Oh Crap, Ran Out Of Ammo

[Kashiki]

In rail conflicts, it effectively negates carrying them at all. WAY too low.

 

That was the point - to stop people using them all of the time and cutting down their inherent superiority in the Rail Conflicts. Now, you need to use guns that require more aiming and can use your melee without the fear that someone's going to spam Penta grenades down your neck.

[Dasmir]

Ammo mutation mod.

[(PSN)Bobtm0]

What if I don't want to take a melee weapon with me? What if I want to use my tanky Valkyr? Or Loki?

I'm going to say this one last time, and after that I'm going to ignore you. I never said S#&$ about infinite ammo or anything about wanting DE to return Launchers to their former 500+ ammo pool. Are you unaware that there are numbers between 20 and 520?

 

Maybe they don't want to change their playstyle? And the BP is better. 

 

Maybe you need to pull your head out of your [you know] and understand that other players who play in different ways exist. You also need to understand that you are the only one talking about infinite ammo here. Take your strawman argument somewhere else, no one is asking for that.

 

It's going nowhere because you're strawman'ing us to a standstill. How about addressing our actual concerns?

 

For the first part, not taking a full loadout;  Well of course there is a clear downside for not taking a full loadout.  The whole arguement that any individual piece of a loadout needs to be 1110% viable and perfect for every possible situation by itself forever is silly.  DE should've never given people the option to unequip things in the first place as it opened the door to this broken logic.  Not taking a proper loadout incurs a consequence that one must deal with.

 

Anyways with that out of the way, what exactly is your point here really?  You claim that you don't want infinite ammo, however you complain that you're running out of ammo.  Sniper ammo is far from horribly uncommon, when using a bow I rarely go below 50 Arrows, and only then that occurs because I was being terrible with said bow for a streak of time.  However there are always a fair few sniper ammo pickups lying around by that point.  Bows get 72, so at most I'm down 22 on a weapon who's AoE is only linear versus the radial nature of launchers.

 

Going much above 20 rounds at all would put launchers back at having effectively infinite ammo.  Back when I was rocking a Penta I basically never found myself below 500 rounds at any point I can recall.  Literally speaking, the Launchers' ammo pools really haven't even changed from where I'm standing.  Only their pickup frequency and color is different.

 

So, short version?  If you're asking for launcher ammo pools to be increased to the point where running out of ammo no longer occurs, then you're still asking for infinite ammo.

[adarazrad]

Well I've been away from the game for a while (been playing marvel heroes..hey I love my marvel comics :D). Anyway, like I always do, I just updated the game, hopped in void for some quick solo play. One thing I like to do is grab nekros with penta and desecrate and solo T3 for about 35 minutes. It's always been much fun to do that especially when I've been away for a week or two.

So I'm running along and suddenly I auto-switch to pistol. I didn't hit the F key...so I switch back and I have no penta ammo...WTF!

Well I went back and read recent patch notes and my jaw dropped.

So don't get me wrong, 500+ ammo was always way too much for launcher weapons, I agree....but 20 max ammo is a major insult. I knew they would get reduces sooner or later, but not by nearly 95% reduction...WOW!

Anyway, I'm not complaining about the change, I'm just shocked at how huge the negative impact on the launcher weapons this is. I literally ran around for a few minutes in T3 survival with no ammo drops for the penta. I had to use consumables just to get ammo. Now I'm feeling that my only alternative is to remove a damage mod (about a 2,000 base damage loss) and equip ammo mutation...because desecrate wasn't making a difference and sniper ammo still is the rarest of drops of anything in the game.

I say 40 to 50 max ammo is a nice spot for launchers to be at and make all ammo drops have equal chance to drop. Sniper ammo shouldn't be rarer than rifle or pistol ammo...I don't see a good reason it should be that way anyway.

Overall, when you have a weapon that runs out of ammo in less than 1 minute into a survival mission, even if that weapon did 5 million damage per shot and had an AOE radius that covered 60 meters, it would still be a totally useless weapon because no ammo means no damage. It's not like high rate of fire weapons that run out of ammo fast. Those you can burst fire and manage ammo. You can't manage launcher's in anyway. It's one shot, kills all...but if you have no ammo, you are forced to go to your secondary or melee or powers. That's a restriction I thought this game would never impose on players.

One of the things I loved most about this game that set it apart from any other game was the freedom to play it anyway you like. If you wanted to use the same gun for 8,000 hours straight, you could do that and still play and succeed at any mission type. DE didn't force builds or weapons or frames on us..but with all the changes in the past 6 months or so, it's starting to feel like they are forcing us into distinct builds and ways of playing. Forcing me to use a mod I don't want in order to make a weapon useful is not the way to go. So I am disappointed at the ammo change, not just for launchers but for every weapon. I'm still trying to figure out why some weapons got nothing but buffs and others got nothing but nerfs.

