The 50% gun damage nerf since shortly before release is horrendous and nobody uses guns except for a boss that requires them due to [BS] mechanics (which says something about the quality of testing mechanics in the game). Why have something if almost nobody is going to use it? The damage decrease should have been about 20% and the "splash" effect bullets have could easily have been reduced.
Guns need to be king of single target damage, not just used for a single boss.
Sat, 04/23/2011 - 11:31
Sat, 04/23/2011 - 11:37
#2
But that's wrong. In tier 2
But that's wrong. In tier 2 and 3 there are many types of enemies that can close the distance of guns at range in under a second and everybody dodges bullets like water splits in front of Moses. There is a lot of risk, but the reward is minimal, while you can just knock back enemies very far with just swords as well as deal tons of damage doing so. The risk-reward argument has been debunked for a while now and it's stupid that everyone keeps repeating it just because they don't actually comprehend game mechanics.
Sat, 04/23/2011 - 21:44
#3
Guns should do more damage
Yeah i agree that guns need to do more damage. Or reloads should not be needed as often.
I don't know if i agree that there are a lot of mobs that close the distance too quick, but on the other hand if you are facing a lot of mobs, once you are backed into a corner without a sword/bomb your in trouble.
On the other hand, guns are great against the gun pups.
Thu, 04/28/2011 - 18:25
#4
bump for posterity
bump for posterity
Thu, 04/28/2011 - 18:33
#5
Guns are meant to provide
Guns are meant to provide support in case we NEED to run away.
And everyone does have a point, if guns were buffed, there'd be no point in using swords.
EVEN if anything can close the gap between you and the enemy, you're capable of moving anywhere while shooting a gun as long as it isn't a Magnus or Autogun and as long as you aren't reloading (unless you're using an Alchimer.)
And even to this day Guns have their usage outside of bosses.
To be frank the only boss that even warrents the usage of guns is Vanaduke.
Trying to use a gun on the Jelly King is stupid.
Thu, 04/28/2011 - 21:32
#6
Don't be a baby, he makes
Don't be a baby, he makes some sense.
Thu, 04/28/2011 - 21:38
#7
There's a rather large
There's a rather large populous of primary gun users/pure gunslingers, actually, that do quite well for themselves.
This thread's basis is that you're a baddy and you're lashing out at people because of it. The only time anything should close the distance and hit you when you're using a gun is if it's a wolver. If you set oilers on fire/shock quicksilvers, that's your own stupidity playing into your demise. You don't stand still and shoot, you shoot while strafing, backpedaling, etc.
As for enemies that dodge bullets(wolvers, fiends), carry a sword in one of the four available weapon slots, or group with sword users.
Fri, 04/29/2011 - 02:59
#8
Nobody's opinion on guns
'The 50% gun damage nerf since shortly before release is horrendous and nobody uses guns'
Er, actually I'm using guns only (Voltech+Magnus/Blaster). I guess I'm Nobody then (or should I say: Nemo).
Fri, 04/29/2011 - 05:20
#9
Tiwddles, have you ever heard
Tiwddles, have you ever heard of the Magnus series?
Those work well on Wolvers (not wolvars) and Fiends.
And only the Firotech and Pepperbox lights up Oilers. Any other gun works fine.
Get your facts straight before you talk.
Fri, 04/29/2011 - 09:59
#10
Guns are better for soloing,
Guns are better for soloing, especially if you are trying to solo a challenge room.
At least, so long as you have room to kite.
I agree that the damage should be tuned up a tiny bit, but it's not terrible at the moment so long as you take advantage of elemental weaknesses.
Fri, 04/29/2011 - 11:14
#11
yeah i hear the rapiers do a
yeah i hear the rapiers do a lot more damage than magnus to those and do better at deterrence to boot
kawaii_desu still talking out of their ass woop woop
also tyrfang i like your cut of the jib
Sun, 05/01/2011 - 12:48
#12
Bump because guns need more
Bump because guns need more damage. Please balance them out.
