My Concerns for Damage 3.0

[Clovis15]

I want it to be clear up front that I am not against balance, and - should Damage 3.0 actually do that - I would be all for it. I however don't believe it'll bring balance, and I also believe it will cause much damage while failing to achieve its intended goal: to increase build diversity. This is because the dream of forcing build diversity upon the community is illusory at best, since you must understand that meta-chasers - despite what certain vocal people cheering the devs on happen to claiming - are actually happy with their meta.

The meta-chasers did their math to find the best blind-idiot DPS possible, regardless of all the real downsides involved in any such given weapon, and then married themselves to it because they are married to the idea of achieving blind-idiot DPS. These people chase the best epeen results available in any game they associate themselves with, and - rather than becoming diverse - will merely recrunch the numbers if a game is rebalanced. Afterwards - through a process they'll finish in less than a week, if even that - they'll discover a new singular meta, and christen that their new got assortment of mods and weapons.

You can't make them diverse because these people only crave the blind-idiot advantage of being theoretically number-wise better, even if they don't have the actual skills to compensate for the inherent faults found in the weapons and/or mods they chosen. Yet the devs are coming up with Damage 3.0 precisely because people upset at the existence of meta-chasers have long begged them to do so, and claimed the game would be better if the meta-chasers were using a diverse assortment of gear. Yet people only use a diverse assortment of gear if they like variety, no rebalancing will ever change the meta-chasers need to proclaim they have the highest possible blind-idiot DPS advantage in any group they find themselves within.

Ergo, we are about to have a massive rebalancing that will inherently fail its intended goal. This would be a problem if evidence suggests Damage 3.0 was going to make things better, or at the least probably be over all benign in nature. However - and keep in mind that I dearly do love this game - but the evidence historically available suggests quite the opposite, and in reality those with a lot for a diversity of weapons already are about to severely punished, while the meta-chasers will only be prevented with a miniscule speed bump they'll soon climb over and afterwards forget even happened.

Let's look at - for example - irreparable damage caused previously in the wake of other system changes, that have permanently wrecked diversity in the games by rendering many weapons without their niche any longer:

The Machete Wraith used to have Serrated Damage on normal non-charged strikes to compensate for the weak-damage and awkward animations inherent to the weapon-type, this ensured that despite these out comings it was - in light of it being a reward weapon - still worth using. You still had to get right up in someone's face to use it, so it wasn't the be all and end all of power either. Unfortunately someone thought it was a good idea to give serrated damage to long-range pistols, and such Serration became the thing that the anti-meta crowd banded against claiming that removing it would destroy the meta and finally improve build diversity. All it really did was push the meta away from the Acrid, and leave many melee weapons in a very awkward place for a long time when their inherently bad damage levels no longer benefitted from armor bypass. The Machete Wraith itself never recovered at all, so much for an event reward.

I am not complaining - however - about what happened to the Brakk, that thing really did need a few pegs knocked out of it.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Clovis15

[Sygnano]

15 minutes ago, Clovis15 said:

I am not complaining

You are actually, and it looks like the "meta chasers" (as you call it, it's actually a terrible name) had an affair with your sister or something. Anyway.

Soooo you're (not) complaining about how Serration became the thing and made the melee weapons useless, or something. But when the devs are on their way to removing Serration, you're spitting on it claiming it's not gonna change anything since meta chasers will find their way, the same guys that brought Serration to long range pistols.

I guess you're not complaining,  you're just spinning in circle...

Edited February 23, 2016 by Sygnano

[Clovis15]

Apparently we have post length limits now.

I wanted to also bring up the case of the Flux Rifle, an expensive to build MR6 weapon - that leaks ammo like a sieve - and had really bad range. It too used to use Serrated damage, up until the whiners claimed that you could thwart the meta-chasers by taking that system out. The meta-chasers weren't thwarted in the slightest, but the flux rifle is now just a short range weapon - expensive to build - and suffering from very bad stats with no perks anymore to justify its existence. Increasing diversity ended up not affecting the meta-chasers at all, and only ended up decreasing the even vaguely sane options for everyone else (because a meta-chaser back then had a Soma, not a Flux Rifle).

Worse yet is that people with a variety of weapons forma'ed out will lose the most when the build rules change, whereas the meta-chasers - whom already married themselves to just one payload - will barely be met with a speed bump after they elect their new singular God Emperor mod and weapon set. 