Again, much needed change DE, but you just went too far on the ammo pool reduction. If this is final, can you at least double the clip size of launchers then...because low ammo pool, small clip size, long reload, travel time on projectile, dumbfire/no hitscan, forced use of ammo mutation mods (or forma) is just way too much negatives for any weapon.

please, not another thread like this.

 

you may need time to get use to it, but thats how it suppose to be, also in my opinon thats how i like it to be.

 

i dont know how you ran out of ammo with nekros, i did t3 def till wave 40 with no nekros and i took unformaed ogris so its not that strong, still was completly fine on ammo.

 

tip: dont reload, else you may accidentaly take sniper ammo to retrive just 1, try that, its really easy to deal with ammo like that, if not all helps, get ammo mutation/scavanger aura

[Acidtrees]

Nah, you can't. Not as easily, and you end up using alot more ammo.

 

The problem lies in the fact that most veterans nowadays have forma'd said weapons to hell and back. I, on the other hand, specifically did not. I normally don't like forma'ing weapons exactly for this reason. It ends up making you forget just how balancing works in this game when you've basically modded out all of the weaknesses in a weapon.

 

Max ranked, potato'd boltor prime is powerful yes. But nowhere near as powerful as a max ranked, potato'd Penta, Ogris, or even Angstrum. While certainly more viable in direct, one-on-one situations, it can't clear a room as fast as launcher weapons - especially when you use Penta. Penta nades can be lobbed right over a huge group of enemies and explode in mid air, killing them all. Or lobbed over obstacles Boltor can't shoot through. Or bounced off corners. It's extremely versatile, and extremely powerful. Without ANY forma, I was doing past 6k damage to huge groups of enemies, and I don't even have full Serration. I've already posted a video on the 2nd page showcasing just how immensely powerful this weapon can be. And you guys want it to still have infinite ammo?

 

 

My soma does 2k damage per headshot. I don't have a max'd serration either. And yes, I can assure you, I just strafe the gun at head height and I clear a room, easy. It's strictly better than the Angstrum at room clearing in cases where enemies are coming in from multiple angles.

 

If you think making people play more conservative with primaries is what we should do then we should be nerfing all primary gun ammo. 150 bullets maybe.

 

And I don't know why you keep bringing up infinite ammo, the OP said 40-50 ammo would be good, and I agree with that.

[Seanjuju]

 

 

 

 

Classified as Primary really doesn't say much about usability of weapons. It's just a loadout limiter. Grakata has poor ammo efficiency, which makes it difficult to use without ammo mutation, it'll still drain quickly of ammo even with its increased cap. It can't be used whenever one wants, it has to be managed or it will burn out quickly, so it should be demoted to secondary yes? And you never have to stop using the Akvasto even with their smaller reserve because of their generally well balanced stats and high power, should they become primaries then?  If you primarily use melee does that make it your primary? And then what does that make your primary and secondary? Secondary and tertiary weapons? 

Primaries are guns that we wield with two hands.  

Secondaries are guns we wield with one hand, or dual-wield.

Melee are physical weapons. 

That's really it. 

 

That's not it. A primary weapon is for use primarily because its a primary weapon. The Grakata is not an example of a balanced weapon. If I can't use a primary weapon, primarily, then its not balanced and it's not doing its job.

[Ryouhi]

Twin vipers, AkZani, Afuris and the like have much more problems with running out of ammo, and they only get 20 ammo per pickup.

I don't use launchers often, but since the ammo change i have not once run out of ammo, and even then there's still ammo mutation mods, so i don't see why people are so angry about this ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

like seriously:

- launchers have the capability to kill whole crowds of enemies in a single shot

- one ammo pickup gives you 1/2 of your max ammo

- ammo mutation mods exist

- ammo restores exist

 

Launchers are incredibly strong, so obviously they need some kind of drawback.

Explosive weapons in pretty much any game have very low ammo, 20 is being pretty genrous tbh (though ofc in Warframe there's hordes of enemies)

 

If you want to talk about ammo problems, go try out some of the Machine pistol secondaries and then come back..

[LukeAura]

What primary weapon (prior to this ammo nerf) wasn't meant to be mained? 

 

The Grakata is also constantly being brought up as needing a buff.

>Implying I am of the opinion that secondaries shouldn't be usable as primaries.

The Grakata competes at the level of the Gorgon Wraith right now, it really doesn't. It is a rather strong weapon only managed by low accuracy and ammo efficiency. 

And Snipers, Bows can't be used too freely either. 

Not an implication of your disposition. it is an example that a weapon you can use whenever doesn't have to belong in any specific slot, likewise, a weapon you must use conditionally can be in any slot.

If your main is a secondary, your primary is back up. If you main a melee weapon, your primary is again not mained. You do not need a primary weapon that can be used whenever you want. It's primary, not primarily. 

The only thing that defines a weapon as main, or 'conditional' is its intended function as part of the arsenal. A launcher is a primary weapon because of its size and it is the first weapon in your loadout.

