There are weapons that are overpowered, weapons that need a bit of love and weapons that are in a pretty good spot or even really nice spot. All of these things can be true without invalidating anything.
You can use armory mod or simply something like this Reddit Armory mod reference if you don’t want to download it. There are also breakpoint calculators to see exactly how much damage it does with the burn. Data is pretty easy to find but @Frostysir pretty much summed up the gist of it.
Anyways its not like the arguments here are made without any sort of statistics and purely on feeling.
I already responded as far as I’m willing, rude or not, I don’t care how you feel and I don’t have to respond to everyone. If you don’t like Newton’s Flaming Laser Sword, take that up with Mike Alder. It’s a philosophical razor, not a bunch of buzzwords, like “OP” and “nerfed”. As for what evidence it might be, I already said what I’m interested in several times.
The data on specific weapons is relevant, and it might be in this topic, but this topic isn’t exactly quality reading material (the same goes for most of what people have to say on any online forum).
Thanks to @hgjw for sharing the data on the Moonfire bow. Compared to the Longbow, it looks inferior but for the burn damage. I think I like how powerful it is damage-wise. What I think would fix it is a slower charge and maybe three charged shots max.
Also, perhaps make the burn a bit slower, like how the hagbane takes a quite a bit more time to kill.
A part of me thinks this weapon will never be fully balanced. As with any of the DLC and new classes, there’s a slight “Pay to Win” aspect.
It really does not need to do so much damage on burn. With dot alone it does enough damage to burn legend stormvermin on half charge, while we ignore the initial impact position (head/torso). You get nothing like this on longbow. You need crit/headshot at minimum to reach the same.
Over half of the enemies especially in legend, this weapon kills with the first few ticks of the dot (accounting initial damage). It will not inherently change anything about it.
I also believe that it really does not change anything if the enemy dies now or 5 seconds later, its a threat that you can mostly ignore at that point.
This is a moot point because dlc weapons have been tweaked in the past.
You seem to have missed the point, I’m not saying you should be reading my posts as though they were God’s gift any more than anyone else’s, yet you still spent your time reading (but perhaps not understanding it).
Nothing about what I said seems to disagree with what you’re showing me. I don’t think the Moonfire’s high damage output would be such an issue if the burn didn’t do so much damage, if it didn’t have 4 charged shots, and didn’t regen so fast.
I looked at the reddit data sheet, which basically shows me what you found by testing. What are you trying to add?
When youre talking about data and pick rate, people who regularly play cata or legend at high levels are probably statistically a pretty small minority.
Although I still think moonfire is too good at too much, it might just tick so many boxes at lower levels in terms of players struggling with causing loads of FF, players maxing the overcharge so fast, players not understanding the mechanics and players simply thinking longbow is still better.
It is possible the weapon is only REALLY silly in skilled hands, and at champion the data might suggest that less skilled players simply don’t utilise it anywhere near properly. The weapon is still OP though.
For the bulk of players in the lower difficulties it might sit just right(statistically), and FS fixing it for the top tier people likely to be here would warp it completely for the arguably larger player base struggling in legend and lower.
Fs might be letting it be OP for top tier players as its ticking all the right boxes for them when in comes the the majority of players.
This doesn’t nullify anything said about its power, but the broader picture might make it better for FS to leave it be.
I am confused. You, yourself have mentioned this in your first comment.
And when I offered to have this discussion with you alongside what we consider to be an overperformer, under performer etc, I am met with this.
Yes, you have and your piece included questions and thoughts. Answering those queries in this thread would derail the topic, yet you have no interest in seeking a discussion elsewhere. Just don’t bother asking if you aren’t looking for an answer.
Is this some joke? You are literally more than half a year too slow. I don’t expect you to have read all 300+ comments( just read every 5th to get a feel for has and hasn’t been said) but have the decency to
at least read the original post at the top of this thread. It says basically the same thing you just did.
Before I get any sort of smartass reply about data, evidence and anecdotes, at least make it constructive criticism because you have not said single thing that hasn’t been said yet.
It’s a valid reference, don’t you think you’re just being a bit petty and derailing at this point?
You’ll see similar suggestions if you cycle back through this thread. I also want to add, while I understand the Newton’s sword reference everyone is derailing over, as a Physics major myself even I think that razor is reductionist and unhelpful in a lot of contexts. In general I think you’re vastly underestimating the value of intuition and game feel when it comes to extremely experienced people. Not every scenario in the game can be easily boiled down to numbers. If you’re not willing to have a discussion with some nuance and grey areas then you’re guaranteed to not get very far on any topic.
Regarding your comment about the rest of the arsenal being too weak, in 95% of cases this is just false. This is another case where raw numbers simply aren’t going to paint a full picture of how everything performs, but you will find videos of people true soloing Cata with most weapons, which certainly says they’re fine with a full party at your back. I would also suggest that power crept weapons/classes like moonbow, SotT, Coghammer, Bret Sword, MW Pistol, Coruscation etc have significantly warped the views of people like you, by offering so much in one package that they make everything else look lacking. This is a cooperative game though, things are meant to have weaknesses that get covered by the equipment of other party members. It’s just too many weapons circumvent team reliance these days so everyone is in the habit of expecting to be a 1 man army. Remove the crutches and people will pretty quickly learn to play the game again.
To be clear there are a few things that should be brought up, and a few other things that should be made more consistent across the board, but they’re generally in the minority.
Most of my questions were rhetorical, so I don’t want a new topic on it to hear answers. When I’m playing Vermintide, I get tired of hearing the circlejerks about what people think is OP when that same team then fails consistently. Seeing this as the first topic when I entered the online forum set me off on a rant.
If everything I said about the Moonfire Bow is half a year too late, that’s good to hear. I did read the original post, and it definitely gives me the sense that this guy wants a much more extreme nerf.
You can take moonbow and experiment endlessly. Dude says we can’t debate while he’s in the debate. Says there’s no solid data when people have made getting solid data out of this game their hobby. It’s good stuff.
Those fancy new weapons have warped the view of people like me huh? Everyone knows me so well. Actually, I do enjoy using each weapon in the game; not just the one-size-fits-all kind, but I find some are just too ineffective at doing anything other than one thing and I was using them before I bought any DLC.
I think the arrival of these new weapons is a good thing, and perhaps knowing a time before they were around warps your views. Several new weapons allow you to diversify your role in the party. I can jump right into quick-play with the cog-hammer knowing that I can help with crowds or handle elites fairly well. On the other hand, there are weapons that have some blend of roles but just suck. Kruber’s sword and shield is just so bad against armor, and not that great at what it’s supposed to be good for. I’d be better off with a one-handed sword and some stamina buffs on it, and I’m good to fight hordes. If someone can do a Cata true solo with kruber’s sword and shield, that I have to see. I’m going to focus on trying to use that weapon today.
Not all the original items are bad. Many are great and do perform multiple functions well as they say in their descriptions. For example, the executioner’s sword is great against elites and hordes, and as is the falchion. There are many still that just don’t function so well at more than one thing, and I think we need more of the original items to be more versatile.
How exactly does it “suck” against armour? Push-attack → H2 with headshots kills Cataclysm Stormvermin in 3-4 hits, and the thing it’s good for - crowd control, it is excellent at, cause push → bash is really strong. So yeah, I’d say your view is extremely warped.
1h sword has very little crowd control in comparison to sword & shield, trading it for more mobility and DPS. I’d much sooner take the sword & shield if dealing with a mixed cataclysm horde.