I just did a quick search on suppressors

Well, that disagrees with gaming 101, and real life.
In game world, there should never be a best choice. In real life you get better velocity, accuracy, recoil, less sound and flash, and better Instagram pics, at the expense of more weight and weapon length. There has to be some negative impact for a choice, otherwise there's no choice.

No there doesn't. When it comes to something as small as a suppressor there is room to make it GOOD, not choosy.

A single grenade can determine a fight.
If it's a frag, a revive, a flashbang, concussion, anti-vehicle, or even a repair, that changes everything about it, and the fight it's in.

For attachments; Even a Laser-Sight or HVA (High-Velocity-Ammunition) changes how a weapon preforms enough to be a killing edge where intended.

So, no, actually, a Suppressor isn't small.
It hides you from the mini-map, it reduces sound to near silence, it affects the muzzle flash a wee bit, and the audio that can be heard, is unable to be identified from friend or foe.
This means, If used properly, no one can detect your position actively, nor track via sound, nor can be alerted past Tracers.
Which if properly switching locations, means you are vastly better off than any other Sniper without it.
Without the Velocity loss, you also have the same effective range without any additional effort - while reducing every detection factor past the tracer round itself.
Far far from Small.

To help Clarify about choices:
If there is no reason to ever not install the suppressor, then it is straight weapon-upgrading.
Which means, now your single item is the sole difference between a new Sniper , and a new sniper with Certs.
As the other, will have a superior weapon, in every situation possible, and no reason to ever switch anything.
And if it's just for Sniper Rifles; There's no reason to not have it built-in, when it's now a required item.

Yeah, everyone get's that. To balance that out you can make the suppressor cost as much as the gun. But at the end of the day the result will be the same.

The minimap could get a nerf as well to balance it out. The general ability of people to know where people are from fairly far distances makes the suppressor a must have to begin with. You already can't snipe without it for most situations. So if you make the suppressor what it is supposed to be then nothing will change in who uses it.

Or snipers don't have to have their muzzle velocity reduced with a suppressor but you can just make it to where they are revealed sooner on the minimap. There is a nice trade off.

There are many ways to balance a game.

So the suppressor will be a straight upgrade to any weapon it's screwed on to, will obsolete any competing barrel attachments, and provide stealth and concealment on the minimap, and not only is this perfectly OK with you, you think nothing will change as far as who uses it? Are you bloody mental?
That's not even touching on the fact that you would make this attachment 1000 certs. You know, for that new player experience. I mean, why not add BC2's Magnum Ammo while we're at it? At least then you might have some variety.

I don't think you know what that is.

I don't think you know what those are either.

Dude chill out. Be just a bit more tactful.

Now as for this post, yes, you are completely right. Real suppressors do not work the same as in a game. But here's the problem. Real suppressors are OP in real life. If you put it into the game, it just makes it harder to find that person who is shooting it. Hidden on the radar, hard to hear, and faster muzzle velocity are things you can combine together, but you will get backlash because there is no reason you shouldn't use one, unless it doesn't really help your gun playstyle and you need the other barrel attachments to give incentive towards using them. I'm talking huge increases to make them use it. Really, DBG could add this and it could go well, however it could also go very wrong. You don't have to make a downside to making a choice. There doesn't have to be an opportunity cost, but they do it just to make sure it isn't as hard as in real life.

I was speaking in terms of the sniper which has no other attachment. So calm down and think it through rather than be so cocky you understand it. If you want to be intelligent give intelligence. Otherwise you will end up the fool.

I was speaking in relative terms and again for snipers. Everyone already uses the suppressor when sniping for MOST engagements. So buffing the suppressor for sniper rifles will not change who is using it when it's already being used. Again, same concept here: give intelligence before you assume to take it for yourself only.

Again you miss the point. Not all of these statements are meant to be taken as absolute or together as the answer for balancing suppressors. This statement is a one-off to show that you can do anything to create balance and usually it comes by changing multiple little things. You are misreading everything I'm saying and taking things too literally or extreme.

I had to do this before. I had to tell someone that we are not trying to answer what is that balance. We are submitting a single change that we believe will improve the game for a specific reason. After you make that change, then there are necessary changes which must be made to accommodate it. Accommodation we can talk about all day and get no where. That is ultimately up to the devs. But there is plenty of reason to remove muzzle velocity penalties of the suppressor and balance it only through how far away you are revealed on the minimap. I would rather be spotted SOME of the time with a REAL sniper rifle in my hand than NEVER with a gun that performs worse than a pistol. I hope you take the time to think before you speak.

Dude, this is what I have to tell people too. Instead of looking for ways that something can't work and writing it off as "stupid" for those personal reasons, we should be trying to find out ways that it can work and ways to balance a certain idea. I main Infiltrator. I like to snipe with the Railjack. I can't hide my position using a sniper because I would be taking off so much muzzle velocity that it isn't worth it. I can get 1 kill without a suppressor and someone is after me. I have to literally run to a new position after taking 1 or 2 shots to stay alive. I can only kill the same person once or twice before they come after me. If suppressors were balanced for weapons, Infiltrators would be so much more of an asset for enemy intel. I wish Infiltrators also could listen into squad comms of the other factions and gain intel of what they were planning, but that may just be a little too much to ask for. If suppressors were just as you said, it would add to teamplay of the game. People wouldn't have to have a downside to anything. The only downside of using a suppressor then is that you can't use the other barrel attachments that would help your gun's recoil. With the balance of suppressors comes changes to the other barrel attachments too.

