Ah my bad, I thought it meant something else lol.
Guess I am getting old? Can’t keep up with all the terms anymore lmao.
Tho someone else also flagged it.
1 Like
This forum has just been weird lately. I don’t see much reason to continue conversing with people here if the salt-lords are allowed to power trip and “hide” comments they disagree with for whatever reason.
"Based" is just what someone says when supporting someone who’s standing up for something they believe in, or you agree with someone who’s actively going against the grain.
4 Likes
For me the only time I ever run 24% firearm reload is on snipers since a full reload for them is longer than an LMG and thats only for 5 rounds. I don’t see a point to running it on any other class. I could definitely see the recoil perks being nerfed due to how strong they would be on LMGs, but I wasn’t going to suggest anything with 0 testing, I could totally see them being dropped that low, but I think the costs should be decreased by 1-2 points if they’re down to 10%. I don’t think a full removal of the vitality or aim stability perks are necessary at the moment, just a hard nerf to make them situational instead of god tier perks that everyone will run and punishes everyone not running fully upgraded loadouts.
Overall, I think that our differences of opinion on perks comes down to how important we think perks should be. And there’s nothing wrong with differences in opinions so long as people aren’t using them to insult others as some love to do.
I thought it meant something along the lines of “biased” lol, like that I was so salty about perks that I am just default biased against them xD
And all it takes is 2 people working together to flag any post, or 1 guy with 2 accounts.
Any perk that increases health is super busted no matter the %. Even if it was 25%, that would be the difference between eating or not eating an LMG bullet. if it was 10%, that would be the difference between eating two vs three of the most powerful SMG bullets. Even at 5% you will eat an extra pistol/weak SMG bullet without going down. (for the record, I did do the math on this)
2 Likes
“Based” has become a very popular term within the last few years, typically seen on 4chan or edgy subreddits. But I think it’s a fine word for now. Slang only lasts for so long.
Health perks needs to be removed, such as stability when receiving damage, also I don´t think we should have recoil perks at all.
Also the rest of perks are not really a gamechanger, except 100% more stamina and medkit effectivity that should be halved.
(Of course ammunition perk is strong one, but I would still leave that one as it is simply because how fast you are going to run out of ammo)
2 Likes
See for me I don’t see taking one more SMG round to die as being anything strong (for the cost of the perk) since its fire rate is fast enough that its not a large addition to TTK. Thats why I suggested around 10% for a new value.
But the playing field would be nearly leveled for everyone (when it comes to damage/health) if the Vitality perk is removed. I’ve got all of the Premium squads and still want the perk removed just so everyone can kill each other with the same amount of bullets.
It’s apparent that many if not most want consistent gameplay meta.
2 Likes
Well, it is possible to learn how to control recoil better, so I don’t mind them being in the game. But definetly should be nerfed.
1 Like
The medpacks perk is overkill but that’s the end of it.
At 200% bonus healing, it heals all of your health.
At 100% bonus healing, it heals all of your health.
1 Like
no, a medkit heals 3 of the soldier’s 10 health. At 200% bonus, that becomes 9 health, or 90%. If it was 100% bonus instead, it would still heal a very comfortable 60% of your health, which would give you the choice to spend 1 less medkit to get you to a comfortable but not full health, or spend 2 to save 1 medkit (instead of 2 with the current %) on going back to full health, after using one to heal yourself back from a downed state.
1 Like
Vitality perk should be outright removed and instead introduce body armor as equipment that can let you potentially survive if you get shot in armored areas but lower your max stamina and sprint speed, similar to how it is when you carry an AT rifle.
1 Like
Body armor is supposed to be coming to game that will probably do exactly that
Unfortunately body armor + vitality perk + regen out of battle perk + 200% medkit perk already sounds broken
1 Like
Oh right this I wanted to ask. What did you imagine under sidegrades?
Or different backpacks that either offer more grenades OR medkit slots
Or heavier bolts for guns that increase stability but lower the rate of fire, or vice versa with lighter bolts.
Different kinds of ammo (see H&G for these)
There’s a whole list of what could be possible.
Bottom line is: Benefits at a cost.
2 Likes
H&G as any kind of example is awful.
The game is a complete disaster and has been for years. Nothing that game does should be replicated here.
1 Like
By that logic we shouldn’t have any ww2 games or shooters anymore lol. Just because something is in a bad game doesn’t make it an inherently bad idea.
2 Likes
H&G’s ammo options and their effects are pretty realistic. Or at least, last time I played it (1-2 years ago).
And I’ll echo what Tony said:
Instead of getting your mindset stuck at the “dat bad gaem”, try looking at it objectively and see what parts of it are bad, and what parts are actually good
4 Likes
I did look at the game objectively, after playing it for about 3 years.
There is nothing good about that game. Everything introduced in that game is a bad idea.
Their guns are essentially completely useless until you upgrade the parts to the correct ones, no different than the current system of upgrading weapons.