After all, they were chasing the blind-idiot DPS meta most likely long before they ever installed this game. However, as long as the whiners are given their way - like the devs are doing right now - the diversity for everyone else will actually shrink. Afterwards they will begin working on Damage 4.0 because the whiners will again be upset that the meta-chasers weren't thwarted yet, after which even more diversity will be lost.

I still have my multi forma'ed Lato Vandal, and I even still use it on occasion, so please don't say I haven't been around long enough to have an opinion. I desperately do want Damage 3.0 to be benign,  and maybe even helpful, but that simply isn't what long-standing historical evidence currently suggests.

[Clovis15]

25 minutes ago, Sygnano said:

You are actually, and it looks like the "meta chasers" (as you call it, it's actually a terrible name) had an affair with your sister or something. Anyway.

Soooo you're (not) complaining about how Serration became the thing and made the melee weapons useless, or something. But when the devs are on their way to removing Serration, you're spitting on it claiming it's not gonna change anything since meta chasers will find their way, the same guys that brought Serration to long range pistols.

I guess you're not complaining,  you're just spinning in circle...

Fighting by selective cropping is a good way to prove you don't have a point worthy of using against what I was actually saying, and thus you created a straw man variant - divorced from the point and concerns being raised - to ad hoc against instead.

Especially since you just disgustingly clipped that from a section praising the nerfing of the Brakk. The context was that I'm not against nerfs that actually serve a purpose - like when the Brakk took a much needed hit - but you twisted it to debunk my argument falsely, since you were apparently upset you didn't have a valid rebuttal otherwise.

I never once claimed that I wasn't complaining about this situation, but you already must have known that based on your non-accidental selective clipping job.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Clovis15

[(XBOX) Blut Fatal]

All they have to do is make the formula easier to understand and it would increase build diversity.

Currently you have people arguing saying that buzzkill allows you to hit 75mil with a fang on a bombard.

Its the stupid leading the stupid, there is no meta, its just 99% of the mods in the game are terrible.

[Clovis15]

1 minute ago, (XB1) Blut Fatal said:

Its the stupid leading the stupid, there is no meta, its just 99% of the mods in the game are terrible.

I do agree that many ancient mods, such as the Warframe elemental immunities, need a serious buffing to competively matter against virtually anything.

[Firetempest]

With all the meta meta meta talk you seem to have forgotten that during the era of serrated blade damage and armor piercing, enemies had ridiculous armor scaling that made a very few select weapons absolutely necessary on high waves.

Yeah, the meta will change. in 1.0 people would choose specific weapons, then rainbow build them. In 2.0 you could choose a larger library of weapons but then you just crit built them or loaded up on +damage% mods. With 3.0 I just hope a few more side mods will be used instead of slapping on a serration and multishot on every.single.weapon.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Firetempest

[Clovis15]

To Firetempest:

One of my concerns currently stems from their plans to add penalties to multi shot. This is because all pistols are already inherently balanced around 1.8x multi, whereas rifles are balanced around 0.9x multi, meaning that demonizing multi cards will not hurt rifles and pistols equally. To balance out multi becoming bad, most pistols would actually have to receive a buff in order to continue remaining relevant against the rifles that wouldn't be quite as hurt by the same change (especially since pistols already have fewer bullets). That's the problem, the change won't affect weapons equally across the board, so afterwards the new meta will favor rifles over pistols in a multi eats extra bullets world if pistol stas aren't rebalanced to accommodate (but damage 2.0 has shown it's unlikely this will happen).

Edited February 23, 2016 by Clovis15

[Sygnano]

25 minutes ago, Clovis15 said:

Fighting by selective cropping is a good way to prove you don't have a point worthy of using against what I was actually saying, and thus you created a straw man variant - divorced from the point and concerns being raised - to ad hoc against instead.

Especially since you just disgustingly clipped that from a section praising the nerfing of the Brakk. The context was that I'm not against nerfs that actually serve a purpose - like when the Brakk took a much needed hit - but you twisted it to debunk my argument falsely, since you were apparently upset you didn't have a valid rebuttal otherwise.

I never once claimed that I wasn't complaining about this situation, but you already must have known that based on your non-accidental selective clipping job.