Tue, 05/03/2011 - 22:16
#13
Bump! Guns need to do more
Bump! Guns need to do more damage.
Wed, 05/04/2011 - 09:26
#14
Guns are awesome solo, when
Guns are awesome solo, when you can be patient and take forever.
But swords are ALSO awesome for solo, when you can be patient and don't want to take forever.
Every monster broadcasts when they are about to attack. They have predictable attack behavior. You can wander around until you have an ideal opportunity to attack, slap them around, shield, slap them around, done.
Guns take longer against a single target than a sword does, but swords take longer against many targets when you don't have good terrain to force splitting.
So there is no risk/reward comparison really when talking solo. Please can we stop falling back on that one?
Let's look at personal annoyance:
Using a sword - You are right up near the enemies, but since you knock the main target you selected around, typically you are moving out of range of any other attackers, and you are interrupting the attacks of your main target. Wolvers can dash behind you, but you can swing in the other direction with minimal mouse movement. No biggie. Sometimes there are gun puppies on the other side of a wall/gap attacking you, that forces you to stop attacking random things that are close to you and actually move around to take out the gun. Again, not a biggie. Nothing blocks against your attacks, nothing even attempts to keep distance, except nearly dead gremlins, but if they are running, they aren't attacking at all.
Using a gun - You are far from the enemies, nothing can touch you unless it has a dash attack or a projectile. Basically everything has one of those. There are monsters who can use shields, and automatically do if you shoot at them. There are monsters who dodge when shot at, and automatically do if you shoot at them. You can still hit these monsters on occasion, or if you corner them. Gun puppies are a joke, and it is actually better if they are over a wall/gap since that means whatever else is with them is leaving you alone while you finish the kill. But if there are spikes preventing you from dodging the gun puppy bullets on your side of the wall/gap, you can't easily snipe the puppy, so have to walk around and deal with everything at once.
To balance on this side: Either remove the shielding/dodging, or at least make the enemies who can do that far weaker against all guns in general. ~OR~ Add some enemies who are smart enough to keep their distance and attack sword users, making them wish they had a gun handy to take them down. Also add some enemies who use shields against sword attacks and not against gun attacks.
In a party: If you use a sword, you contribute equally with everyone else. If you use a bomb or a gun, you piss off your party members because you don't add much damage, and you cause their target to run/blast away, making the fight take even LONGER.
If you use a sword, you piss off the gun/bomb users because you are RIGHT THERE whenever anything dies, so you pick up every single health capsule. Then you squander them by taking a TON of damage which is completely avoidable. When the party finally gets somewhere that damage is unavoidable, people die because nobody has spare health potions....
Wed, 05/04/2011 - 10:59
#15
Heh, I actually feel like
Heh, I actually feel like guns are better in a party then solo. In a party monsters are less predictable because they can pick different targets and can be shield bashed into you, so playing it safe with guns seems better. Solo the fact that everything telegraphs its attacks make it so that for the most part you can take advantage of sword's superior damage output. Every now and then there are still places I wish I has a gun, but overall I really prefer swords solo and guns/bombs in a group.
Wed, 05/04/2011 - 11:17
#16
When to use guns:
1) Need a
When to use guns:
1) Need a safe option and don't want to take chances.
2) Need to move targets around that conveniently dodge what you shoot.
3) Need to attack something that someone is already slashing (and thus knocking back; you can't use two swords on the same target and have both swords hit every time).
4) Out of Sword range; because nothing is stopping you from using a gun while you walk up, then switching to your Sword when you get close (and vice versa!).
Note that damage is not critical in any of these scenarios.
If your argument is that Guns aren't useful, I have to disagree. They have the most range, they aren't UV reliant like Bombs and they sport more mobility than both Swords and Bombs. They're a mix between the two that also fills the niche that is supporting damage on a focus target. A small buff wouldn't hurt, but making them "Single-target Damage Kings" would make swords obsolete to both Guns (Single Target) and Bombs (AoE Damage).
