Sorry dev´s but he´s right: You don´t understand your own game. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMLePGaH5ow
I agree, and I noticed that same detail in that broadcast. They literally missed the mark entirely, on what is the reason everyone uses an SMG as a primary, and sometimes, as both a primary and secondary weapons. In fact, they did not just miss the mark but they managed to hit some innocent bystanders in the process. It is sad that you have to see that the people in charge of changing the game, hopefully for the better, actually have absolutely no real perception of what is going on and why it is happening.
In my humble opinion, the SMG's are indeed the root of all evil in this game. They have little to no accuracy and range whatsoever, and yet they have been granted a ridiculous amount of critical hit chance, and by default. On the other hand, by definition, critical hit chance is, or at least should absolutely be directly proportionate to accuracy. Which means that there is no sense in giving these weapons this bonus, let alone such a ridiculous amount.
People say The Division is a cover-based tactical shooter, and I agree. The problem is, and people also wonder about it, no one uses cover and tactics, and the reason is the fact everyone uses SMG's, which will only work at 2-3 meters away from opponents. Rushing is the name of the game, these days, and I completely understand players that complaint about trying to play with their SMG-abbusing friends and ultimately feel they are not doing anything there. I have actually felt that myself, and there is nothing worse than playing with your friends and realize you are pretty much useless and you are just there to make the numbers.
From what I heard in the broadcast last week, the weapon re-balancing will come essentially after the 1.2 update, and it will focus mainly on increasing the capabilities and abilities of the remaining classes of weapons, especially assault rifles, rather than decreasing the power of SMG's. I think that is a big error, since the critical hit chance bonus has no place with an SMG, in the first place. But improving the assault rifles is a start, I suppose.
I am hoping it was a case of misspeaking or misunderstanding on our part.Originally Posted by joelsantos24 Go to original post
Not necessarily. From what they are saying you will need to sacrifice DPS to gain the new armour cap. So you will do less DPS but are tougher...or go up against people who tougher than youOriginally Posted by Nbdys Go to original post
I think we need to wait for this to release before we can really dissect the pros and cons and its effect on balancing.
Not necessarily. The point about armour is correct, because, like the man said, we actually did not need any more of it. The problem with this game, is that I can empty two clips on an SMG user while he is coming at me, and he does not blink. But as soon as he gets inside his comfort range, which is the same as saying as soon as he gets in 2-3 meters from me, he will utterly destroy me with just a few bullets. That is the problem.Originally Posted by AK_8100 Go to original post
Looks and sounds about rightOriginally Posted by AK_8100 Go to original post
(Youtubers the god people we all believe and must hang on everything they say (it has to be perfectly true you know)
Originally Posted by AK_8100 Go to original post
Well...No.
Yes, they said "Weapon balances" are coming in the future, but the future is/can be a very long time, and it still doesn't explain their unusual response to the game meta.
If what this person says is true, then the extra armour mitigation added could make the balance issues even worse...and if what he says is true, then "weapons balancing" isn't going to balance anything because it isn't the root cause.