Except that you have no point besides "damage 3.0 will be a fail because there was those times where they tried but they failed", which by itself is sterile. This thread is just here to complain about how people are trying to get the most DPS out of their weapons. Which would make a good side topic with actual conversation : "Why is there always some hipsters spitting on people trying to min-max their shit".

Edited February 23, 2016 by Sygnano

[Kaotyke]

It was the same thing when the transition from Damage 1.0 to 2.0 was announced to get rid of Rainbown Builds.

Let it come, we will adapt. Like we always did.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Kao-Snake

[Clovis15]

To Sygnano:

It is a valid concern when the devs have pretty much always ignored the fall out of such changes on weapons that weren't the meta at the time, and afterwards became even less viable as a result. I want them to not just think about how they can hurt the stats of the Boltor Prime, but remember also to be careful about how those changes can hurt not-quite-meta bystander gear in the process. I would actually welcome such changes if they began behaving in this manner, but as yet they have never done so with alarming consistency.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Clovis15

[S0V3REiGN]

I don't understand why you are already proclaiming that the change is bound to fail when you don't even know what they are going to change. 

[Reaper24503]

The only thing I'm "concerned" with, if you will, is the fact that the new Damage system was supposed to erase Serration and change Multishot and look at enemy scaling. For some reason, the attention was diverted to the Impact, Puncture and Slash mods. To be fair, no matter what happens, we will just experiment and find what's best suited to destroy the new "end-game" enemies. Also, it appears that there isn't enough context to be absolutely sure what it is the new Damage system is to accomplish. Hopefully there will be a more clear, concise explanation to show what the hell is to come. Considering the only recent context is a tweet from Steve.

[RedmeetsBlack]

To Clovis15: 

I have to things to say here. 

Point 1: This may not have been your intention in the OP, but try to avoid calling ppl who build for damage "meta-chasers" please. They are simply using the tools they have to fit their play style even if you and many others don't agree with said play style.

Point 2: People are always going to build for the most efficient dps to situation scenario and supply others with the information. No amount of damage reworking is going to change that so there really isn't much point to worrying about it. Say they make pressure point standard on all melee. P Reach or blood rush will take its place (spoiled strike may also be a consideration). 

I don't really understand what they are trying to accomplish with such a rework. It is not as thought mandatory mods are a thing they emphasized. The community came to the conclusion the mods listed were mandatory, not them. Once the ones we have now are gone, it will be (insert mods here) taking their respective places.

[Unholy_Ghost]

2 hours ago, Reaper24503 said:

The only thing I'm "concerned" with, if you will, is the fact that the new Damage system was supposed to erase Serration and change Multishot and look at enemy scaling. For some reason, the attention was diverted to the Impact, Puncture and Slash mods. To be fair, no matter what happens, we will just experiment and find what's best suited to destroy the new "end-game" enemies. Also, it appears that there isn't enough context to be absolutely sure what it is the new Damage system is to accomplish. Hopefully there will be a more clear, concise explanation to show what the hell is to come. Considering the only recent context is a tweet from Steve.

The physical damage has become obsolete, impact alone is no longer efective against corpus and slash alone is no longer efective against infested, only puncture remains the decent physical damage type but can't do much to increase its damage dealing numbers like you would do with elemental damage mods. To me the whole mod sistem is broken, mods are just to unbalanced, why should i put a mod that increases clip size by 30% on a rifle to gain 6-10 bullets that help me last longer while taking enemies down when i can just add atleast a 60% elemental mod and kill the enemy or several enemies from one shoot from the same riffle.

DE should really take notes from deadspace3's circuit system, i know its not complex but its a starting point, a balanced starting point.

[Airyllish]

In a game where enemy level scales well beyond the "level cap" available to players, and thus to achieve the ability to fight against the steadily exponentially scaling enemies you have to start consider min-maxing and equipping specific mods to achieve the best effect, you are always going to have an "efficient meta". The game forces you to, in fact, because at a certain point in end-game content being inefficient will cost you your life - enemies will out-scale you and decimate you in seconds if you cannot blow them up first.

That's the gist I get from end-game Warframe. It's not a skill-based battle, it's a simple war of attrition. How long can your build and your resources keep you fighting until your resources dry up and the scaling enemies out-number, out-damage and out-live you? 

