Baked-in Mods?

[Guest]

Just now, SenorClipClop said:

A boost to this stat is not utility, as it sharply increases a weapon's DPS.

And ammo consumption + Recoil. Which is why I don't like Wisp Haste Motes when using a Grakata.

Ammo economy is not changing. You may kill faster, but the total number of people your gun can kill per unit of ammo remains the same.

[SenorClipClop]

1 minute ago, Datam4ss said:

And ammo consumption + Recoil. Which is why I don't like Wisp Haste Motes when using a Grakata.

Ammo economy is not changing. You may kill faster, but the total number of people your gun can kill per unit of ammo remains the same.

So what? That doesn't make speed/RoF utility. DPS stands for Damage Per Second, not Damage Per Shot.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, SenorClipClop said:

So what? That doesn't make speed/RoF utility. DPS stands for Damage Per Second, not Damage Per Shot.

Do missed shots count as part of DPS calculations? Do wasted bullets that fly out after the target is dead count as well? 1 damage or 100000 damage not hitting is still 0 damage. Paper DPS is pretty much worthless as a measure of effectiveness and can only serve as a rough gauge. Overkill in Warframe is useless as well.

Rate only has 0 drawbacks in the case of melee. Your argument only works for that.

Edited June 19, 2019 by Guest

[SenorClipClop]

5 minutes ago, Datam4ss said:

Do missed shots count as part of DPS calculations? Do wasted bullets that fly out after the target is dead count as well? 1 damage or 100000 damage not hitting is still 0 damage. Paper DPS is pretty much worthless as a measure of effectiveness and can only serve as a rough gauge. Overkill in Warframe is useless as well.

Rate only has 0 drawbacks in the case of melee. Your argument only works for that.

Missed shots and wasted bullets happen, but that doesn't make RoF mods utility. RoF mods buff the speed at which you output fire, increasing your DPS and decreasing your time to kill enemies. Having potential drawbacks like recoil and wasted bullets doesn't change that. For starters, missing due to recoil is heavily circumstantial (distance to target, player ability to account for recoil manually, not very many weapons have significant recoil), as are wasted bullets (player holding down trigger too long). Secondly, even with these drawbacks your time to kill is still decreased and your DPS is still increased.

Rate of Fire is a straight-up buff to your weapon. Not utility. It just isn't a top pick on some weapons due to the drawbacks it may entail on them.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, SenorClipClop said:

Rate of Fire is a straight-up buff to your weapon.

and

1 minute ago, SenorClipClop said:

It just isn't a top pick on some weapons due to the drawbacks it may entail on them.

I don't even need to address the rest of your post. Do you see the contradiction?

I didn't know straight buffs can result in drawbacks.

Edited June 19, 2019 by Guest

[SenorClipClop]

47 minutes ago, Datam4ss said:

I don't even need to address the rest of your post.

If you're this dedicated to arguing my claim that RoF mods aren't just utility, then yes you do. Everything you conveniently skipped from my last post are the reasons behind my assertion.

[SneakyErvin]

1 hour ago, Datam4ss said:

and

I don't even need to address the rest of your post. Do you see the contradiction?

I didn't know straight buffs can result in drawbacks.

You missed the key word some.

Just as there are some weapons that dont benefit from rof due to the drawbacks, there are others where it is a straight up benefit. Beam weapons for instance are better off with RoF mods than multishot mods due to how MS interacts differently with beam weapons than bullet/pellet weapons. On bullet and pellet weapons it means a straight buff in status application and damage, on beam weapons it simply means an increase in damage. RoF on the other hand means a straight buff in damage and status application for a beam weapon because you get more individual ticks. And with the new ammo budget on beam weapons, the drawback of shooting more really only has half the impact that it does on a bullet/pellet weapon.

[Mr.SpookSpook]

1 hour ago, SenorClipClop said:

A boost to this stat is not utility, as it sharply increases a weapon's DPS.

Yeah, you are right.

[(PSN)N7_Dredgen]

I think its too late for such a solution without power creep.  If the game had been built from the groundup with this intention, it could have worked.

That said -  I would not be opposed to an Exilus slot on weapons that is purely for mods that don't affect DPS, utility mods like Hush.  We'd have to have a clear line between what constitues utility though - some might think something like Ammo Drum is utility, but I would argue it increases DPS indirectly, and therefore would not be utility. 