[RealPandemonium]

Use ammo restores until they fix it.

[Seanjuju]

Twin vipers, AkZani, Afuris and the like have much more problems with running out of ammo, and they only get 20 ammo per pickup.

I don't use launchers often, but since the ammo change i have not once run out of ammo, and even then there's still ammo mutation mods, so i don't see why people are so angry about this ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

like seriously:

- launchers have the capability to kill whole crowds of enemies in a single shot

- one ammo pickup gives you 1/2 of your max ammo

- ammo mutation mods exist

- ammo restores exist

 

Launchers are incredibly strong, so obviously they need some kind of drawback.

Explosive weapons in pretty much any game have very low ammo, 20 is being pretty genrous tbh (though ofc in Warframe there's hordes of enemies)

 

If you want to talk about ammo problems, go try out some of the Machine pistol secondaries and then come back..

There are plenty of weapons capable of similar feats in a similar amount of time.

They deal damage to the user which heavily restricts movement.

In any other game, explosive weapons are more powerful than they are here.

Those weapons are primaries. Not for use, primarily.

Edited August 22, 2014 by Seanjuju

[Seanjuju]

The Grakata competes at the level of the Gorgon Wraith right now, it really doesn't. It is a rather strong weapon only managed by low accuracy and ammo efficiency. 

And Snipers, Bows can't be used too freely either. 

Not an implication of your disposition. it is an example that a weapon you can use whenever doesn't have to belong in any specific slot, likewise, a weapon you must use conditionally can be in any slot.

If your main is a secondary, your primary is back up. If you main a melee weapon, your primary is again not mained. You do not need a primary weapon that can be used whenever you want. It's primary, not primarily. 

The only thing that defines a weapon as main, or 'conditional' is its intended function as part of the arsenal. A launcher is a primary weapon because of its size and it is the first weapon in your loadout.

Primaries are for use primarily, that's why they're called primary weapons. Whether a player uses a primary weapon, primarily, is up to the player but they must always have the choice.

[SoulEchelon]

My soma does 2k damage per headshot. I don't have a max'd serration either. And yes, I can assure you, I just strafe the gun at head height and I clear a room, easy. It's strictly better than the Angstrum at room clearing in cases where enemies are coming in from multiple angles.

 

If you think making people play more conservative with primaries is what we should do then we should be nerfing all primary gun ammo. 150 bullets maybe.

 

And I don't know why you keep bringing up infinite ammo, the OP said 40-50 ammo would be good, and I agree with that.

 

I didn't say ALL primary ammo needs to be nerfed. That would absolutely destroy the already balanced weapons like Karak. Launcher ammo needed it, and it finally got it. The only thing DE did wrong was take too damn long to implement this fix. If they had done so right when Ogris was first debuted, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

 

As for infinite ammo:

 

 

Going much above 20 rounds at all would put launchers back at having effectively infinite ammo.  Back when I was rocking a Penta I basically never found myself below 500 rounds at any point I can recall.  Literally speaking, the Launchers' ammo pools really haven't even changed from where I'm standing.  Only their pickup frequency and color is different.

 

So, short version?  If you're asking for launcher ammo pools to be increased to the point where running out of ammo no longer occurs, then you're still asking for infinite ammo.

 

This person says it better than I did. You think DE didn't extensively test this? Do you really think they just flung numbers at a wall and picked what stuck? They knew launchers were a sore spot in the community - both for those who use them and for those who hate seeing explosions everywhere. The current amount is balanced. Maybe DE might tweak a few numbers here and there, maybe not. But it sure as hell won't become infinite again.

 

As for Soma, the reason why I don't use it anymore is because of what you just said. It's OP and needs a rework (of course, the forums will explode even moreso than the launcher update whenever that happens.) However I can easily argue that just one Penta nade can kill off more in particular situations than a wave of Soma bullets, since Penta can be lobbed anywhere - including areas your Soma can't shoot in your current position. And then you'll mainly have to go for headshots, since even with high crit, Soma has very low base damage and, depending on what you're fighting/their level, they will need that extra headshot damage to go down fast enough to die before that Penta kills them.

Edited August 22, 2014 by SoulEchelon

[Mokkania]

What happens if that player wanted to only use (or maximize xp for) their Ogris or only use their Angstrum and didn't bring any other weapons? When you run out you're #*($%%@. And sometimes there are only a few enemies, and you're forced to decide between running away or killing them and risking them not dropping any ammo.

 

I didn't say S#&$ about infinite ammo, do not put words in my mouth. The Ogris doesn't need to be reloaded with every shot, but it does require charging. The penta has a grenade limit and a rather small magazine. And the Angstrum is capable of using its entire magazine in one shot on top of needing to be charged.

 

 

Sitting in one place killing things is just as common in the other high powered non-launcher weapons as it was in launchers.