Therefore, the game actively promotes finding efficient metas. No changes made to damage are ever going to change or fix this because the very foundation of the game in the very end-game missions basically demand that you have the set ups that can deal the most reliable damage you can manage so that you can blow up everything before it blows up you. It's not damage that would need to change but gameplay, if you want to try and "eradicate" the idea of a meta. The end-game of Warframe would need to be fundamentally and drastically re-worked to be a mode that isn't the current "war of attrition" mode it currently is. Enemies cannot be allowed to delete you off the face of the planet in three hits or less - because those are the situations when yes, you do need to have the optimal build in order to delete that enemy before it deletes you.

So honestly, bring on Damage 3.0. Your concern of encouraging a meta is null and void because there will always be a meta, and the way damage works won't change that. Enemy scaling, enemy AI and even resource management (in terms of health, shields and energy and your access to them at any given moment either through orb drops, gear you take or mods) would need to be revised in order to change the standing meta of "what is the fastest way I can delete the current strongest enemy I can fight" because those are the things that decide why damage needs to work the way it does. /shrug

[Babellon]

Why is everyone a whiner and/or idiot? this is what I got from that very long opening statement. People finding the best possible dps/utility setup for a system is commonplace in any game you play. They serve a purpose. What they do is give the rest of us a max baseline understanding of probabilities. It doesn't change anything about how someone plays or at least, someone who builds for their personal idea and playstyle. I personally never follow build guides in any game I play, I do how ever like the information those people provide through their experimentation and examination.

People who want changes to a system aren't whiners, people who put builds together for highest numbers aren't idiots. Balance is achieved on both sides when we have a design that accommodates those who want that type of focused setup and also gives diversity in build for those of us who want to do something different. I have hundreds of mods in my lineup, but if I want to be successful at a mission I'm pushed into using only a few in order to keep the damage output. I'd much rather have a more optimal build around other elements than damage exclusivity which I hope is what this current redesign is going to accomplish.

[CrazyCatLad]

I can't tell who is angry at who because we all have the same darn avatars currently!

[Airyllish]

1 minute ago, Lanieu said:

I can't tell who is angry at who because we all have the same darn avatars currently!

This is the internet.

By proxy, everybody is angry at everybody else.

[LeifKlover]

I can't even begin on the fallacies in your post. One of the primary issues with Warframe right now is that Primary and Secondary weapons vastly outclass melee weapons in almost every way (with the exception of Melee weapons being the most reliable when equipped with high ammo consumption weapons like the Amprex or Atomos.) This is caused entirely by the existence of Heavy Caliber, Magnum Force, Serration, and Hornet Strike as mods. My Rubico potshots enemies for several hundred thousand per crit, while my Obex, designed for achieving Red Crits at one of the highest strike for strike attack speeds, is hitting its 3k reds about 7 times a second.

The problem that arises is because of these vast differences in damage, they have to redesign enemy armour so that Primaries and Secondaries don't oneshot everything they're fired at, but this puts melee weapons at a severe deficit. Hell, it's the entire reason why Channeling exists. Just so that they had a method of pushing Melee that much closer to Primary weapon damage status. It's with Damage 3.0 that we see a fix for this. I don't give a rats &#! about the meta giants, because the game has always had meta weapons. It makes using other weapons to great effect that much more enjoyable. I'm just sick and tired of lobbing a shot or a thousand at an enemy, and requiring Corrosive Projection x3 + Coaction to do any damage to the bloody things. Damage 3.0 will fix damage scaling on most weapons to their ranks, but it will also allow DE to balance out enemy scaling by level to something more manageable. Besides, it allows for more build diversity than "Put Serration, Heavy Caliber, Split chamber, and whatever the hell else on there that makes these three mods perform better." The simple removal of the first two and the bug fix on the third will mean build diversity will LEAP on almost every weapon, and can shove certain weapons well into meta status.

Edited February 23, 2016 by LeifKlover

[Clovis15]

4 hours ago, (PS4) KikoEschobar said:

To Clovis15: 

I have to things to say here. 

Point 1: This may not have been your intention in the OP, but try to avoid calling ppl who build for damage "meta-chasers" please. They are simply using the tools they have to fit their play style even if you and many others don't agree with said play style.

Point 2: People are always going to build for the most efficient dps to situation scenario and supply others with the information. No amount of damage reworking is going to change that so there really isn't much point to worrying about it. Say they make pressure point standard on all melee. P Reach or blood rush will take its place (spoiled strike may also be a consideration). 