Edited June 19, 2019 by (PS4)Zuzu_with_a_Z

[Guest]

9 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

You missed the key word some.

Just as there are some weapons that dont benefit from rof due to the drawbacks, there are others where it is a straight up benefit. Beam weapons for instance are better off with RoF mods than multishot mods due to how MS interacts differently with beam weapons than bullet/pellet weapons. On bullet and pellet weapons it means a straight buff in status application and damage, on beam weapons it simply means an increase in damage. RoF on the other hand means a straight buff in damage and status application for a beam weapon because you get more individual ticks. And with the new ammo budget on beam weapons, the drawback of shooting more really only has half the impact that it does on a bullet/pellet weapon.

Actually it remains the same for beams. Old beam weapons (that aren't what we have now) with the fixed four ticks per second, yes, your point stands, but upping fire rate still increases ammo consumption rate for current day beam guns (the beam guns consume half ammo with fire rate mods anyway, so it does not have half the impact as it does on a bullet weapon - the ammo budget is the same. Just imagine that beam guns have double the actual ammo cap you see). Also, ramp up time is unaffected by fire rate, so actually you lose damage/ammo with a beam gun, which worsens your ammunition efficiency.

The fact that it has drawbacks on some guns means you already cannot call it a straight buff. By definition, a straight buff must not have a single drawback or tradeoff, which is a bit like what Serration is - it increases damage at no cost in any category of performance. There is a reason why many do not use fire rate mods on a lot of guns even though the theoretical DPS should be higher than with current builds - because it worsens something else in exchange for that DPS. If it was a straight buff, you would see fire rate mods on a lot more guns.

10 hours ago, SenorClipClop said:

If you're this dedicated to arguing my claim that RoF mods aren't just utility, then yes you do. Everything you conveniently skipped from my last post are the reasons behind my assertion.

It already contradicts itself - your conclusion is that it is a straight buff, then you say it is not. If you already place exception to your own conclusion, the premises are irrelevant as the drawn conclusion is invalidated.

[SenorClipClop]

1 hour ago, Datam4ss said:

The fact that it has drawbacks on some guns means you already cannot call it a straight buff. By definition, a straight buff must not have a single drawback or tradeoff, which is a bit like what Serration is - it increases damage at no cost in any category of performance. There is a reason why many do not use fire rate mods on a lot of guns even though the theoretical DPS should be higher than with current builds - because it worsens something else in exchange for that DPS. If it was a straight buff, you would see fire rate mods on a lot more guns.

It already contradicts itself - your conclusion is that it is a straight buff, then you say it is not. If you already place exception to your own conclusion, the premises are irrelevant as the drawn conclusion is invalidated.

Okay, you know what? If you're so fixated on "straight-up buff" and its contradiction of my point, let's discard it then. Ignore that sentence. I scrub it from my assertion.

While it's true that Rate-of-Fire/Attack Speed mods have only benefits for the following weapons,

Spoiler

• All melee weapons
• All snipers
• All bows
• All launchers
• All beam weapons
• Virtually all semi-auto weapons
• Virtually all charge weapons
• Any weapon with zero to neglible recoil
• Any weapon whose modded-up fire rate has low enough recoil not to make the weapon go all over the place

there's a small subset of weapons that have drawbacks associated with bumping RoF really high. So okay, in all sincerity, I no longer support my previous assertion that RoF is a straight-up buff to weapons. Now, with that out of the way, back to my singular point:

Rate of Fire mods do not count as 'utility' mods. This is because they generally increase a weapon's overall damage potential.

Here's an example of the distinction between lethality and utility:

1. "Lethality" mods, in my point of view, are mods that affect a weapon's overall damage potential and lethality. These include but aren't limited to:
   1. any mod with a listed +damage value
   2. Multishot mods
   3. Crit mods
   4. Rate of Fire and Attack Speed mods
   5. Channeling damage mods
   6. Status mods (?)
   7. A handful of other mods with unique effects.
2. "Utility" mods, from my perspective, are mods that primarily increase a weapons usability. These include but aren't limited to:
   1. Ammo mutation mods
   2. Recoil mods
   3. Channeling Efficiency mods
   4. Magazine capacity mods
   5. A handful of other mods with unique effects.

So here, and in my previous post you still refuse to address, I've given you numerous reasons that Rate of Fire don't count as utility. I'm a bit confused at your continued arguing, since I don't think I've seen you assert that RoF mods should be considered utility. Please clarify your stake in this discussion and let's move on with what I'm actually trying to say, unless you want to stonewall further with semantic nitpicking.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, SenorClipClop said:

Rate of Fire mods do not count as 'utility' mods. This is because they generally increase a weapon's overall damage potential.