 

 

They already had an achilles' heel, that being that you could kill yourself with it. Boltor Prime has ridiculous damage and great range but far better ammo economy. The ammo buff doesn't do anything to add to immersion and all it really does is make it impossible to get passed a certain point in defense missions without ammo restores, weapon switching, or a mutator mod.

 

1. Not everyone brings a secondary with them.

2. Why shouldn't they be allowed to use the weapon they want?

3. No. Launcher users should not be forced to use a mutator mod. 

 

 

 

^This. People keep saying 'but launchers' and completely ignoring the fact that launchers were not the only weapons that could slaughter rooms full of enemies with a press of a button.

 

The only people talking about infinite ammo are those who are advocating for the weapons to remain as is. That's an exaggeration on your part.

 

The BP has a higher DPS than the Ogris and Penta.

 

What if I don't want to take a melee weapon with me? What if I want to use my tanky Valkyr? Or Loki?

I'm going to say this one last time, and after that I'm going to ignore you. I never said S#&$ about infinite ammo or anything about wanting DE to return Launchers to their former 500+ ammo pool. Are you unaware that there are numbers between 20 and 520?

 

Maybe they don't want to change their playstyle? And the BP is better. 

Those kind of argument don't make sense, I want to play Mk1 braton only so the game is supposed to conveniently change for me?

Same for the person using both Ogris and Angstrum, you're the one who decides what weapons you use and the risks that come with.

 

If what you want is not unlimited ammo then, say it in a simple sentence else, we'll surely get confused like right now.

 

They deal damage to the user which heavily restricts movement.

In any other game, explosive weapons are more powerful than they are here.

- not heavily

- depend of the game don't make a generalization like that

 

Primaries are for use primarily, that's why they're called primary weapons. Whether a player uses a primary weapon, primarily, is up to the player but they must always have the choice.

Primaries in the game got that name only for convenience, you focus too much on the word itself, some people have other mains than primary weapons.

[SquirmyBurrito]

The vast majority of people who disagree with the launcher changes are also guilty of that. You're one of the few I've seen not using the ridiculous "people love nerfs because they're jealous!" strawman.

 

Anyways, those are all good points. However, I think there should be some risk factor involved in taking a launcher, at least compared to a more normal weapon. You should be trading combat flexibility for massive AoE damage potential. They should still be usable as a main(there's a distinction between main and primary here) weapon though. I think doubling their available ammo would work nicely. 

 

I won't deny that.

 

There is already the risk of killing yourself which restricts combat flexibility via its massive self-damaging AoE. I'd rather they inflict a slight movement speed penalty, but I'm fairly certain that would not go over nicely. That's all I'm asking for, an increase from 20 to ~40. I'm not asking for the full 520 or infinite ammo. 

 

You didn't read a damn thing that I said, did you? I even specifically told you which frames I took with that Penta/Angstrum build: Ember, Saryn, and Nekros. Only one of them could be considered "tanky", and she's not even close to the tankiness of Valkyr.

 

And don't throw that "strawman" routine at me. You always try to do that. Every time you're backed up against a wall, you begin ignoring obvious points and then spam "strawman!" everywhere like the hypocrite you've become over this asinine argument.

 

I've stated facts. I've stated direct as well as indirect experiences. I've posted information from an experienced third party to back up my claims, and all you can do is ignore it and then insult my intelligence. If it's going to come to that, then I'm officially done with this, and done with you. Go ahead and cry in the corner about how you can't spam rockets anymore and have a S#&$ fit like a snot nosed kid just like everyone else who can't adapt.

 

I think you're the one who failed to read what I typed. The fact that I bring a tanky frame has nothing to do with my point. I pointed out that I might want to bring said valkyr because that valkyr is not equipped with any offensive abilities. So if I run out of ammo, while only carrying an Ogris/Penta/Torid/Angstrum I'm basically screwed unless I can manage to kill an enemy with my flying kicks.

 

I point out strawman arguments were I see them. Don't like it, don't use them. How am I being hypocritical? Do I need to post the definition for you?

 

If they were facts then I wouldn't be able to rebut them. I didn't insult you, I pointed out your use of strawman arguments. 

 

For the first part, not taking a full loadout;  Well of course there is a clear downside for not taking a full loadout.  The whole arguement that any individual piece of a loadout needs to be 1110% viable and perfect for every possible situation by itself forever is silly.  DE should've never given people the option to unequip things in the first place as it opened the door to this broken logic.  Not taking a proper loadout incurs a consequence that one must deal with.

 

Anyways with that out of the way, what exactly is your point here really?  You claim that you don't want infinite ammo, however you complain that you're running out of ammo.  Sniper ammo is far from horribly uncommon, when using a bow I rarely go below 50 Arrows, and only then that occurs because I was being terrible with said bow for a streak of time.  However there are always a fair few sniper ammo pickups lying around by that point.  Bows get 72, so at most I'm down 22 on a weapon who's AoE is only linear versus the radial nature of launchers.