How it is, and should be:
Swords: Damage and Knockback
Bombs: AoE Damage/Status-effect Application
Guns: Farthest range, most mobility, hybrid between Sword damage/Bomb Status-effect Application.
Wed, 05/04/2011 - 12:49
#17
Guns can be useful due to
Guns can be useful due to their projectile nature, but they are a tad underpowered. If you think otherwise you are dumb or delusional, no exceptions. The Gunslinger armor line (more so increased attack speed) is also underpowered for guns. I'm not quite sure what they were thinking.
Wed, 05/04/2011 - 14:23
#18
If you disagree with me you
If you disagree with me you are dumb or delusional.
Truly the eloquent argument ever crafted by man or god.
Wed, 05/04/2011 - 13:12
#19
The balance problem is there,
The balance problem is there, weather or not you agree. Guns have range. That means I can back away while hurting my opponent, can shoot over walls, and avoid all damage. If you're having a dodging issue try magnus, I've yet to have a problem hitting even t3 wolvers with it. sure 1v1 swords dominate, as you can easily knock that one guy around, but doing it in a pack you have to watch everyone that is around you. Guns let you control how the enemy approaches you by how you place yourself, with a sword your stuck with how the enemies position themselves because you have to be in their faces.
That said, I do think guns need a slight buff. The combination of low damage, rapid matrix dodges, and reloading make guns survivablity not worth the loss in damage. i'd say make it about 2/3 damage of a sword with equivalent speed, damage type, and damage meter.
Wed, 05/04/2011 - 14:33
#20
I'm not one to throw out
I'm not one to throw out hasty generalizations, but it is 100% true in this case.
Thu, 05/05/2011 - 15:29
#21
Bump for gun damage. They
Bump for gun damage. They need to do more. Really.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 06:22
#22
OP
... nobody uses guns ...
Stopped here. Speak for yourself OP.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 10:31
#23
Re: Guns and damage
Guns don't need better damage. You just need more paitence.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 14:02
#24
@Sunflash Why would you need
@Sunflash
Why would you need more patience when swords and bombs can just do almost everything better anyway?
I honestly almost never use a gun anymore.
The only times when I would use a gun these days would be at FSC and Vanaduke.
For most other maps, I just have a bunch of swords and my Ash of Agni to deal with large groups.
There are times when I would appreciate being able to shoot Gun Puppies across gaps or low walls but honestly, my setup can take on pretty much everything else that can be lit on fire.
My only incentive to use guns is when things can't get lit on fire and things that aren't approachable with either a sword or my Ash of Agni (namely Vanaduke).
When I started out, the damage on my blaster was just so terrible that I stopped using it entirely and went with swords instead. With things how they are now, my fingers would get tired clicking all day just shooting everything in the game so I really don't know how pure gunners do it.
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 14:24
#25
New player here who
New player here who completely agrees. I have a 2 star gun and still have the starting sword, and even on enemies my gun is super effective against the sword kills them quicker, and not necessarily less safe either. The ONLY time the gun is handy is when I have low health and want to take forever to kill enemies by kiting them, but I've started to realize that even then a bomb seems better.
I expected this to change as I got to higher levels, but it seems like it doesn't : /
Fri, 05/06/2011 - 16:47
#26
Simple as that
@requiemaeter: I know what you're feeling. I'm playing with only/mostly guns and I really don't know how pure fencers do it. When I'm playing with friends I do use swords on rare occasions when you can't aim because of general mayhen. But never use sword when going solo.
I think we just have to accept that there are different people - what some find good/easy/useful others don't and vice versa. Simple as that.
