I'd rather have snipers made more individualistic rather than making them all the same. You already have generic versions of most of the snipers for the factions (difference only in name and visuals).
Or another bolt action. Between 3 faction specific copies + directive weapons, how can one even hope to make another bolt action that's unique in something else than lethal headshot range? Following the NS doctrine, that would be likely a classic semi auto weapon, with not as much damage per shot or rate of fire, but easy enough to handle and versatile in application. Something like Vandal... Ooops.
I could imagine something a bit like the infiltrator version of pump-action with slugs. Limited OHK range, 0.1 standing accuracy, better hipfire and moving CoF, low velocity, slightly faster RoF than the CQC bolt-actions, 0.75x ADS. Basically a bolt-action scout rifle, like they're really supposed to be.
I think we don't need another sniper-rifle, we already have 3 long-range ones and one for mid-range, and i don't see in what niche it would fit. I would like to see an NS-Autoscout with a 167 damage profile, would be the 4th scout rifle, you wouldn't have to do the battlerifle for the scout-rifle-directive and then change the reward to something useable on the infi.
I'd dig both, tbh. I believe there's a concept art for PS2-esque crossbow with an actual bow, it was circulating on forums around the time Hunter Crossbow was first announced and we didn't know what it would look like. Might be even official PS2 concept art. There are people like Chingles who eschew everything non-realistic, and they'd say "it's stupid that bow does more damage than a shotgun slug", but I think variety is good, and I'd love to have a futuristic bow in PS2. It would have similar combat effectiveness stats to Hunter Crossbow, but naturally a bit more powerful, since it would take primary weapon slot, and would need to reload after each shot, in return getting shorter time between shots than that full second of the crossbow.
The only problem with a bow is you have to draw it, which strongly implies a sort of charge-up mechanic. A bow you don't have to draw manually is effectively a crossbow. They could orient it vertically, though, so you get more of that longbow aesthetic.
I'm with Iridar, the last thing we need is another NS weapon or another bolt-action rifle for infiltrator.
Seems like a balancing downside rather than a problem. Easy to implement since we already have charge up mechanic, which could and should affect damage, velocity and drop of the projectile.
A bit of the issue would be figuring these things out in the first place, while not making it a clone of the QCX. A bow's arrow or a crossbow's bolt is INSANELY slow compared to a long range precision rifle. Average arrows and bolts clock in at around 300-400 feet per second. By comparison, my personal long range precision rifle ammunition clocks in at 3320 feet per second. They are also only effective out to a tiny, tiny margin of the range that the other weapons in our arsenal have. My personal rifle is ballistically lethal out to 1,790 yards, whereas the average bow or crossbow are lethal out to a bit past 100 yards. Difficulty in hitting a target is also a big factor. My record rifle shot is 1312 yards, whereas my fiance's record crossbow shot is a bit under 100 yards. Arrows are also affected ASTRONOMICALLY more by external ballistics (forces such as atmospheric pressure, wind speed and direction, temperature, altitude, etc.) Precision is another huge factor. A rifle can be considered to be 'sniper accurate' if it can reliably fire 1 Minute Of Angle groups (fit its shots into a 1 inch circle at 100yds, a 2 inch circle at 200yds, etc.). The 'cone of fire' on a precision rifle is around 10 inches or less at 1000 yards, compared to a bow's horrendous standard of accuracy, which is a few inches at 30-40 yards. By comparison, my rifle is shooting groups of shots within .4 inches of each other or closer. In terms of damage, the rifle round would also carry much more energy. The average bow carries around 50 ft-lbs of energy at the 'muzzle', whereas my rifle round carries 3671 ft-lbs at the muzzle, and at a mile away, would still carry around 500ish ft-lbs of energy. Granted, bullets and arrows deliver their energy in different ways, I'd much rather take an arrow to the knee than a magnum rifle round to the knee. In short, it seems like the QCX already strikes this comparative balance incredibly well, and it would be incredibly hard to design stats for another weapon of the same class without it being either almost exactly the same, or directly inferior. I love the QCX, and I'd like to see a bow (or another crossbow), but I think from the stats standpoint, it would either feel like a re-skin, or a downgrade. Faction-specific bows, however, would be a different story... Just my two cents -Stay Frosty
Really, though, it's hard to see how a charge-up bow could compete with the CQC bolt-actions, unless you do something drastic like make it OHK on a body shot. I mean, a CQC BASR body shot already does 700 damage at 500 m/s and fires instantly.
would love to see the original bolt driver from PS1 just for nostalgia. Guess the name would have to change since the NC have it now....NS Arbalest? For mechanics, i dunno....maybe make it the same as a basic bolt action but it can damage everything? Balanced out by the single round capacity. *shurg*
