Shotguns really, really need to be reworked. (Nerfed up close, more range.))

Some people are trying very hard to derail this thread.
Anyways, I agree with the OP. I don't use shotguns thanks to my constant FPS issues and hit detection turning me into red mist if I meet a stalker infiltrator with no shields. Perhaps if it was more versatile I'd use the Thanatos.

THIS, AND A THOUSAND TIMES THIS.

If this game is legit, the thread and topic are dead forever.

Read this up until the "first stat"

then you lost me.

jackhammer can dish out that much damage in a third of a second, yes, but then you take the rest of the second to re-arm the weapon.

I will go back and re-read, this just required immediate clarification.

Edit: ok, gonna give a more thurough reply now.

While I agree that the spread is and has always been hilariously stupid for shotguns in games, I disagree with your analisys of damage output.

First off, it takes armor plating to stop a buck shot round in close (Myth busters did an episode on this, basically something capable of absorbing the impact), in the case of infantry armor, this is most effectively done with plating that shatters upon impact, as is done with some tank plating. The shattering has the effect of dispersing the energies from the rounds, by putting their energy to work doing something other than creating a flesh rending shockwave.

That said, shotgun to the face still = insta gib IRL, as does two or three to the body, and that's with armor.

The thing to remember about video games is that it's a game first and foremost, this means that they need to keep things fun.

If shotties had a fist sized impact site 30m out, with thesame velocities as IRL.there's literally be no reason to use anything else, you could spam buck shot at most snipers with this kind of spread, and kill them if they failed to retreat... This would also eliminate the need for Slug rounds.

This would also remove most of their alpha strike potential. Shotguns are more forgiving in close when you squeeze the triger. This means someone that isn't 100% on target can squeeze the trigger, and still have a good chance of hitting their thin opponents, and you're rewarded by a high damage output when you've successfully gotten the drop on them, meaning they're an excellent QCQ choice, but not great at anything else. Additionally, slugs currently extend their range, but limits or removes this alpha potential as a trade off, meaning that shotguns do have abalance to them.

To restate some things already said: The pellets aren't high caliber, so they need the immediate force and concentrated pow to do their damage, especially in the future where people have shields and nanite armor that are (should be) better than our current armors. This is why (or at least how I justify the insanity of it being this way) maximum effective engagement ranges are so much shorter in PS2 than they would be in the arr ell. No, ten meters is not a direct representation of a RL shotgun's effective range, but 300m isn't realistic for a sniper rifle either (nor is 400 for the min damage, but we can't even shoot that far now -.-.) Hell, the effective range and maximum range of the P90 SMG are 200m and 1800m respectively. I think you can hit ~20m max damage range on most PS2 SMGs if they can equip SPA? 90% reduction, if that's true.

You can't really bump up shotgun ranges without bumping up everything else if you want to use the RL argument. I would *love* this, but I'd file it under "unlikely to happen".

From a gameplay argument, I mostly just think that shotguns should be readily distinguished from other weapons by silhouette. The only aggravating thing about a OHK weapon is shoot baddy -> baddy turns -> shotty to face, I die. Even that is honestly justifiable, but people should at least be able to go "Oh frak he has a shotgun" before dying. Snipers have the same potential (which has saved me on numerous occasions), but if I see someone with a sniper, I can account for that in my tactics.

I'm not really against making its range and accuracy a bit better at the cost of something else, but it'll be tricky to balance. I'd personally keep the burst but skew it more to headshots, then punish shotguns with slower firing and reload speeds. It could go a few different ways, though.

Look up TTK/DPS in Counterstrike for shotguns, it's same with all other guns whether semi auto or automatic, it is meaningful obviously for an FPS game.

The mechanic is same as in Counterstrike for example, you need to get close otherwise you can't hit broad side of the barn and look how fast Shotguns kill in that game, same as AK47 or M4A4, thats balance right there.

The autoshotty is just okay in CS (at least non-GO, haven't played it), and it's outclassed by many other weapons even in extreme close ranges. I'd rather have a P90, a main rifle, or a Clarion (dat burst).

The pump action, on the other hand, is trash tier. You have to be literally point blank for a body shot to OHK, and even a half miss will result in a death because of the chamber time. If you want a CQC weapon, you're better off with a TMP or Mac 10 if you're strapped for cash. Rifles will still beat them out in most situations. If I know someone is camping a corner with a shotty, there are a number of very viable tactics (some as simple as "round the corner fast while shooting") to beat them.

