Have you used the synthesis mechanic to reload shock cannons? OC Frags are a far more practical alternative for a similar burst profile. The premium OC frag cost is less punitive than the base Shock cannon synthesis IMO.
Shock Cannon - Can we get a reload cost balance pass?
- Thread starter Chaparral
- Start date
Have you used the synthesis mechanic to reload shock cannons? OC Frags are a far more practical alternative for a similar burst profile. The premium OC frag cost is less punitive than the base Shock cannon synthesis IMO.
Not missed the point at all. The suggestion is to make changes so that you get more ammunition from the same amount of materials. That is very clearly making getting ammunition easier.
As to bringing something 'in line' with something else.... why on earth should it be?
It's already a very capable weapon, more so than the others you compare it to. One of its downsides is that it has a greater need of materials for synthesis.
There is zero reason why the costs for the various weapon types should be similar.
IF all you were interested in was 'balance' so that all the options had similar costs then INCREASING the costs of Frags would be an equally effective solution to the problem. But thats not what is being asked for. Like so many other threads, it's always 'I want more!'.
Guest 161958
G
I would vote for a higher frag cannon resynthesis cost especially for the pacifiers. It is a good solution given its high dps. It might be viable now that it is easier to gather materials with the new fss.
Balancing by nerfing at this age of power creepers is better imo.
I would even want these stupid premium ammo resynthesis options deleted.
Engineered frags (especially pacifiers) are objectively way better than shock cannons. Try them in serious pvp.
Bringing it in line in pvp so that not everybody flies fdl, not everybody uses only frags and PAs, that is the reasoning.
Last edited by a moderator:
Guest 161958
G
It is boring to me. Trying different loadouts, more variety makes combat retain fun and not get dull after too much time doing it. Meta is boring when you know that no amount of skill will compensate. Especially now that there are many more experienced pvpers in the black.
Last edited by a moderator:
Pretty much that. I’d also be ok with raising the synth costs of other weapons to create the balance but that would be a much more difficult task to achieve. Removing synth altogether is fine too, but never going to happen. Would love to see premium go.
You're kind of funny. This is a bad choice because the costs and benefits are not comparable to other game assets. You're response is to say "Well don't use it then." I think you really are missing the point about why nerfs and buffs happen in in games at all. Balancing is to ensure that all assets are used. If only one choice makes sense to obtain optimum results, that results in less interesting game play. Shock cannons behave differently than frags. Their dps can be comparable, and the range profiles result in different uses. The balancing nerf to shock cannons is the increasing heat and jitter as the weapon is fired.
These balancing elements are good things.
Frags cost far less to synth reloads. This is not a good thing. This makes Shock cannons an undesirable choice for any sustained combat, and makes frags the obvious choice for nearly every single encounter. Changing the synth costs of shock cannon reloads does not buff their performance - it makes them a viable option for sustained use.
I'm not missing anything at all.
I'm challenging why there is a belief that everything has to be equal and balanced. And why, if everything is balanced, it has to be equal to the lowest cost.
There is absolutely nothing that says all assets should be used. It's a fallacy based on the artifice that everything should be equitable.
In this specific instance you have two weapons with very different outcomes and effectiveness and with different costs.
This is demonstrably nonsense. Having more ammunition available for less cost clearly improves your ability to engage in combat. You clearly favour Frags in combat (they are the "obvious choice in nearly every single encounter") ostensibly because of the cost of the ammunition. You cannot claim that one weapon is preferable over another due to its ammunition cost and then claim in the same paragraph that the ammunition cost isn't a factor.
I'm challenging why there is a belief that everything has to be equal and balanced. And why, if everything is balanced, it has to be equal to the lowest cost.
There is absolutely nothing that says all assets should be used. It's a fallacy based on the artifice that everything should be equitable.
In this specific instance you have two weapons with very different outcomes and effectiveness and with different costs.
This is demonstrably nonsense. Having more ammunition available for less cost clearly improves your ability to engage in combat. You clearly favour Frags in combat (they are the "obvious choice in nearly every single encounter") ostensibly because of the cost of the ammunition. You cannot claim that one weapon is preferable over another due to its ammunition cost and then claim in the same paragraph that the ammunition cost isn't a factor.
Guest 161958
G
Braandlin with all due respect, I have absolutely no intention to belittle you, but have you ever done serious pvp? Because one thing is to balance on paper, one thing is balancing on experience.
And there you have it. You believe that some assets should be ignored. I think all assets should have merit.
If the synth costs of Shock Cannons were reduced, I would use them as frequently as frags. I would employ different fighting tactics as a result of the different properties of these assets.
Given the lack of sustain the Shock cannons offer, I will favor frags, and limit the style of gameplay I engage in to a smaller range of tactics. This reduction in styles of gameplay is a detriment to the overall game and player interaction. Good luck out there B.