Grakata

[Vanloth]

I am not being condescending, good sir. I am submitting to your every demand, showing my findings, only to find them dismissed. In addition, you are not even giving me the time of the day, where I am attempting to meet your expectations with every new piece of proof to my claim I pose. Now, with that in mind, who is behaving unfairly and elitist towards whom? And this extends not just to you, mmSnake, but the accumulated group people of bashing the Grakata.

I don't think you understand the meaning of this word, so I'll go ahead and paste the definition for you.

"Acting in a way that betrays a feeling of patronizing superiority."

Don't play dumb. You didn't change your attitude until I mentioned this, and while I will not argue further on this topic. I think it's obvious to everyone here, as well as yourself, how you really felt about the people you were responding to.

As has been said before, this weapon is outperformed in every way by a starter weapon. What is bad may be subjective, but I think most people would agree that is a bad thing. Every weapon should have something it is the best at, and the Grakata isn't really good at anything.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Vanloth

[f3llyn]

I disagree every weapon should have something it's "best" at. Every weapon should have something they are good at, though. If that's a combination of different things then that's fine. Every weapon should feel different, however.

 

If every weapon is the best at something then sooner or later you're going to run out of ways to make new weapons unique.

 

That being said, I haven't tried the Grakata yet, my supply of alloy plate is low so I can't comment on how it actually feels while playing, which is all that matters to me.

 

Sure, if you just look at numbers then it's clearly inferior but so what? If it really is bad DE won't have any problems with buffing it. What is important is if it's fun to use or not.

Edited April 22, 2013 by f3llyn

[Ced23Ric]

I don't think you understand the meaning of this word, so I'll go ahead and paste the definition for you.

Acting in a way that betrays a feeling of patronizing superiority.

You clearly do this, and ignoring your lousy attitude, [...]

 

I think ... this is ironic. Are you patronizing me, while explaining to me how I am in your opinion unable to comprehend an adjective of the English language, to the point where you need to paste "the definition" of it, attempting to educate me?

 

[...] you still ignore direct evidence that contradicts your argument.

 

My argument was never that the Grakata is the best weapon in the game. I try not to speak in such black/white statements. I posted my opinion twice now, and I still stand by it, as I see no reason to deviate from a perfectly fine, relational statement of "this isn't as bad as you make it sound". There has been no evidence that would contradict this statement so far. There is, on the other hand, a lot of evidence that does support my statement - and the evidence was done based on the presets of the thread here, not by my choices.

 

As has been said before, this weapon is outperformed in every way by a starter weapon. What is bad may be subjective, but I think most people would agree that is a bad thing. Every weapon should have something it is the best at, and the Grakata isn't really good at anything.

 

The Braton is not a starter weapon. The Braton Mk.1 is. The Braton is actually a really decent, balanced rifle. And since your calculations did not include reload times, clipsize, TTK, procs, etc., you will find that maybe your 180 < 192 is in actuality a lot ... closer. The Grakata works. "The Grakata isn't good at anything." is simply a statement I cannot concurr with. It kills. It does so fast and effortlessly.

 

Where is the reason you need to call something functional "bad"? I keep trying to show you why it is not bad, but this arrives on your end as ... good. And good seems to translate to best. "Not bad" means "not bad". Not "best". There seems to be a communicative barrier I cannot breach.

 

My apologies if this discussion ruffled anyone's Jimmies. *shrug* To each their own?

[Dasmir]

Progression of events:

 

1. Mob decides something arbitrarily.

2. Ced disagrees.

3. Mob demands evidence.

4. Ced provides evidence.

5. Mob is severely offended that someone proves them wrong.

6. Mob drums out Ced and decides they're right anyway.

 

Goodness, this is like watching an honest person argue with Fox News anchors.

 

Every thread about Grakata and Ankyros

[Vanloth]

I think ... this is ironic. Are you patronizing me, while explaining to me how I am in your opinion unable to comprehend an adjective of the English language, to the point where you need to paste "the definition" of it, attempting to educate me?

I see my example went completely over your head.

 

It kills. It does so fast and effortlessly.

As does every weapon in the game. Unless they release the cotton candy hammer, I think we are going to continue to get weapons that 'kill'.

 

The entire issue is that a gun that only costs 15,000 credits is on par, if not supremely better than a gun that costs significantly more. Your tests have all been on missions I could have run with nothing but my man mittens, they are not conclusive to the effectiveness of the weapon against high level defense missions. When a weapon is outclassed in every aspect by another weapon, that means the weapon is bad. As I have said, what is bad, and what isn't is subjective, but it's fairly obvious that the majority agrees this weapon needs some love. There needs to be a reason to use it, and currently there isn't one other than looks.

We want this gun to be good, and the fact that you seem to oppose buffing it, is baffling given the numbers.

 

 

 

Where is the reason you need to call something functional "bad"? I keep trying to show you why it is not bad, but this arrives on your end as ... good. And good seems to translate to best. "Not bad" means "not bad". Not "best". There seems to be a communicative barrier I cannot breach.