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 10:23
#27
lol, if guns did equivalent
lol, if guns did equivalent or better damage than swords, no one would even touch swords.
i do agree that a slight buff is in order. just not at the levels the OP wants guns to be OP
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 14:20
#28
____
First, some background info about my viewpoint:
I run most solo games with a gun(Prismatech) and a sword(Rigadoon~).
The only time I take damage while soloing(ignoring the odd lag-spike-leading-me-into-a-mob) is when I take out that sword, which I only do for those mobs that automagically dodge gunshots(Gremlins/Wolvers/Devilites).
That said, I'm curious what you mean by 'better'. I can think of a few, 'Faster', 'Safer', 'Easier'. Let me hit those:
1) Faster: This is true simply due to the Sword's Damage > Gun's Damage bit. Only tricky is making sure you're not horribly outnumbered(Decon zones, anyone); in which case you'd probably resort to Running-And-Charging your sword attack....kinda like running around shooting things? Hmm.
Regardless, I will wholehardly agree that the viewpoint of 'Swords are Faster than Guns' is true.
2) Safer: Not even close, IN MY EXPERIENCE. The entire time you're facing down that mob and trying to click your button fast enough to interrupt the mob's attack-sequence, I've been calmly backpedaling and shooting while staying completely out of the way(either by straight backpedaling or manuvering as well) of said mob's attack. Even in the face of a large group(DECON AGAIN ARGH) I can still apply that exact same stragety; which is ALSO(as I pointed out above) what most people will be doing with their swords, only they would be charging their attack. Might I note here that a failure with that style is that in order to use a charge attack, your character freezes in place for a moment? Requiring near-perfect timing? Meanwhile all I have to do is keep moving and clicking calmly...
Ergo, I completely disagree with the idea that 'Swords are Safer than Guns' is true. Because I have NEVER found it to be such.
3) Easier: This is pretty much entierly opnionated, isn't it? Some people take to swords quickly, while others shine with a gun. Regardless, let's consider as best we can. A sword requires you to time your swings such that you will connect(idly the full combo) and NOT overextend yourself. A gun requires you to time your shots such that you will hit(again, full combo preferred) and not lose your evasive room.
Honestly I can see this part going either way, since it is, again, COMPLETELY a personal thing.
As for bombs, I cannot comment either way as I have not found them very useable in single-player. Are they unuseable single-player? Of course not. Just for /me/. :)
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 17:59
#29
^Get a sealed sword line.
^Get a sealed sword line. Their knockback and range make most enemies easymode.
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 19:00
#30
----
Except, in case you didn't figure out from my gun-based perspective of the arugment above, I don't like swords. Ergo, that's not really a solution for anyone that happens to prefer guns, such as myself.
Also the idea of a weapon that curses you is just silly. That is all.
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 19:34
#31
sunflash
btw you do know higher tier decon zones will dodge your gun, right...
anyways, i think it comes down to what your good at. you handle a gun better, so you naturally will think it's better. i will admit, in decon i run around a lot trying not to get hit. however, those of us with 2-strike swords can become very good at taking little damage even with crowds. if you know how to time your second swing, you can manage to hit 5+ creatures and back up. i love small corners, because they're all in my swing radius. using this approach, you MUST know how to change direction between swing 1 and 2, and when to abandon your second and shield, but generally, when i run with my gran faust-avenger combo, the only time i take damage is when someone interrupts my target's cycle and puts their timer ahead of mine, or when a creature gets knocked into me by a parter member (ESPECIALLY troublesome with timbers).
oh and avenger (part of sealed sword line) won't curse you. and i NEVER need to use gran faust's charge anyways, so problem solved
imo the only use for guns was piercing damage. but even then, most things piercing hurts dodge bullets... curious
Sat, 05/07/2011 - 19:51
#32
btw
i just finished finals week, so there's a good chance i totally missed some point above... don't judge me too much X) anyways, i'll come back in a while (aka after sleep) and see what anyone has to say. however, you must be able to back what you have up with logic (and i'll try to come back with more as well), or i won't take you seriously... so basically talk more like sunflash than tiwiddles please :)
Sun, 05/08/2011 - 07:03
#33
------
"btw you do know higher tier decon zones will dodge your gun, right..."