 

Going much above 20 rounds at all would put launchers back at having effectively infinite ammo.  Back when I was rocking a Penta I basically never found myself below 500 rounds at any point I can recall.  Literally speaking, the Launchers' ammo pools really haven't even changed from where I'm standing.  Only their pickup frequency and color is different.

 

So, short version?  If you're asking for launcher ammo pools to be increased to the point where running out of ammo no longer occurs, then you're still asking for infinite ammo.

 

Why shouldn't each weapon be fully viable as a solo weapon (when fighting against enemies in its level range)?

 

 I'm asking for what OP is asking for; An ammo pool increase to 40.

 My experiences with the bows do not line up with yours outside endless mission types (and even within them sometimes).

 

Back when they were at 520 they were pulling from the most common ammo pool. They have changed quite a bit.

 

I was never asking for their ammo pools to be increased to that point. I was in agreement with OP and asking for 40. I can't help but get the feeling that some of you ignored that part of the OP.

 

Twin vipers, AkZani, Afuris and the like have much more problems with running out of ammo, and they only get 20 ammo per pickup.

I don't use launchers often, but since the ammo change i have not once run out of ammo, and even then there's still ammo mutation mods, so i don't see why people are so angry about this ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

like seriously:

- launchers have the capability to kill whole crowds of enemies in a single shot

- one ammo pickup gives you 1/2 of your max ammo

- ammo mutation mods exist

- ammo restores exist

 

Launchers are incredibly strong, so obviously they need some kind of drawback.

Explosive weapons in pretty much any game have very low ammo, 20 is being pretty genrous tbh (though ofc in Warframe there's hordes of enemies)

 

If you want to talk about ammo problems, go try out some of the Machine pistol secondaries and then come back..

 

I can't speak on the AkZani or the Afuris yet, but I've been told (and I found out via testing) that it is actually incredibly easy to not run out of ammo with the machine pistols. I think most people just spray with them, not realizing that the wave of enemies died during the first 30% of that spray and that the rest was completely wasted shooting air. For this I blame the blue light that partially obscures the targets.

 

I already addressed all those.

 

They already have a drawback. That being that you can't just use them anywhere or you risk downing yourself. 

In most other games explosive weapons are a OHK unless it is a PvP game where a player is using a specific item that raises their resistance to explosive weapons. This game does not guarantee that your explosive is going to be a OHK.

 

I used to main the Wraith Twin Vipers, and I stopped having trouble with ammo when I realized I was shooting at air. This wouldn't be a problem if DE would just remove that annoying blue light.

 

The Grakata competes at the level of the Gorgon Wraith right now, it really doesn't. It is a rather strong weapon only managed by low accuracy and ammo efficiency. 

And Snipers, Bows can't be used too freely either. 

Not an implication of your disposition. it is an example that a weapon you can use whenever doesn't have to belong in any specific slot, likewise, a weapon you must use conditionally can be in any slot.

If your main is a secondary, your primary is back up. If you main a melee weapon, your primary is again not mained. You do not need a primary weapon that can be used whenever you want. It's primary, not primarily. 

The only thing that defines a weapon as main, or 'conditional' is its intended function as part of the arsenal. A launcher is a primary weapon because of its size and it is the first weapon in your loadout.

 

I have no idea where the GW sits in comparison to other weapons.

This is true.

There shouldn't be any weapons you have to use conditionally (outside the whole not standing to close to your own explosion thing) IMO.

That's more a case of players choosing they want to main their secondary/melee weapons. Barring a tier disparity (bringing an Mk1 Braton and a Marelock) the primary weapon will usually be capable of being the main weapon should the player ever choose to switch. That isn't a case of the primary not being capable of being main'd, that's an example of them choosing not to.

[SquirmyBurrito]

Those kind of argument don't make sense, I want to play Mk1 braton only so the game is supposed to conveniently change for me?

Same for the person using both Ogris and Angstrum, you're the one who decides what weapons you use and the risks that come with.

 

If what you want is not unlimited ammo then, say it in a simple sentence else, we'll surely get confused like right now.

 

- not heavily

- depend of the game don't make a generalization like that

 

Primaries in the game got that name only for convenience, you focus too much on the word itself, some people have other mains than primary weapons.

 

That isn't even remotely close to what I'm saying. I'm asking for a 20 round increase. That's it.

Prior to this nerf, taking a launcher primary and the angstrum as your secondary was completely viable as they didn't compete for ammo.

 

I am in a thread where OP already stated his/her desire for 40-50 instead of 20, I agree with 40. This whole 'infinite ammo' thing was born of a straw man argument directed at me.

 

It denies you a third of the possible engagements unless you're willing to sustain self-damage. Sorta like how shotguns give their users the finger passed a certain distance.

Most games that feature explosive weapons, also make those weapons OHKs to most enemies. 

 

Can you cite a source for that? Without one I'm pretty sure Occam's Razor is on my side here.