This is legitimately gibberish, and I have no idea what you are attempting to convey with this paragraph.

Edited April 22, 2013 by Vanloth

[mmSNAKE]

Put it back in perspective. No gun is bad once you supercharge it for simple missions. Like previously noted a supercharged Lato can handle anything thrown at you in most missions. It's by high end game that you measure what the gun is worth, and there it falters.

 

Also note the gun has no polarities, and if you don't supercharge it (because some people don't have a potato for every gun, or don't have mountain of platinum to spend) the gun will simply suck compared to a gun that has a V polarity for example.

[Syaniide]

I will repeat myself once again... this whole thread is invalid. The lato is by far the best gun ever made... ever. I mean why discuss the grakata when the lato is far superior in damage? I can take out a whole 5 grineer commanders before I have used all my ammo... theres no way any gun in any game has ever topped that.

And if you disagree I end this by saying...DO YOU EVEN LIFT BRO?!?

[V101]

So my comparison of the stats of other weapons to Grakata is arbitrary? His evidence isn't complete because it's one sided. Until you compare it how it performs to other weapons you can't say it's a good gun. Compared to many other weapons in the game it does not hold, especially in possible total damage.

 

So lets, do some small basic stats here.

 

Total Damage: 600*9 =5400

DPS: 20*9 = 180 dps (not going to include reload time for the calculation to keep it simple)

 

Now let's take Gorgon.

 

Total Damage: 24*590 = 14160

DPS: 24*12.5 = 300

 

Now lets do Braton

 

Total Damage = 17*545 = 9265

DPS = 17*11.3 = 192.1

 

Grakata is worse than the regular Braton, in both DPS and total damage.

Now I could calculate the extra bit with reload time, but it wouldn't make a difference, it would still come up short. Want proof? There it is. If you want I'll do it with crit chance as well, as long as I know what base crit chance for Grakata is. From what I've seen it's not high enough to make a difference.

holy crap, i knew it wasnt that good, i was using it and felt good but not quite .... as much as a gorgon, even a burston, its like, hard to handle (i can live with that, and actually found a way to burst it succesfully) but the damage doesnt seems quite right, i mean, its pretty fast but i end up using 3, 4, 5 magazines on high level armored monsters, and every standar clip is 60 bullets . . . i mean, in every high level map there are like at least 20 armored monsters, from ancients to bombards, etc, and taking that long to kill a single, isnt that good, but i guess in such cases, there comes melee or pistols (low armor pierce damage porcentage)  so, if the grakata gets a boost, fine, if not, well... we'll have to deal with it . . .

[Shaemhameforash]

I see people comparing Grakata to Braton. I see people saying that Grakata is bad at higher levels, even though that has been proven wrong in this thread already. That it's ammo-inefficient. When did gamers turn into accountants? When did playing become a matter of overanalyzing and dissecting guns and their abilities?

The gun might not have the highest damage in the game. Hell I don't even care if it's viable on Pluto or Eris. The point is that it is fun. Fun to the max. It has an insane rate of fire and great sound. It feels like a proper machine gun. Performance? Who cares? Slap some mod on it and it will be grand. Games are supposed to be entertaining and so far I've been greatly entertained while using this gun. 

[V101]

sorry but you are wrong, performance does matter, it dictates if the player have fun using it or not, and i agree its about having fun, but there's no fun spending time (waiting to craft, farming materials, waiting for "?" alerts to give orokin catalyzers) money (well, now making money isnt that a big deal with the alerts, yet a few of them required to craft it, and some who bought with platinum) and realizing the weapon its not what they spected and lets be honest, i got mine with serration 120% dmg, max fire, ice, armor pierce, multyshot, and still its pretty hard to kill high levels, and if exploring high level maps doesnt matters, where's the endgame? so, performance does matter, you dont want to end up realizing you are not having fun with the weapon . . .

[Cpl_Facehugger]

Because everything else dies too quickly. Whats the point of gauging it to something other weapons will overkill? Fire hek at lv 30 mobs across tile, they all die.

So basically it's just fine for the extremely vast majority of mobs a player is going to be shooting at. Is that what you're saying?

[MoonicusMaximus]

So when did Defense Missions become the be-all end-all final-say benchmark on a weapons viability in Warframe? I must have missed that memo.

[Shaemhameforash]

sorry but you are wrong, performance does matter, it dictates if the player have fun using it or not, and i agree its about having fun, but there's no fun spending time (waiting to craft, farming materials, waiting for "?" alerts to give orokin catalyzers) money (well, now making money isnt that a big deal with the alerts, yet a few of them required to craft it, and some who bought with platinum) and realizing the weapon its not what they spected and lets be honest, i got mine with serration 120% dmg, max fire, ice, armor pierce, multyshot, and still its pretty hard to kill high levels, and if exploring high level maps doesnt matters, where's the endgame? so, performance does matter, you dont want to end up realizing you are not having fun with the weapon . . .