I'm hoping you were being sarcastic, because really. CS shotguns are pretty neutered in actual effectiveness with almost no real benefit for the lack of effectiveness at range.

You didn't, you selected an inappropriate weapon. Shot guns aren't IWIN like that. They're weapons that are terrible at range but insanely good at arms reach. So many people pick shot guns when they know they have to first get into range, which can be difficult, and then argue that it takes skill to close the gap, when instead, they could have picked something else and killed enemies further away. I usually choose CQC oriented weapons and have to close many gaps, but I don't look at it as my weapon is balanced because it took me XXX amount of effort to get into it's effective range. I look at it as I know that I'm gimping myself at longer ranges because I like fighting up close more and once I do get into my optimal range, I will be slightly more effective thanks to higher rates of fire and most importantly, my aim.

BTW, I'm not a shot gun hater and I do own a few shot guns, one of my first unlocks was a PA shot gun, but I noticed long ago that it's easy mode once you get up close, which isn't at all hard to do. I don't totally agree with this thread, but I agree more with this thread than the decision to add shot guns to this game when the TTKs are higher than other FPS games but the shot guns perform the same. When I first unlocked my first shot gun, Bruiser, I would frequently get shot in my back to only turn around and OHK the person, which just made me feel cheesy. I knew it wasn't skill that won the fight, but the sheer ease of my weapon. Consider that many think you should pick the right tool for the job, but most capture points are CQC oriented, so how bad would it be if everyone chose a shot gun, because effectiveness? It would be terrible and it would devolve the game into a whoever see's who first wins, instead of depending on personal skill and some aiming.

I don't like using shot guns and most people that use them always do. I see people using them in places that only a small portion of the base would benefit their selection. You may think that it's ok to trade deaths due to inappropriate weapon selections for being better up close despite skill but I don't. I prefer gameplay where if you play well you do well. I don't die to shot guns all that often but I have died some horrible deaths where I just couldn't kill the guy fast enough despite me landing every shot because he had a shot gun. It might only happen a few times a day, if that, but it is somewhat annoying when you know that you did everything right but rock, paper, scissors balance dictates you lose even if you are better than your opponent.

I would have much preferred that shot guns were limited to only a few classes. I would've wanted shot guns to be available to engineers and light assaults only. Heavy assaults with shot guns is just stupid IMO. Medics are a bit powerful as well thanks to their healing and plus medic balls with shot guns are just too easy.

Not that it matters all that much but look at the stats of players who you frequently see using shot guns. Most of the players I see always use them and never have good stats (unless it's a jackhammer, due to it being ES). They're useless weapons that allow you to perform better within a certain range for players with less than stellar aim, but once you improve your aim, any other weapon will serve you better. In which shot guns won't help you to improve aim. If more good players used them then you would see just how easy it is to close gaps and how powerful they are up close.

I really only use PA shotguns because I like the idea of fighting in the extremes. Too far away and you blow your shot and could be killed in the rechamber time. Too close and you might miss your shot and be killed by almost any other weapon in the game. Its a challenge to use it all the time instead of in certain situations like bio farms.

I can understand the frustration of the weapon to users and targets alike. Users hate how limiting the weapon can be and targets hate getting into it's effective range.

Wait. Are you for or against the nerfing of shotguns?

I think shot guns are fine. If I'm getting owned by someone with a shotty, I get mine out and go toe-to-toe with them. When said baddies are dead and gone, I grab my LMG again.

I have never in my life seen so many complaints about shotguns in any online game before. It just sounds strange me. The only thing I think is kinda dumb is the Jackhammer burst fire. That thing is WAY to accurate in burst fire mode. It should be throwing rounds all over the place.

But, even that weapon can be countered by another shotty. So basically everything is fairly balanced IMO.

A shotgun needs to be nerfed up close and be given range? Do you know what a shotgun is?

Shotguns are easy to defeat, just don't overextend and watch your corners. They are useless at range.

He expressly states that shotguns are weapons with multiple pellets to grant a greater hit chance. They are not supposed to extremely close-range burst-damage weapons.

What Zorro said as well, in the post above me.