Yes, this is why at the start of that post I mentioned that I run with a Gun /AND/ a Sword. I also pointed out that I only use the sword for those mobs that insta-dodge gunfire, and that I only reguarlly get damaged when I use the sword. All caught up now?
Indeed it DOES come down to what you're good at. My post above was an entire attempt to quantify what exactly Requiemaeter meant when he said the very subjective phrase "Why would you need more patience when swords and bombs can just do almost everything better anyway?" (My emphasis); since 'better' can mean any number of things, a few of which I touched on in that post.
"oh and avenger (part of sealed sword line) won't curse you. and i NEVER need to use gran faust's charge anyways, so problem solved"
A) I use a Prismatech Alchemer 90% of the time. It does Elemental damage.
B)Avenger does normal/elemental. I would only pull out the Avenger on creatures my Elemental-Damage Alchemer is weak too, which means an Avenger would only be half-as-effective(since half it's damage is Elemental.)
Ergo, Avenger is only slightly better than the Faust, only because it doens't have that silly curse thing.
On a somewhat related note, while I know OOO will never explain /why/ they hate gunners so much, can someone explain to me why in the hull-breached black(./reference) it is that GUNS are the only things auto-dodged? Nothing dodges a sword or bomb attack. And don't say T3 Wolvers because they're the same for all three, so I don't think they count in that regard.
Sun, 05/08/2011 - 08:19
#34
why in the hull-breached
why in the hull-breached black(./reference) it is that GUNS are the only things auto-dodged?
Because swords and bombs require you to be right next to the mobs to use them properly, in most cases. With a gun, you can run around like a sissy, never take a point of damage, and still do a very respectable amount of it.
Risk:Reward. The phrase that counteracts every aspect of this thread from top to bottom. The fact of the matter is that guns are safer to use than swords in ways that cannot even be accurately described. So, you pay for that by having a few mobs be immune to the whole "run away while doing damage and taking none" strategy.
It's a fair payoff.
Sun, 05/08/2011 - 08:37
#35
-----
I would agree with what you say, except you've missed something.
Gunners already do /less/ damage than swords(I disagree that bombs require the same risk but we'll ignore that for now). We /ARE/ paying for the Safety bit by doing less damage. Why should we be forced to pay even MORE by some mobs flat-out evading our shots?
I'm all for risk/reward. But this is more than that, it seems. Why the double-penalty?
If you think that the lower damage isn't enough of a penalty, then I'm afraid I'll have to bow out of the discussion because I won't be able to change your mind anymore than you can change mine. Lemme know. :)
Sun, 05/08/2011 - 09:17
#36
It doesn't matter how much
It doesn't matter how much damage you're doing if you're doing it with theoretical invulnerability. You could be doing 10 damage a shot in T3 and still kill things before they killed you, and with very little trouble, if you could just run and gun constantly with no enemies stopping this behavior. You can even easily endlessly kite and shoot in Danger Rooms, so I'd like to not see some moron go "BUT SITUATIONS AREN'T ALWAYS OKAY FOR RUN AND GUN", because they are always okay for it. Absolute worst case scenario, you stop and shield bounce, then keep going.
Also, the amount of damage that guns do less than swords is very heavily exaggerated by whiny gunners, especially when you're factoring in the utility guns offer. Easier shielding, mobility, status effects, etc. can not be measured in numerical values, but if they could, they'd come out a few miles ahead of swords if not for several monsters in the game making you use a sword sometimes.
So, some mobs were put in the game to prevent it from being a pattern that cannot be stopped. It should be very easy to understand.
Carry three guns and a sword and your gameplay problems will all go away.