Again, you keep taking about this "damage potential". Potential damage =/= damage in practice. RoF inflates your on paper DPS, yes, but this on paper DPS doesn't, as I mentioned earlier, translate into actual DPS. In that case, having the gun spit out more bullets doesn't always translate into actionable improvement in DPS, since higher RoF does indeed = more recoil, higher ammo consumption per unit time, no change in damage/ammo, more wasted ammo for automatic guns (no matter your so called trigger discipline, you will end up wasting a couple of shots if the fire rate is too high).

Regarding your point on specific weapons:

Melee - I already conceded this. I mentioned it above and I don't see why you bother to mention it again. I have stated attack speed is lethality in the case of melee because melee doesn't contend with spread, reloads, recoil and limited ammo. This is in an earlier post.

Snipers - Arguably, on a "high damage" Semi Auto sniper like Rubico, it doesn't do much to outgoing damage since you will generally be going for one shot kills and lining up the next shot, which will not be immediate. It is completely useless on the Vectis (and quite irrelevant for the prime). The only real case is for the Komorex, which already has more than enough fire rate unless you are using the second zoom level (I will treat Lanka as a charge weapon), or if you are unloading the rifle into an Eidolon's Synovia, which is a very specific task in a very specific mission type.

Bows - it can be argued that you would need some time to aim a bow anyway and another strong limiter of bow DPS is the reload speed. Unless it is one of the slower bows like Lenz or Daikyu the change in bow DPS is not that big since if you are still aiming when the bow is fully drawn, it changes nothing. It only lets you fire off the shot a bit earlier and makes full charging more forgiving (so you don't end up discharging a partially charged shot). In most cases, this improves usability, not DPS.

Launchers - Useless on the Tonkor (one shot in clip). Mostly utility for non napalm Penta (you are limited to 5 grenades so this only affects how fast you can get them out). For a Napalm Penta, it is semi auto and you are likely to change aim after firing one grenade (most players are not likely to spam it) The only case is the Ogris (and Angstrum) because it has a very slow charge speed, but if you are going to take time to aim and not blow yourself up, higher charge speed only makes the weapon more comfortable to ready and fire.

All Beam Weapons - as I explained, the ramp up time is unaffected by fire rate, so you are actually worsening ammo economy in such a case. Just because you have carrier/use a Cycron doesn't automatically mean worsened ammo economy has ceased to exist or that you don't have to reload. You are exchanging ammo economy for more status (the DPS for a beam weapon with say + 100% fire rate will not be double that of the same gun without the +100% until both reach full ramp up, but the + 100% will still run dry twice as fast.).

Virtually all semi auto weapons - false. Already fast semi auto guns would need a macro to hit buffed fire rates. Things like the Akbolto Prime, Akjagara Prime and semi auto mode Tiberon Prime which are already fast by nature don't make your finger click faster if you slap + fire rate on them. On the other hand, you can only argue this for a slow rifle that doesn't have that much recoil, say a Latron Prime. This would be oddly specific, though, akin to saying Heavy Caliber makes all guns do better (when an Opticor that shoots backwards isn't actually damaging anything).

Weapons with charge - again, this is a very small group of select guns. Arguing that a mod which exactly fixes a specific flaw of a specific category of weapons is not evidence that it improves the lethality of all guns when I can argue that in fast fire rate guns it is actively detrimental with practically no benefit. If you want to argue charge guns exist and get a straight buff, then you have to accept things like Grakata, Viper etc exist and fire rate is a pure downside for them (outside of memes). 

Weapons with zero recoil/modded fire rate will not make it go all over the place - again, I can say that if it is a fast firing weapon, you are still pushing rounds downrange which are hitting nothing and these rounds contribute nothing to practical DPS although they very much improve the on paper stat. If it is high damage, slow firing, you will be aiming and the gun may very well already be ready to fire the next shot even with no fire rate mod.

So no, fire rate doesn't directly contribute to lethality except in certain cases. It can make some types of weapons more usable, end up doing nothing or even worsen the situation with some guns. That cannot be called generally "contributing to lethality" because it is not generally applicable.