[SoulEchelon]

That isn't even remotely close to what I'm saying. I'm asking for a 20 round increase. That's it.

Prior to this nerf, taking a launcher primary and the angstrum as your secondary was completely viable as they didn't compete for ammo.

 

I am in a thread where OP already stated his/her desire for 40-50 instead of 20, I agree with 40. This whole 'infinite ammo' thing was born of a straw man argument directed at me.

 

It denies you a third of the possible engagements unless you're willing to sustain self-damage. Sorta like how shotguns give their users the finger passed a certain distance.

Most games that feature explosive weapons, also make those weapons OHKs to most enemies. 

 

Can you cite a source for that? Without one I'm pretty sure Occam's Razor is on my side here.

 

Yeah, you don't seem to know what a straw argument actually is. Either that, or you seem to think I'm talking about 540 ammo instead of the OP's proposed 40. I never said anything of the sort, and now I see how you work. You disguise the strawman as your opponent's and when no one is looking, you throw it on the floor. Interesting tactic.

 

Anyway, having 40-50 ammo capacity will be just like having infinite ammo on these weapons. Ammo pickups for launchers currently restore 10. That's half our current ammo. No other ammo type/weapon has that amount of ammo drop efficiency. And. thanks to the sniper ammo drop buff DE implemented awhile back, ammo for snipers/launchers now drop at a relatively consistent rate. The specific reason for this ammo "nerf" is so that players can't spam explosions everywhere as easily. Do you not see all the reports of people stating "I couldn't even get past 500 ammo no matter how much I spammed"? So putting it to 40 would totally defeat the purpose of this change.

 

If you're using Penta or any other explosive weapon the way they were meant to be used - i.e., clearing large groups of enemies, you'll find sniper ammo within the group almost every time. I know. I tested it. I went to every single popular mission type, from Defense to Survival to even Assassination, used Penta AND Angstrum together just to make it even more challenging to conserve ammo only to find.....................I didn't have any actual problems. In Defense I simply waited until each wave was over to grab ammo (which filled it right back to full). In Survival I made sure to conserve until there were large groups of enemies running down the halls. In Assassination I did the same. But I've stated this a billion times now. You're just going to refuse to even acknowledge it as usual. Let's see if you're even reading this post.

 

And with more people emerging stating the same, I can't help but think you actually haven't went ingame to do your own tests. How about you go do that right now and we'll compare notes.

Edited August 22, 2014 by SoulEchelon

[Mokkania]

That isn't even remotely close to what I'm saying. I'm asking for a 20 round increase. That's it.

Prior to this nerf, taking a launcher primary and the angstrum as your secondary was completely viable as they didn't compete for ammo.

 

I am in a thread where OP already stated his/her desire for 40-50 instead of 20, I agree with 40. This whole 'infinite ammo' thing was born of a straw man argument directed at me.

Based on "infinite ammo" misconception, apologies.

 

It denies you a third of the possible engagements unless you're willing to sustain self-damage. Sorta like how shotguns give their users the finger passed a certain distance.

Most games that feature explosive weapons, also make those weapons OHKs to most enemies. 

 

Can you cite a source for that? Without one I'm pretty sure Occam's Razor is on my side here.

I still hold on what I said but I guess there is too much implications from how players play.

In warframe too, the launchers one shot most ennemies. You said most game, I said depend of the game, he said any other game.

 

Is that referring to my last sentence? Are you denying that a Primary design a primarily used weapons and that no players ever use as their main something else than a (warframe) primary?

[SquirmyBurrito]

Yeah, you don't seem to know what a straw argument actually is. Either that, or you seem to think I'm talking about 540 ammo instead of the OP's proposed 40. I never said anything of the sort, and now I see how you work. You disguise the strawman as your opponent's and when no one is looking, you throw it on the floor. Interesting tactic.

 

Anyway, having 40-50 ammo capacity will be just like having infinite ammo on these weapons. Ammo pickups for launchers currently restore 10. That's half our current ammo. No other ammo type/weapon has that amount of ammo drop efficiency. And. thanks to the sniper ammo drop buff DE implemented awhile back, ammo for snipers/launchers now drop at a relatively consistent rate. The specific reason for this ammo "nerf" is so that players can't spam explosions everywhere as easily. Do you not see all the reports of people stating "I couldn't even get past 500 ammo no matter how much I spammed"? So putting it to 40 would totally defeat the purpose of this change.

 

If you're using Penta or any other explosive weapon the way they were meant to be used - i.e., clearing large groups of enemies, you'll find sniper ammo within the group almost every time. I know. I tested it. I went to every single popular mission type, from Defense to Survival to even Assassination, used Penta AND Angstrum together just to make it even more challenging to conserve ammo only to find.....................I didn't have any actual problems. In Defense I simply waited until each wave was over to grab ammo (which filled it right back to full). In Survival I made sure to conserve until there were large groups of enemies running down the halls. In Assassination I did the same. But I've stated this a billion times now. You're just going to refuse to even acknowledge it as usual. Let's see if you're even reading this post.

