Ok I've seen a few bitter and misguided people inside and outside of the forums, the "VS weapons have no downsides now!" exclamation is quite prevalent. I'm not going to discuss whether or not the entirety of our arsenal is balanced or not but I'm going to talk about this particular issue. VS Specific Damage degradation was an advantage for 90% of our guns Confused? I'll give an example graph below is a comparison of the old and the new damage curves Notice how it does more damage all the way out to 85m? Do you realize how little combat happens outside 85m? Essentially it acted as an empire wide soft point ammo (lowering minimum damage instead of velocity) that you could add softpoint ammo to on specific weapons. This was blatantly op and is the main reason why the MSW-R has access to softpoint ammo despite being near identical to the orion, it was to counter this. If you were to look at lmgs, you'd notice that our only long range gun is the Ursa (the flare is classified as a close to mid range gun in the tool tip) so 5/6 lmgs benefited from it. other weapon categories.. well imagine a double soft point H-v45 or a double softpoint serpent or vx6-7, in these groups only the battle rifle (who cares) corvus (sucks regardless) and the pulsar C (ok fine this ones a good gun) didn't benefit from vanu specific damage. beyond that there is smgs (double soft point), shotguns (oh boy), and finally the semi sniper and scout rifles. the semi sniper still has this (as it is a downside to counter the no drop) and scout rifles I am unsure of but they're kinda up anyway. thank you for reading this actual PSA. If you have a gripe with vanu weapons, this not what you want returned to the game.
It would be an actual balancing mechanic if other weapons did not have excessive and unrealistic damage degradation. I personally do not a bit of damage degradation in return for advantages. Thank you for posting this, this clearly demonstrates how wonky game balance was (and still is to some extent).
Wait, they seriously just dropped the damage at ordinary combat ranges for all VS weapons? When did they do this?
I can understand this, but putting no drop on semi-auto snipers and your battle rifle. THAT needs to go.
Do you realize that long-range weapons are pretty much the only weapons that no-drop actually counts as an advantage instead of a gimmick?
Why should they be useless for us and not you? Balance? hueuhe Nope, put drop on them then buff them all up.
Best part is when people say this was a buff to VS. Getting attention in patch notes is not always good news...
semi auto snipers do reduced damage for VS as I stated, at maximum range the spectre is a 3 headshot kill rather than the two headshot kill required by the 99sv or gauss spr.
But other factions can't even use theirs at long range, sides, who in their right mind would use a semiauto at max range? Edit: I mean, being able to line up shots in quick succession is easier with VS SA snipers. What's the point in our semis if we can't do this as effectively as a VS semi?
I was surprised at the time that VS were eager to get that change. Some people are so negative about empire balance that everything they have that is different it somehow secretly working against them. That would include people who say that all VS weapons have no downside although some VS weapons just have advantage stacked on advantage compared to equivalents.
its not that great a trade off anyway which is why nobody uses it. everyone just gets the 100cert boltdriver clone if they want to snipe.
I remember this, so many NC and TR complained that it was a buff and even more VS defended there so called buff. I just sat there and laughed at all of them realising the actual truth of the matter.
I quite enjoy semis, back when I tried VS I had loads of fun sniping down into the canyon warpgate, also had fun (though less) as the TR. Albeit I haven't unlocked the Gauss SPR yet, I can definitely see myself getting it in the future, if not for competitiveness, for the lulz...
You seem to think that something can only be a balancing mechanic if it adheres to reality, when the opposite is often true.