On another argument, for academic purposes, using your exact definition for Lethality and Utility mods (and using on paper DPS as the metric):

In your case, if you consider reloads as part of DPS calculations (you cannot ignore them as there happens to be many small clip bullet hoses and hiding to reload is still a DPS loss), then magazine size and reload speed mods would directly contribute to minimising reload downtime, where zero damage is done, improving on paper total DPS. If DPS is your metric for lethality, then by your definition, Reload Speed and Mag Size actually increase DPS. Which by extension imply they increase lethality.

The same can be said for - recoil mods. More bullets actually hitting = more consistent headshots, ability to aim more easily, less wasted shots, which means higher practical DPS and less reloads too, since smaller volumes of ammunition are used (remember, misses do not contribute to DPS).

Channeling eff ... but this lets you channel more which means more channeling bonus. Which then means more DPS for the same bar of energy and a longer time before you stop channeling. If I make 100 channeled attacks, vs your 20 channeled attacks and 80 non channeled attacks (in the same span of time, on the same energy bar), my 80 channeled attacks are doing 50% more damage, which means my average DPS is higher.

In that case, isn't your whole argument based entirely on arbitrary cherry picking of specific cases? You are just drawing lines as you see fit. According to the strictest following of your definitions, if all DPS affecting things are "lethality" mods, then only ammunition mutation would be your so called "utility mod". Which isn't actually reasonable by any measure.

There is no actual clear metric that can strongly determine what is utility and what is not outside the realm of mods which are either direct damage boosts (The base damage stuff, multishot, elementals) and things which have completely no bearing on weapon performance (Ammo Mutation). 

 

 

[SolarDwagon]

On 2019-06-19 at 4:34 AM, trst said:

Realistically it wouldn't change anything.

Look at all the mods you can't currently fit into a weapon build and honestly ask which ones you would slot in if you could. People always say it's for using whatever utility or QoL mod they can't normally use but eventually people are just going to slot another crit, status, or elemental mod into the weapon.

Remove Serration and suddenly mods that aren't normally used that add situational damage like Bladed Rounds, Motus Setup, another dual-stat status, or a 90% element mod that was left out in favor of more status chance just get put on in their place.

And most of the mods that are considered utility like reload speed, capacity, or in some cases punch-through and fire rate all do increase sustained and/or burst dps of a weapon.

 

Ultimately removing "mandatory" mods will just result in us making new mods into mandatory ones. Also powercreep is still a real issue and either removing mandatory mods or adding a exilus-like slot for weapons will all add onto the growing issue.

I mean, I don't really see using more situational damage mods as a bad result.
 

The rest of the argument is pretty accurate though, unless you made the "baked in" version of Serration and co less powerful than current. Say, half the effect. Then we might still have the same DPS if all situational mods applied, so no power creep, but you would need to ensure the stiuation stays valid as a player. So more "work" for the same power.

[SneakyErvin]

6 hours ago, Datam4ss said:

Actually it remains the same for beams. Old beam weapons (that aren't what we have now) with the fixed four ticks per second, yes, your point stands, but upping fire rate still increases ammo consumption rate for current day beam guns (the beam guns consume half ammo with fire rate mods anyway, so it does not have half the impact as it does on a bullet weapon - the ammo budget is the same. Just imagine that beam guns have double the actual ammo cap you see). Also, ramp up time is unaffected by fire rate, so actually you lose damage/ammo with a beam gun, which worsens your ammunition efficiency.

The fact that it has drawbacks on some guns means you already cannot call it a straight buff. By definition, a straight buff must not have a single drawback or tradeoff, which is a bit like what Serration is - it increases damage at no cost in any category of performance. There is a reason why many do not use fire rate mods on a lot of guns even though the theoretical DPS should be higher than with current builds - because it worsens something else in exchange for that DPS. If it was a straight buff, you would see fire rate mods on a lot more guns.

It already contradicts itself - your conclusion is that it is a straight buff, then you say it is not. If you already place exception to your own conclusion, the premises are irrelevant as the drawn conclusion is invalidated.

Fire rate is still better than multishot for beams because fire rate lets you proc status effects. Multishot simply has a % chance of adding an additional tick with no status available.

And it is rediculous to say that just because something has a drawback on a certain weapon it isnt a straight buff. If the weapon in question benefits from the mod with no or little drawbacks it is a straight up buff. And if weapons had an extra slot where fire rate counted as utility, it would be the mandatory mod on most every weapon. Especially if you could slot shred/primed shred there. 