 

And with more people emerging stating the same, I can't help but think you actually haven't went ingame to do your own tests. How about you go do that right now and we'll compare notes.

 

I am correctly using the term. 40 does not equate to infinite ammo. I do no such thing. That doesn't even make sense given the fact that our previous posts are fully visible to other people and can be recalled as evidence whenever.

 

No it won't. No other weapon has that kind of efficiency because they all have far larger ammo pools. Those claims were made back when launchers were at 520 and pulled from the rifle ammo pool which is both more common and restores more (20 IIRC). They no longer apply. I'm not requesting that DE bump it up to 40 and switch it back to rifle ammo pickups.

 

People will play however they want within the constraints of the game. The game's constraints being changed so that people must play more conservatively outside endless missions (and even within them if you're unlucky) is something that players can argue against. Especially since this change is fairly recent. You played conservatively, good for you. Not everyone wants to wait until large groups of enemies have bunched up. Some players kill as they see new enemies. I'm not refusing to acknowledge your experiences, I'm refusing to take your experiences as a show of how every player's experience will play out.

 

There are also players stating the opposite.

 

Based on "infinite ammo" misconception, apologies.

 

I still hold on what I said but I guess there is too much implications from how players play.

In warframe too, the launchers one shot most ennemies. You said most game, I said depend of the game, he said any other game.

 

Is that referring to my last sentence? Are you denying that a Primary design a primarily used weapons and that no players ever use as their main something else than a (warframe) primary?

 

Ah okay.

 

Yeah just noticed that, sorry.

 

It was referring to your last sentence, but not in that manner. I was asking for a source for this bit "Primaries in the game got that name only for convenience" that implies they weren't supposed to be main'd.

[SoulEchelon]

I am correctly using the term. 40 does not equate to infinite ammo. I do no such thing. That doesn't even make sense given the fact that our previous posts are fully visible to other people and can be recalled as evidence whenever.

 

*sigh* I forgot using any sort of creative imagery can confuse certain people. Obviously I didn't mean literally "when no one is looking". You're either trying to skew my wording or you're being blatantly ignorant. Either way, I don't really care anymore.

 

 

No it won't. No other weapon has that kind of efficiency because they all have far larger ammo pools. Those claims were made back when launchers were at 520 and pulled from the rifle ammo pool which is both more common and restores more (20 IIRC). They no longer apply. I'm not requesting that DE bump it up to 40 and switch it back to rifle ammo pickups.

 

Other weapons have "far larger ammo pools" because they need it. Can any rifle kill huge groups of enemies with one bullet normally? How about any pistol? Shotgun? Snipers? Bows, not including the thunderbolt mod? Yeah, didn't think so.

 

 

People will play however they want within the constraints of the game. The game's constraints being changed so that people must play more conservatively outside endless missions (and even within them if you're unlucky) is something that players can argue against. Especially since this change is fairly recent. You played conservatively, good for you. Not everyone wants to wait until large groups of enemies have bunched up. Some players kill as they see new enemies. I'm not refusing to acknowledge your experiences, I'm refusing to take your experiences as a show of how every player's experience will play out.

 

So you're advocating being as inefficient as possible? The base of your stance is: "Players should play how they want. This includes spamming high powered explosives at everything that moves at such a constant rate that a pool of 20 ammo + ammo pickups aren't enough." Not only is this detrimental to Warframe as a whole, but it also ruins the fun of other players trying to enjoy themselves, too. But eh, who cares about them, amirite? If they wanna keep up, they better equip explosives too. Or forma the living hell out of their Soma, or Boltor Prime, or -insert "godtier" weapons that need to be rebalanced here-.

 

Launchers needed a rebalancing. They were too powerful; had 0 downsides at range, and were able to be spammed at such a rate that you had zero need to even look at how much ammo you had left. "You can blow yourself up with them!" And? Being able to accidentally kill yourself means you should have a ton of ammo. That makes no sense and has no correlation, so that argument is incredibly moot. Either way, I'm about done. I've wasted enough time on this thread anyway talking to you. Go ahead and have the last post - it's my gift to you, since you seem adamant on wanting it. I'm gonna finally go enjoy myself.

[SquirmyBurrito]

*sigh* I forgot using any sort of creative imagery can confuse certain people. Obviously I didn't mean literally "when no one is looking". You're either trying to skew my wording or you're being blatantly ignorant. Either way, I don't really care anymore.

 

 

 

Other weapons have "far larger ammo pools" because they need it. Can any rifle kill huge groups of enemies with one bullet normally? How about any pistol? Shotgun? Snipers? Bows, not including the thunderbolt mod? Yeah, didn't think so.