You do realize making this about only one weapon type for only one class makes your argument weaker, not stronger?

I have no idea where you get the notion that every sniper uses a suppressor in this game, but you're wrong. The number of snipers using the suppressor is low, even after the buff. Snipers have the least to gain and the most to lose by using a suppressor on a bolt action rifle. It is powerful in the right situations, but you are making a conscious decision when you equip it and you need to adapt your playstyle around it. Ultimately you have to decide if it is worth it or not.

If you turn this attachment into a straight buff for all snipers, every bolter in the game will be using it. No one has to think about it or change their playstyle, just buy your upgrade and get your buff. This is bad for balance, and it will be bad for gameplay. Literally the only person who does not see this is you.

Now if you want to retcon what you've been saying and add some suggestions to make changes like this palatable then by all means knock yourself out, but generally you do this by not suggesting the first thing you add to be deliberately superior in every way to any alternative. This is a game, give and take needs to exist, otherwise balance goes out the window.

Suppressed snipers are low risk, low reward. Working as intended.

Dude, do you read my posts?

Do you understand what that means? A suppressor right now totally removes you from the minimap; 5 meters to 500 meters. You can balance it multiple ways. You can keep your ultimate hidden suppressor with 15% reduced muzzle velocity and make another suppressor with 15m minimap reveal and with 0% muzzle velocity reduction.

Wow, kind of like how it would be in real life with supersonic ammunition don't you think? You can't go full silent with supersonic bullets but it does make it quieter to some extent and it doesn't reduce muzzle velocity. So some people close by will know where you are from the sound. But with subsonic bullets you have a reduced muzzle velocity and now it's so silent we might as well make you invisible on the minimap.

So two suppressors in game mimic the ammunition type of real life and you can CHOOSE between full stealth and less power or full power and less stealth.

So for some reason I have to spell this all out for you when you are the one acting like the only one with intelligence.

If there was a suppressor that increased muzzle velocity, it would be the obvious choice for long-range snipers. It has all the upsides that matter and only downsides that don't matter. That's like giving long-range snipers the choice between SPA and HVA.

You're right that doing something for the sake of realism (which I believe was your initial point) is not always wrong, but using realism to influence balance is bad for gameplay, benign, or merely coincidentally good for gameplay in a game that does not tout realism as a selling point. This is because reality isn't correlated with fun. A main exception to this would be intuitiveness, (such as recoil. If a gun recoiled 90 degrees to the left it would be both bad for gameplay AND unrealistic, because people expect guns to recoil mostly upward, appealing to reality) which doesn't really apply to the suppressor conversation because few players have an intuition for, or care how suppressors work.

CQC bolters might actually have some cause to consider which suppressor, but from what I've read they don't seem to be the focus of this conversation.

Please try to read the thread before posting. A good strategy is to read the first 3 posts and last 3 posts. This was answered only a post before you.

Yeah that's what I'm talking about. A suppressor that increases muzzle velocity is the obvious choice over one that reduces it.

Never was there mention of a suppressor that increased muzzle velocity in game. It was only to reduce or eliminate the penalty.

Then, this suggestion was coupled with the idea of increasing minimap reveal: reducing the stealth capability of the suppressor.

Oh lol I read that wrong, you're right. But the point stands. Why would I need to hide from someone within 15m (or even 30m) of me while sniping, and why would I sacrifice muzzle velocity to do it? It's pointless

Wait, you are agreeing then? If you say sacrificing muzzle velocity is too high a price for stealth then you are agreeing with this thread.

Well since your point has changed almost entirely from the OP to now, it's hard to say. Maybe restate your argument/suggestion for clarity. Are you saying that two suppressors would be a bad alternative? Because it sounds like you're suggesting that we have 2 instead. I'm saying it would be a bad choice. Either way you take issue with the current suppressors, which I do not.

But to clarify myself: Suppressor A completely removes minimap presence and reduces muzzle velocity. Suppressor B limits minimap presence quite a lot, but doesn't reduce muzzle velocity. There is no reason for Suppressor A to exist. That doesn't mean suppressor B should exist, it just means you're presenting the illusion of choice, not actual choice.

You make the mistake when you say "quite a lot" Again, we don't have to talk about the actual balance and what it takes to do that. So what you needed to say was:

"Suppressor B limits minimap presence just enough but doesn't reduce muzzle velocity"

Then there is reason for suppressor A to exist and your point would be moot.

I had mentioned 15m being the cut off. Is that too little for you? It doesn't matter. The principle is that it gets limited at all and that is what makes the balance in principle. In principle do you or do you not see that they are balanced? To make a choice between full stealth and reduced muzzle velocity or full muzzle velocity and reduced stealth? Is that balanced in principle? What the balance actually is does not concern us, it concerns the devs.

So when I'm speaking in these general terms on principle, then my original post is quite in keeping with where I stand right now. I want the suppressor to not reduce muzzle velocity as much or to have 0 muzzle velocity reduction PERIOD. Do whatever it takes to make that work. So I had to introduce specific ideas as to how to make that work for the less imaginative group.

So you want a suppressor that instead of a muzzle velocity penalty, has a stealth penalty. You could just take off the suppressor.