Sun, 05/08/2011 - 16:20
#37
-----
So you basically say 'no the lesser damage isn't the penalty for the safety factor'. 'The penalty is the fact that some mobs auto-dodge.'
Okay. Then what is the reasoning for the lesser damage? :|
Further, while I realize I have not being overly nice towards OOO and their anti-gunner viewpoint, I would kindly ask that you not call me a 'whiny gunner' least I refer to you as a 'skill-less neanderthal'. Deal? Good. Moving on then.
I wholeheartly agree that the damage difference isn't horribly awfull. The issue is not that the damage is different, or that mobs auto-dodge, but that BOTH are true, and it is excessive. This should be an either/or situation, not an and situation. It should be very easy to understand.(Hey, you started it.)
Also: "Carry three guns and a sword and your gameplay problems will all go away."
So your solution is A) What I'm already doing (If you had even BOTHERED to read the rest of the thread, you would have caught the "I run with a Prismatech and Rigadoon" line I mentioned in my /last two/(read: all) posts in this thread.) and B) /NOT/ be a pure-gunner, because being a pure-gunner is not allowed by OOO?
Somehow I'm not surprised.
Sun, 05/08/2011 - 16:28
#38
Devs, please stop hating guns
Devs, please stop hating guns and gunslinger gear. Please!
Thank you for listening.
Sun, 05/08/2011 - 16:46
#39
rofl@Hazel
Swords are only
rofl@Hazel
Swords are only marginally more dangerous than guns, excluding the Cutter/Spur. Guns are situational at best in this game, they should be hashed out weapons like the other two categories.
Sun, 05/08/2011 - 16:48
#40
So you basically say 'no the
So you basically say 'no the lesser damage isn't the penalty for the safety factor'. 'The penalty is the fact that some mobs auto-dodge.'
I'm saying they're both the penalty for it, and that's perfectly fair to anyone without a serious bias. You seem to constantly be missing the fact that a competent gunner is largely unhittable, and since this is a game balanced around survival, you're some kind of kook for complaining at all about slightly lower damage and some monsters brick walling your iron man theatrics.
Further, while I realize I have not being overly nice towards OOO and their anti-gunner viewpoint, I would kindly ask that you not call me a 'whiny gunner' least I refer to you as a 'skill-less neanderthal'. Deal? Good. Moving on then.
You're coming off as whiny. You actually just claimed OOO has an "anti-gunner viewpoint", which is some kind of hilarious whiny thing to say if I've ever seen it. It's right up there with "the game cheats mom I hate it >:(". I've given off no indication of being without skill at any point. You're just a big silly.
So your solution is A) What I'm already doing (If you had even BOTHERED to read the rest of the thread, you would have caught the "I run with a Prismatech and Rigadoon" line I mentioned in my /last two/(read: all) posts in this thread.) and B) /NOT/ be a pure-gunner, because being a pure-gunner is not allowed by OOO?
With that particular point I was not speaking to you. And pure everything is fairly stupid; pure bombers have it worse than pure gunners. Pure swordsmen have it the easiest, but it's still very much sub-optimal to not pack a gun when you're a primary sword user.
EDIT:
Swords are only marginally more dangerous than guns, excluding the Cutter/Spur. Guns are situational at best in this game, they should be hashed out weapons like the other two categories.
Yes, because being halfway across the room from things that can only attack in melee range is only marginally different than being directly in melee range of several things.
Oh, wait.
Mon, 05/09/2011 - 06:36
#41
Knockback and combos mean
Knockback and combos mean they won't have much ability to hit you anyways, not to mention you will be doing a lot more damage with a sword. Only basic horde enemies I would even suggest using a gun for are Retrodes and Zombies, because their melee is so frequent and long-ranged. I used to think I was being smart kiting around big groups of enemies whittling them down with my gun. Then when I got better I realized I was wasting time because swords are so much more useful and they have a better armor set.