[Guest]

47 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

Fire rate is still better than multishot for beams because fire rate lets you proc status effects. Multishot simply has a % chance of adding an additional tick with no status available.

And it is rediculous to say that just because something has a drawback on a certain weapon it isnt a straight buff. If the weapon in question benefits from the mod with no or little drawbacks it is a straight up buff. And if weapons had an extra slot where fire rate counted as utility, it would be the mandatory mod on most every weapon. Especially if you could slot shred/primed shred there. 

But many weapons have little benefit/heavy drawbacks or no benefit at all. For example, Akbolto P. Without a Macro the "increased fire rate" on it from lethal torrent might as well not exist. It does not lose anything, but gains nothing. Then you can list any fast weapon - higher fire rate only means wasted shots because the game itself doesn't register you taking the finger off the trigger immediately upon release.

I'm not talking specifically about your Opticor here. Fire rate is very much a situational mod which can be either good or bad, depending on the gun. Whether it is a straight up buff depends on what it goes on, unlike say, something like serration, which is always an improvement to slot. What is being implied here is that a mod like Intensify is meta and necessary for every frame ... when Loki obviously doesn't need it.

Shred is another ball game - it's a dual stat mod with PT as well, which increases AoE damage to some extent. Which opens another can of worms. Is punch through utility or damage? On one hand it is useless vs single targets, but allows one to hit two people.

 

[SneakyErvin]

1 minute ago, Datam4ss said:

But many weapons have little benefit/heavy drawbacks or no benefit at all. For example, Akbolto P. Without a Macro the "increased fire rate" on it from lethal torrent might as well not exist. It does not lose anything, but gains nothing. Then you can list any fast weapon - higher fire rate only means wasted shots because the game itself doesn't register you taking the finger off the trigger immediately upon release.

I'm not talking specifically about your Opticor here. Fire rate is very much a situational mod which can be either good or bad, depending on the gun. Whether it is a straight up buff depends on what it goes on, unlike say, something like serration, which is always an improvement to slot. What is being implied here is that a mod like Intensify is meta and necessary for every frame ... when Loki obviously doesn't need it.

Shred is another ball game - it's a dual stat mod with PT as well, which increases AoE damage to some extent. Which opens another can of worms. Is punch through utility or damage? On one hand it is useless vs single targets, but allows one to hit two people.

 

Yes but that just means mods with those stats are suboptimal for those specific weapons, it doesnt mean the stat or mod is bad in general. Heavy Cal is horrible on several weapons while on others it is a straight buff with zero drawback. Fire Rate is a great choice on several weapons and a bad one on several aswell. And if you have problems with when to stop shooting I'd say it is a player issue. Fire Rate opens up for far better bursting on most full-auto guns. You dont need to pray and spray just because it has a full-auto trigger mode.

I think the only mods I could see fill a utility spot would be max ammo and ammo mutation mods because they dont add anything to dps. Possibly +zoom aswell and maybe a -zoom if they ever make one. Anything that has to do with reload speed, fire rate or magazine capacity would indirectly increase dps.

[(XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA]

On 2019-06-18 at 10:05 AM, Venatorio said:

Was curious as to what others would think on this topic: What are your opinions on having some mods baked into every weapon? For clarity: there are a number of mods that just go onto EVERY weapon, and a lot of mods that are extremely likely to go on every weapon.

 

There’s a great deal of mods that open more interesting, unique builds for weapons, but that requires sacrificing efficiency/effectiveness. The advent of the new Amalgam mods accentuates this problem. So what if, for example:

 - All primaries, secondaries, and melee weapons had their respective base damage increased by (whatever % is given by serration/hornet strike/etc.)

 - Primaries and secondaries get (split chamber/hells chamber/etc) multishot built-in

 - Melee weapon’s give you the option to either have more range or more attack speed, at %’s equal to their respective (primed?) mods, like a toggle option in the Arsenal that you can swap as you like.

 - all weapons get to toggle between either a critical rate or status rate boost, replacing... the base crit mods and some sorta status equivalent. Kind of hard to justify this one because all people use are the dual-stat mods for status chance (cuz the base status chance mods are just not good)

 

I have absolutely no idea how to handle primed vs not primed mods, nor the potential sunk-endo costs this system would create. However, I at least would very much enjoy having an extra, like, 2 slots on all my weapons to use non-meta mods.

 

cuz let’s be real. When we get new crit weapons, you already know what 6-7, sometimes even all 8 of your mods are going to be.