 

 

 

So you're advocating being as inefficient as possible? The base of your stance is: "Players should play how they want. This includes spamming high powered explosives at everything that moves at such a constant rate that a pool of 20 ammo + ammo pickups aren't enough." Not only is this detrimental to Warframe as a whole, but it also ruins the fun of other players trying to enjoy themselves, too. But eh, who cares about them, amirite? If they wanna keep up, they better equip explosives too. Or forma the living hell out of their Soma, or Boltor Prime, or -insert "godtier" weapons that need to be rebalanced here-.

 

Launchers needed a rebalancing. They were too powerful; had 0 downsides at range, and were able to be spammed at such a rate that you had zero need to even look at how much ammo you had left. "You can blow yourself up with them!" And? Being able to accidentally kill yourself means you should have a ton of ammo. That makes no sense and has no correlation, so that argument is incredibly moot. Either way, I'm about done. I've wasted enough time on this thread anyway talking to you. Go ahead and have the last post - it's my gift to you, since you seem adamant on wanting it. I'm gonna finally go enjoy myself.

 

Doesn't really matter. What you're accusing me of makes zero sense.

 

They don't need it anymore than Launchers need to be so low. One bullet? No. The Stug. The Brakk. I assume the Detron can too. The infested bugspray gun. All of them. Snipetron with a vauban, and Lanka without one. All of them if you pair it with a Vauban ;). Didn't think what? The numerous examples that you asked for that exist? Not that that is even relevant.

 

No, I'm advocating exactly what I said. Them being high-powered explosives is irrelevant. Detrimental how? 'Ruins the fun of other players' so does a soma/BP user killing an entire crowd in one second. But eh, who cares about them, amirite? You don't have to forma your BP or Soma a bunch (or at all) for them to compete with/outperform a Penta.

 

Most weapons that aren't shotgun/shotgun-pistols don't have a downside at range. I'm replying to you in between missions.

[DSpite]

 

HAHAHAHAHA no. I still see the difference. Maybe that's because I refuse to give in to the idea of ammo mutation mods being a required mod for launchers.

 

 

Ammo restores are a huge waste of resources as they put out more potential ammo than you can possible use in the first pulse and continue to do so for ~7 seconds. 2 pickups to restore all your ammo isn't a positive, especially not when that ammo type is rare.

 

 

Those benefits don't do you any good once you're out of ammo.

 

 

I think the whole point was that if DE made changes to the ammo, and you STILL did not run out of ammo using it more or less the same way, then there was not any point in changing it in the first place.

 

If you can just dump all damage mods and no utility mods on a Grenade launcher and not run out of ammo using it like a pistol, there's something wrong.

 

You can "refuse" all you like, it's a Grenade launcher that does AoE, most if not ALL guns should only function in Endless with Ammo mutators, Ammo Restores or similar mechanics.

[Dasmir]

Ammo mutation mod

 

5 or 6 time i already said that here hue.

[SquirmyBurrito]

I think the whole point was that if DE made changes to the ammo, and you STILL did not run out of ammo using it more or less the same way, then there was not any point in changing it in the first place.

 

If you can just dump all damage mods and no utility mods on a Grenade launcher and not run out of ammo using it like a pistol, there's something wrong.

 

You can "refuse" all you like, it's a Grenade launcher that does AoE, most if not ALL guns should only function in Endless with Ammo mutators, Ammo Restores or similar mechanics.

 

I'm not asking to be able to go infinitely without running out of ammo. I just want more leeway with my playstyle. I can pickup and play with any other gun in this game and not have to worryingly keep track of my shots (Grakata being one of the few exceptions). I want to be able to play more like that (not exactly like that, but closer). I'm not asking to be able to do the non-continuous weapon equivalent of walking around with fire held down permanently while using a phage. Even 10 more rounds would be enough to make me happy.

 

The fact that it is a grenade launcher is irrelevant. Speaking of grenade launchers, I took my penta into apollodorus earlier. I ran out of ammo 7 times (almost 8- was down to one shot left and my sahasa dug up some ammo). I wasn't spamming at everything, but I wasn't forcing myself to wait for enemies to bunch up either (my kubrow was unranked and I liked it alive).

 

I refuse because it is a ridiculous doublestandard that is becoming more and more widely accepted. Serration and Split Chamber being requirements is bad, but ammo mutator mods being a requirement is A-Okay. It having AoE is largely irrelevant. A soma can kill an entire crowd just as fast if not faster (grenade/rocket travel-time versus RoF+aim as the weapon is hitscan, it becomes even faster if you opted for a shred in your build). Ammo restores a huge waste of resources for the reasons I explained earlier in this thread (IIRC).

[Pro3Display]

Ammo mutation mod

 

5 or 6 time i already said that here hue.

no need to be a parrot cause ammo mutation is useless

[Dasmir]

no need to be a parrot cause ammo mutation is useless

 

I have ammo mutation in my torid and ogris and i never have ammo issues even at rank 0 is enought

Edited August 23, 2014 by Dasmir