I think the real problem is the expectation. Everybody expects every weapon to be the ultimate killing machine. I use Grakata a lot because I don't mind it's damage output. Whatever is not killed by it, gets destroyed by abilities/melee. Performance isn't an issue here because You're not limited to using just this one gun. You have a multitude of options when it comes to dispatching enemies. And as for defense missions, let's be honest- you won't be using guns for damage past wave 25-30. 

[V101]

its not all about defense, even in spy misions, you ecounter a few armored monsters, wich of course are meant to add dificulty, and not easy to kill, but..... know what, nvm, people and their opinions.... booring

[mmSNAKE]

If you want a crap performing weapon, go knock yourselves out. Numbers don't lie. Braton costs 10k, doesn't need to be made and has a polarity. I say that is enough to close the book on it...

[Vanloth]

So when did Defense Missions become the be-all end-all final-say benchmark on a weapons viability in Warframe? I must have missed that memo.

When they became the only other mission where you couldn't run past everything. Those missions are incredibly easy as is, and weapon selection does not matter for them. This is why we don't care if you post stats for those missions.

 

 

And as for defense missions, let's be honest- you won't be using guns for damage past wave 25-30. 

What?

Edited April 22, 2013 by Vanloth

[MoonicusMaximus]

When they became the only other mission where you couldn't run past everything. Those missions are incredibly easy as is, and weapon selection does not matter for them. This is why we don't care if you post stats for those missions.

 

So about 80% of the game doesn't matter in terms of what kind of equipment you bring?

[Vanloth]

So about 80% of the game doesn't matter in terms of what kind of equipment you bring?

You got it. As long as you have rush on your frame 80% of this game can be run. And even if it wasn't for that I would be fine since any mission below level forty is a complete cakewalk.

[WildJuice]

I think we all know that the Grataka is not the best weapon. Let's just leave it in the dust like the burston and move on. Every new weapon isn't meant to  destroy the competition. Just enjoy the fact you don't need an extra catalyst.

 

For later waves (25 and on) only armor ignoring weapons are still viable : melee, boltor, akbolto, paris

so yeah grataka can be equivalent to a gorgon!

[mmSNAKE]

On Waves 25 and up (xini for example), you are not likely to see without nyx. Even if your Rhino squad can't die, they can't deal damage fast enough to stop the massive hordes destroying the objectives.

 

I'll admit, the only reason I even saw a lv 100 ancient was because there was a Nyx on my team.

 

Not to say it's impossible to do this without current Nyx's Chaos, it's just damn difficult.

 

I generally gauge weapons from xini to see how they behave from wave 5 to 15.After 15 even the Hek starts to stall, and the armor piercing weapons while they do ignore armor they don't penetrate the insane health pool fast enough, so people get to cleaving.

[Cpl_Facehugger]

When they became the only other mission where you couldn't run past everything. Those missions are incredibly easy as is, and weapon selection does not matter for them. This is why we don't care if you post stats for those missions.

So wait. You're saying that ~80% of all missions in the game don't matter because you don't have to kill the enemy? Wat? I mean, sure, if you're a speedrunner weapon selection doesn't matter because your loki will just run through everything anyway, but if you're actually playing the game and shooting enemies, weapon selection definitely matters. And since you have to shoot enemies to get mods and most resources, well, this whole line of reasoning seems really bizarre to me. If there's an enemy in front of you, why wouldn't you kill it?

[Vanloth]

So wait. You're saying that ~80% of all missions in the game don't matter because you don't have to kill the enemy? Wat? I mean, sure, if you're a speedrunner weapon selection doesn't matter because your loki will just run through everything anyway, but if you're actually playing the game and shooting enemies, weapon selection definitely matters. And since you have to shoot enemies to get mods and most resources, well, this whole line of reasoning seems really bizarre to me. If there's an enemy in front of you, why wouldn't you kill it?

Because I can kill enemies while running without breaking a stride and get through the missions with incredibly low rewards. In terms of rewards the vast majority of the missions are terrible. You do not even have to be very good to run through the game as long as you have rush. And even if you are just playing the game, as has been mentioned many times, you can use absolutely any weapon as long as it has mods. I don't know why this is so hard to grasp.

Edited April 22, 2013 by Vanloth

[Namacyst]

Why is this discussion?

 

If you like Grakata you will use it regardless of it's inferiority because maybe you have fun with it.

 

If you don't like it you stick to the generic fotm Hek or BV and ignore the new inferior gun.

 

We have choices.. so choose!

[MoonicusMaximus]

We're not allowed to choose if we want to be the best.

[Braken]

I don't want what happened to ME3 to happen to Warframe.

 

For those who didn't play ME3 multiplayer: They had a lot of different weapons to choose from, and added more over time. However, MANY of the guns were useless/overshadowed compared to a few powerful guns. There was an illusion of choice, but it really only broke down to choosing from about 15-20% of the existing weapons.

 

At the moment, while it isn't useless, it IS overshadowed by almost any other weapon.