 

What do you all think? Do you think the current mod system is fine? Would you like more mod slots and capacity, or baked-in free mods?

I feel like I've seen this idea pop up more often lately but I dont think it would solve anything. For most players the build comes down to 1) what is the most efficient 2) preference. In that order.

 

You could integrate 1-4 mods into the base stats of any weapon(s) and there would just be another set of 1-4 mods. that become the new meta.

 

[Guest]

40 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

Yes but that just means mods with those stats are suboptimal for those specific weapons, it doesn't mean the stat or mod is bad in general. Heavy Cal is horrible on several weapons while on others it is a straight buff with zero drawback. Fire Rate is a great choice on several weapons and a bad one on several aswell. And if you have problems with when to stop shooting I'd say it is a player issue. Fire Rate opens up for far better bursting on most full-auto guns. You dont need to pray and spray just because it has a full-auto trigger mode.

I think the only mods I could see fill a utility spot would be max ammo and ammo mutation mods because they dont add anything to dps. Possibly +zoom aswell and maybe a -zoom if they ever make one. Anything that has to do with reload speed, fire rate or magazine capacity would indirectly increase dps.

When did I say the mod or stat is bad? I said it was situational, which means it is not a straight upgrade, nor is it something you can, or will use on all guns to increase DPS. You also seem to be making a lot of assumptions about my gameplay - there are simply guns where even the slightest tap will discharge way too many rounds, like the Twin Grakata (incidentally, I stopped using them because of this problem. If it is impossible to tapfire single rounds (or two for the Grakata because it consumes 2 to shoot 2 per instance), it can lead to wastage). The whole thing about gun mods can be broken down objectively below:

1. Mods that improve ammo efficiency in all cases (i.e. Damage/Multishot/Elementals/Status Chance/Crit Chance/Crit Damage) are one class. These can be seen as the "True Straight Upgrades" and they make your gun deal more damage on the same ammo.
2. Mods that do not change ammo efficiency but modify weapon behavior (i.e. Reload Speed/Magazine Size/Fire Rate/Less Recoil) are another class. These are commonly what people call "Quality of Life mods" (they are not "Situational mods"). They make your gun feel better to use to some extent (not always).
3. Mods which have no change to overall weapon behavior (i.e. Ammo Mutation/Max Ammo/Zoom) are a third kind of mod. I wouldn't personally call these "Utility Mods" or even QoL. They simply exist as their own class and add additional functions. They don't make your gun feel different but they serve their own purpose.
4. Mods that improve ammo efficiency in specific cases but are otherwise useless/serve no alternate purpose (Bane/Punch Through/Blast Radius) form the fourth class and these are actual "Situational Mods". These are exactly what is written on the tin - they are to counter specific threats.
5. Mods that have some special function (i.e. Harkonar Scope, Combo Counter Mods, Nightwatch Napalm etc) form a fifth class. These are what we mostly call "Gimmick Mods". They change how the gun is used/are specific to certain weapons. They can increase DPS, improve scaling, add funny effects, it doesn't matter.

The problem is, a lot of people keep insisting that half of the second class can be lumped with the first class, while the other half should be lumped with the third class when these three classes are functionally distinct. The fourth class ends up being argued over by a lot of people over what it really is. Nobody would pigeonhole the last class because they are well, gimmicky mods for specific weapons. The issue I have with the argument that "Fire Rate is not Utility" is because the distinction drawn is often arbitrary and "it is like that because I like it this way" or "I say Utility is X". I simply fail to see why should a mod from the second class be lumped together with the first class just because it has a noticeable effect on an on paper number.

Fire Rate simply is not a mod which belongs to the same class as Serration or Multishot, because the functions it changes in a weapon are fundamentally different from the latter mods as long as it is not melee. It does not make the single bullet go further, nor does it allow a gun to kill more per shot spent. it only allows you to kill more people in a shorter time using the same number of bullets - in essence it is compressing a series of tasks that takes X time into a shorter span of time rather than allowing you to increase the amount tasks you can do in X time or with X bullets. I would argue that time saving does not increase how lethal a gun is overall.  Fire Rate does not affect weapon efficiency.

Utility is not something that doesn't affect DPS, I would say. Utility would be something that makes a gun easier to use overall. A fire rate mod makes a particular set of guns easier to use and fire (i.e. like the Opticor). Serration doesn't make the Opticor easier to use, on the other hand, but it does allow it to kill higher level targets. My argument is therefore that I disagree with how some others draw the line at what Utility should or should not be, because mods themselves simply are not "Utility" and "Lethality".

