Why the shotgun nerf was unnecessary

I have already made a post about wanting it removed, but I think that I should probably go into my reasoning about why I want the nerf reversed, mainly for the TOZ-B and the M30 Luftwaffe Drilling.

First of all, the nerf reduced the overall damage of the shotguns by around 75% because both the pellet damage and the pellets per shot were halved at the same time. This severe damage drop makes the shotguns not viable at medium range anymore, and even at close range they are sometimes not a one-shot kill. This makes it so that the shotguns are simply not viable whatsoever. All of the starting rifles in Enlisted are a one-shot kill to the torso as well as the head at almost all ranges, and these rifles also have at least 5 shots per clip. In comparison, the pre-nerf shotgun could only one-shot kill at close to medium range, while you had to use multiple shots at longer ranges. The shotguns also only have two shots that can be fired before you need to reload, and this reload is not particularly fast either.

So even before the nerf the shotgun was only a niche weapon, whose only saving grace was the fact that it was easier to use in close quarters than the rifles. After the nerf the shotgun is simply unusable in comparison to the other weapons in the game, and it doesn’t even feel good to use anymore.

To be honest, I just don’t understand why this nerf was put into place in the first place, almost nobody was even contemplating the shotgun needing a nerf, it was more the opposite because of what I explained before. Please Gaijin, could you revert this nerf otherwise there will be a redundant weapon in this game for absolutely no reason.

14 Likes

yea at 50m or less a shotgun should most definitely be a 1 shot kill anything above that range should suffer from pretty severe falloff damage

3 Likes

I was playing a round and got to use the TOZ I put on one of my ‘backup’ guys. I was shooting enemies with all two of my rounds at like 25m and they just wouldn’t go down, and I became very confused. I don’t know much about balance in worse campaign (Normandy), but this update made TOZ in Moscow go from worse than PPD to completely useless.

I’m not even sure why they put these in the game. They are ahistorical and just plain stupid. Sure the Volksturm or Partisans might have used these due to lack of availability of rifles, but front line troops did not use them - in the standard load out (maybe some specialists had them in different armies, but that would have been by exception). The simplest and most common sense reason this did not happen is that of ammunition supply. The armies of WWII had enough problems just ensuring enough SMG, rifle and MG ammunition was available. This is why Pistols and SMGs used the same ammo. Having to cater for shotguns which are largely ineffective beyond 25m unless you’re using solids or a very high grain pellet, and even then as ppl have mentioned by 50m its spray and pray. It’s a very situational and consequently pointless weapon for a WWII broad milieu game.

I think the less damage they do and the less relevant they are the better.

2 Likes

Yea the US had the only standard issuer shotgun and i dont think they used it in Europe only in the pacific.

The Germans did have the M30 Luftwaffe Drilling in WW2 though - it was a survival rifle used by the Luftwaffe pilots, and mostly used by those in North Africa.

00 buck can be lethal up to 100m but hitting anything with a shotgun past 50m is extremely unreliable and basically luck based. Same goes for slugs. Even getting all pellets on target at 50m can be a challenge with a shotgun.

I agree. The TOZ is at the moment complete useless. Makes more sense to run with knife in a house at the moment than to use that weapon.

The Germans did have the M30 Luftwaffe Drilling in WW2 though - it was a survival rifle used by the Luftwaffe pilots, and mostly used by those in North Africa.

Sounds like it wasn’t commonly used by the ground troops, especially in Berlin. Maybe it would be better for it to be a Premium gun to make them less common?

It was used by the Luftwaffe in other parts but not as common. North Africa was still a significant part of the war. The fact of the matter is though there are quite a number of guns in Enlisted which were not so common.

I agree as i also belive the shotgun nerf for the TOZ and M30 should be reversed as they are terrible now and a just a pain to use what is the point in nerfing something into the ground to the point where its useless and unusable.

I would say the shotguns before the nerf were pretty well balanced and not considered overpowered and and rather nice to use.

Please don’t do what other developers do and make unnecessary nerfs that basically make specific weapon pointless to use.

I completely agree, thank you, now I don’t have to type so much.

Does anyone know when you unlock the squad, that will allow the, upgrade discounts and dismantle bonuses, for the Toz B? I do like the weapon and dislike the nerf.

Considering this still hasn’t been reverted, I’m bumping this thread. Why the fuck would you nerf the Toz-B and M30 Luftwaffe Drilling, Gaijin? The Toz-B didn’t need a nerf, and now it’s so fucking useless that your better off using a knife at 10m rather than the Toz-B. A knife. Instead of a SHOTGUN in close quarters.

The Toz-B is a double barrel, so I fail to see why it should have been “brought in line” with shotguns like the Winchester, which have many more shells in the magazine tube then a shotgun that only has two. My fucking God.

Now can you please revert the change that killed off shotguns on the Moscow campaign, which were already rare and far outclassed by SMGs? Thanks.

Yes. I’m raging. Sorry. :frowning:

1 Like

Not to mention isn’t the TOZ-B a 10 guage as opposed to a 12 guage?
So it’s a bigger shell to begin with.

TOZ-B no longer has enough range to be viable, while the Luftwaffe drilling is in the campaign filled with bayonets which are more practical than a low-damage shotgun.

because they are progression gimmicks inserted as pure gameisms, which were not historically viable battlefield weapons in their own right (otherwise they would have had a broader issue and associated doctrine developed) - they were are are oddities that you are free to use as back up weapons if you have that capacity unlocked, noting that its disruptive of historical immersion for some players as much as it is a nuisance for you in terms of ingame weapons with inconsistent damage models.

probably the 87th most unimmersive part of the game

1 Like

ofcourse because you’re an authority on immersion.

“everything I like is immersive and everything I don’t is unimmersive”
t. FG 42 rambos fighting Jumbos while supported by a present luftwaffe for control over the immediate area around a disabled and indefensible railway gun just off of a beach in Normandy

Totally inaccurate - they were near Calais - not Normandy at all!!

You can still find Dombunker Wimereux in google earth - one of hte bunkers the guns would be housed in when not in use - it’s 1.2km from the coast.