But, I'm not trying to make shotguns bad at close range. Just not so insanely overpowered. If you are fighting in a building, and someone comes around the corner with a shotgun, they have a huge advantage. They just need to aim at your body and blat away. Even if you try to land all your shots into their head, you are still going to lose the fight, just because shotguns are so beastly up close.

You can say "Shotguns are easy to defeat..." but it's simply not true. Within 10 metres, no other weapon comes close to putting out the same amount of damage in a short amount of time. You can talk about tactics to beat this all you want, but the numbers don't lie.

Making them weaker up close and better at range, by reducing the spread and damage per pellet, will not mean that they will suck up close. They will just not be as insanely overpowered up close, and gain range in compensation.

And they WILL be different to SMG's! They shoot multiple pellets! That will make them good at doing snap shots at moving targets, or trying to finish off an evading enemy. SMG's have a higher headshot damage multiplier, so they can be used as spray and pray or aimed to get a quick headshot kill. They will still play differently.

Pretty sure every shotgun in my history of gaming has been a close range burst damage weapon.

I think it's extremely unlikely that SoE will change this now, one year into the game.

I almost stopped reading here because you obviously have no idea how spread in planetside works.

First off: Shotguns shoot multiple projectiles, each doing a certain amount of pellet damage, the cone starts off small close in (thus why the jackhammer or any shotguns for that matter is amazing at close range) but the further you go the more the pellets spread out. Your assumption here is on total possible damage it could pull out, in the situation that every single pellet hit.

Secondly: The jackhammers accuracy becomes complete **** when you put it into 3 shot burst mode, the weapon spread goes through the roof, thus making it only good at pointblank range which is a shotguns role. Why in the hell would we want to take shotguns out of their role as a cqc weapon, when we already have smgs to fill the close-medium role?

Third: Your time frame for the Jackhammer is also completely off, you are assuming that because the weapon can do a high burst in a third of a second it would only make sense to multiply that number by 3 to get an accurate damage per second model right? No. Because you didn't account for the delay between bursts. The Jackhammer can fire off 3 shots in a second total because it has a delay between bursts, which makes it is still 2017 damage per second, in the perfect world where every pellet from all three shots hit.

I can only assume that here you are referring to hunting shotguns (which last I checked are good at 150m tops), and I would like to point out the reason these are so effective at range is because you are shooting at small fuzzy animals with what is basically a wall of lead due to the spread, it doesn't take a lot to drop or injure a bird or a deer, a guy sprinting across a field wearing body armor, with a shield generator and is 200m out? Forget it. You would barely hit him if at all, and if you reduced the damage per pellet, that would just make if be even less effective at range wouldn't it? But take any shotgun, point it at someone 5 meters away, that guy is gone, just like in real life shotguns are more effective at close range because more of the pellets can hit and the velocity would be faster. Also, once again, smgs are the close to medium weapons, I don't know why would you think they are meant to be the king of cqc.

First of all, the jackhammer is the NC's unique AI heavy weapon. If you are going to compare it to anything, compare it to the Lasher or the Minichaingun, not a Stock LMG.
That 3 round burst cannot hit anything past 30 meters, and if you do, the pellet spread, recoil and cof will cause you to do a minuscule fraction of the damage (you will not ever hit a 1250 at max range). This is a case of actually using the weapon rather than theorycrafting.
Third, the IRL argument is a terrible one, especially in a futuristic scifi competitive shooter. Game balance always trumps "irl statements" in such a scene (followed by rule of cool).
In short, if you're going to complain about a weapon in this game, get an auraxium medal with it first, so that you can at least say you've been well experienced on both ends.

Actually, there are exceptions. Anyway, why keep something that is detrimental to PS2's gameplay?

All weapons that aren't shotguns need to be re-worked. Buffed up close, less range.

This. In a game where players compete and are rewarded individually in terms of certs and are able to unlock situationally better abilities/weapons based on that, this is the central point. Everything else like being able to OHK contributes to the reward per skill put in.

The OP of this thread is about DPS and ways to revise shotguns(btw, the sirius is not a high DPS weapon, CQCcarbines/ARs are the higher DPS weapons in this game with 1900 or 2000 DPS variants). As such this thread will be more derailed from the central point of skill and reward. This thread has fared better.


To date no one in the shotgun lobby has had anything further to contribute in this thread about revising/replacing shotguns. Contributions welcome!