In my case, anything not belonging to class 1 or 5 as I have listed above can be seen as Utility. You obviously think only class 3 is Utility. SenorClipClop is obviously attempting to split class 2,3, 4 and probably 5 in some arbitrary way and put them how he likes it. 

 

Edited June 20, 2019 by Guest
Clarity's Sake

[SenorClipClop]

55 minutes ago, Datam4ss said:

many weapons have little benefit/heavy drawbacks or no benefit at all. For example, Akbolto P. Without a Macro the "increased fire rate" on it from lethal torrent might as well not exist. It does not lose anything, but gains nothing.

Wether or not, or how much, a mod benfits certain specific weapons is irrelevant, as long as there is a general benefit across weapons as a whole.

By your logic, Loki should be able to slot any Strength mod in the Exilus slot because he barely benefits from added Power Strength.

Edited June 20, 2019 by SenorClipClop

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, SenorClipClop said:

Wether or not, or much, a mod benfits certain specific weapons is irrelevant, as long as there is a general benefit across weapons as a whole.

By your logic, Loki should be able to slot any Strength mod in the Exilus slot because he barely benefits from added Power Strength.

I am saying, it is not even a general benefit. It only benefits certain classes and works against other classes. The benefit that fire rate bring goes all the way from straight benefit to straight drawback.

For Loki, I don't see why not. It wouldn't matter and it would still be a waste of a mod slot. Would you slot Umbral Intensify in Loki's Exilus if you could do it? I don't even need to answer this (I don't mean a rank 1 Umbral Intensify for the Sentient Resist). It would be a hassle to code, it would bring no benefit, someone may do it for memes. That's all.

Edited June 20, 2019 by Guest

[SneakyErvin]

20 minutes ago, Datam4ss said:

Fire Rate simply is not a mod which belongs to the same class as Serration or Multishot, because the functions it changes in a weapon are fundamentally different from the latter mods as long as it is not melee. It does not make the single bullet go further, nor does it allow a gun to kill more per shot spent. it only allows you to kill more people in a shorter time using the same number of bullets - in essence it is compressing a series of tasks that takes X time into a shorter span of time rather than allowing you to increase the amount tasks you can do in X time or with X bullets. I would argue that time saving does not increase how lethal a gun is overall.  Fire Rate does not affect weapon efficiency.

It still increases DPS, which is the only thing that really matter. Cutting the charge time on opticor in half results in doubling the dps. Same deal goes for most charged weapons. So yeah the mod should definently belong in the same class as serration, ms and others.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

It still increases DPS, which is the only thing that really matter. Cutting the charge time on opticor in half results in doubling the dps. Same deal goes for most charged weapons. So yeah the mod should definently belong in the same class as serration, ms and others.

Perhaps read the whole post before replying. Especially the division of mods I mention.

Separating mods by "does it increase DPS or not" is overly simplistic.

[SenorClipClop]

I wouldn't lump Fire Rate mods in with Serration, Hornet Strike and Multishot mods. In the current game, those are "mandatory mods", mods that are so good that you equip them to every weapon you use (expect maybe those wacky self-damage builds). These (pure base damage and multishot mods) are potential contenders for being "baked in" as the OP describes. I can see counterpointing the baked-in argument with the fact that it can take a player a long time to max out any of those mods, and that doing so is a milestone of that player's progression, but the scheme as a whole is not without its weirdness.

What brought up mods that constitute "utility" was the thought of replacing a baked-in mod slot with a "weapon exilus" slot. To prevent the powercreep of freeing a "mandatory" slot up so players could just throw on moar damage, a weapon exilus slot would be used to add often-overlooked mods which tend more toward increasing a weapon's utility than its aggression.

But then, how would you define a "utility" mod on a weapon? The distinction isn't going to be black and white, it will be open to interpretation, and people have different ideas about what constitutes that.

My "lethality/utility" seems simplified, because that's the intention. I've tried grouping things into two groups because, in the case of a weapon exilus slot, there would only be two groups: exilus and non-exilus. I suppose this binary might be a better way to describe my distinction. And the way I see things, Fire Rate mods wouldn't fly as weapon exilus mods. They are too geared toward aggression at the statistical level to be considered exilus.