavy fighter and their guns is too energy hungry for it, but other than that, Suncannons and Furies are nowhere near as horrible as you claim them to be. There are much worse guns you could've used as example, but seeing as all your examples are from refire 5.88 guns, maybe you'd need to practice with them so you get used to the refire rate and manage to use them efficiently?

I'd personally call LWB Destroyers, FA Vultures, IMG Vampires and KNF Disinfectors far worse guns than any of the examples you brought up. If a gun is far down the tech list when sorted by DPS, it doesn't essentially mean it's a bad gun, just as those examples I brought up are actually nowhere near the bottom of the list (with the obvious exception of the Destroyers), and the only reason that their balance is flawed is how they perform compared to the guns their main enemies use. Compare Destroyers with Hornvipers, Vultures and Disinfectors with Daitos and Vampires with Krakens and you'll see it's not all about DPS, it's also about the stats being relevant to the one of their main hostile group.

The matter of gun balance is (or at least in my opinion should be) more than just sorting the guns by DPS and then checking their efficiency to judge which gun is better and which one would need a buff. Also as a side note, you have to understand that unless you want the exact same stats for every single gun ingame, there'll always be a "worst" gun there.

(04-27-2013, 07:52 AM)aerelm Wrote: [ -> ]... Also as a side note, you have to understand that unless you want the exact same stats for every single gun ingame, there'll always be a "worst" gun there.

No good. All must be balance.

It is only developers' mistake, i hope it will be fixed