Mon, 05/09/2011 - 06:34
#42
heavy sword
really the only sword where this applies is the heavy sword type (troika line and sealed sword line). every other sword doesnt have nearly as much knockback, reach or swing arch to make em "safer than guns".
i say nerf that shizz
Mon, 05/09/2011 - 20:58
#43
o.e Re: Heavy sword
You DO know that if you the reason the sword has heavy knock back is because it has usually the longest cool down EVER. Try using a Faust/ Gran Faust and see how long it takes to swing the sword again and not be able to block. Also, yes I do admit the gun damage needs to be a slightly bit higher.
PS: Status Effect Bombs are dah shiz
Tue, 05/10/2011 - 00:33
#44
I only slightly agree with
I only slightly agree with this topic. Guns need A LITTLE BIT more damage, maybe like 10 more damage a hit, but that is IT. Any more than that and they would be too powerful.
As it is already I can almost kill most mobs just as quickly with a gun as I can a sword without ever taking a single hit in damage as long as I have room to run, and IF I do get backed into a corner, I have swords I can use, and there's always shield bashing and running away. Guns make a lot of enemies easy mode since most enemies can't hit you without you stopping to give them a chance.
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 00:40
#45
Guns need more damage
BUMP. Guns need to do more damage.
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 05:25
#46
Why did we need a nerf in the
Why did we need a nerf in the first place?
Tue, 05/17/2011 - 19:18
#47
Y U NO LIKE GUNS!
BUMP for
Y U NO LIKE GUNS!
BUMP for more gun damage!
Mon, 06/20/2011 - 20:39
#48
"The 50% gun damage
"The 50% gun damage nerf"
That's a joke, right? They didn't really make guns that bad on a whim, did they? It would explain why my friends all have tier 2/3/4 stuff when I'm struggling to make enough to buy anything though.
Mon, 06/20/2011 - 21:11
#49
Dasp's report on Gunslingers.
This topic has been derailed by pointless personal attacks.
TL;DR:
Guns inflict Defense Down for up to 2 seconds, duration refreshes on hit; effects don't stack.
The point is this:
Gunslingers feel like they make little impact to gameplay outside of status effect procs. Guns do roughly 50% the damage that a sword would, and apply it to single targets rather than the AoE that bombs do.
In order to feel like they're actively contributing to damage, Gunslingers must cover all damage types with their guns - dealing neutral damage just doesn't cut it. Most beginner 'slingers don't understand this or can't afford this, and are stuck in mediocrity for their lifespan.
Because they provide less damage than a sword and less statuses than a bomb, Gunslingers aren't usually welcome in a party - they're considered a waste of a slot.
Discussion in Haven:
Guns provide single-target debuffs from range, without a lot of damage. The discussion I led explored the role of a Gunslinger as a ranged support role specializing in single-target debuffs: namely, the implementation of a gun-only Defense Down debuff. The idea is simple.
Defense Down is already a status effect in the game, but cannot be applied by any weapons. By giving guns this debuff, it'll increase not only their damage output, but the whole party's, making Gunslingers valuable in a group.
However, due to the fire rate of a gun, this debuff should not last very long. Perhaps 2 seconds at the most, meaning that Gunslingers can only debuff one target at a time reliably. Because of the nature of how debuffs work, the duration and effect does not stack but is refreshed with each consecutive hit.
Mon, 06/20/2011 - 21:39
#50
Pleny of games have achieved
Pleny of games have achieved a good balance between ranged and melee mechanics. This has been done since the very start of gaming, even before videogames.
Gun mechanics in this game have room for a lot of improvement. The DPS is too low, too many dodgers (witch was a lazy approach to an anti gun mechanic), most guns have generic boring designs (witch is subjective, i admit), and so on.
It goes back and forwards, if guns were more powerful, there'd be no way you'd catch me with a sword. Since I'd never have to touch an enemy to do just about as much damage and more safely.