I don't really understand what they are trying to accomplish with such a rework. It is not as thought mandatory mods are a thing they emphasized. The community came to the conclusion the mods listed were mandatory, not them. Once the ones we have now are gone, it will be (insert mods here) taking their respective places.

Actually I usually do build most of my weapons - many of which are unpopular ones - for the highest possible per bullet damage, although usually not for the highest possible per second damage (I'm not necessarily a fan of wasting ammo faster just to do slightly more damage per second). Honestly I have nothing wrong with people wanting the best results, and I often look at the info they disseminate (I apologize that I didn't explain this originally). It's the people begging for the devs to force those people to change up their builds - and stop using their favorite Boltor Prime - that I hate, especially when it's been shown the devs' method of doing so is to break 20 other weapons just to slightly inconvenience - and ultimately not really hinder - the weapon that was upsetting the people upset with the meta people to begin with.

Back during Damage 1.0 I was perfectly happy not using the meta-choice of the Soma - Galatine - and Acrid, and I was also perfectly happy letting everyone else use them to their heart's content (except for one clan member we had that'd be rude to everyone not using them, I didn't like him). What I hated is that the people crusading to get those weapons and builds punished were rewarded by the devs implementing a sloppy idea that heavily punished many weapons no one was upset with at the time, weapons that are now beyond worthless. I can have fun with a slightly-sub-optimal weapon that isn't the perfect meta, but I can't have fun with the 100% trash that various weapons have become in the name of balancing the game.

For the record, I have all of the current meta weapons maxed out too. I even use them sometimes as well (but I will still contend that I liked the Tigris long before it became the meta). But that's because I like viable diversity to swap around with, not because I'm married to just one option. Sorry that it wasn't clear that I'm honestly not upset with the people who like just one payload, I can perfectly understand specialization. Although I switch up my weapons all the time, I almost exclusively play only Vauban. It was the people complaining about the meta, pushing the devs to often shake up unneeded changes - hurting less than perfect weapons in the process - that I'm upset with.

I should probably never again start a thread like this when I've had so little sleep.

 

[DeMeritus]

I'm just hoping it won't be the same 'stack on more across the board armor / damage resistance' implementations that comprised both damage 1.0 and 2.0.

[Clovis15]

2 hours ago, LeifKlover said:

I can't even begin on the fallacies in your post. One of the primary issues with Warframe right now is that Primary and Secondary weapons vastly outclass melee weapons in almost every way (with the exception of Melee weapons being the most reliable when equipped with high ammo consumption weapons like the Amprex or Atomos.) This is caused entirely by the existence of Heavy Caliber, Magnum Force, Serration, and Hornet Strike as mods. My Rubico potshots enemies for several hundred thousand per crit, while my Obex, designed for achieving Red Crits at one of the highest strike for strike attack speeds, is hitting its 3k reds about 7 times a second.

The problem that arises is because of these vast differences in damage, they have to redesign enemy armour so that Primaries and Secondaries don't oneshot everything they're fired at, but this puts melee weapons at a severe deficit. Hell, it's the entire reason why Channeling exists. Just so that they had a method of pushing Melee that much closer to Primary weapon damage status. It's with Damage 3.0 that we see a fix for this. I don't give a rats &#! about the meta giants, because the game has always had meta weapons. It makes using other weapons to great effect that much more enjoyable. I'm just sick and tired of lobbing a shot or a thousand at an enemy, and requiring Corrosive Projection x3 + Coaction to do any damage to the bloody things. Damage 3.0 will fix damage scaling on most weapons to their ranks, but it will also allow DE to balance out enemy scaling by level to something more manageable. Besides, it allows for more build diversity than "Put Serration, Heavy Caliber, Split chamber, and whatever the hell else on there that makes these three mods perform better." The simple removal of the first two and the bug fix on the third will mean build diversity will LEAP on almost every weapon, and can shove certain weapons well into meta status.

The bad balance of melee damage is actually because - back in the day - melee weapons originally had the benefit of bypassing armor, and at first only melee weapons had this perk. Their low damage didn't matter, since - using an old-style charge attack - they'd hit for 100% of their full value (where as other weapons would have their damage massively reduced by various factors). As a result their apparent low damage would often hurt enemies far more than primaries and secondaries would with higher base stats. Then one of the devs thought it'd be a funny idea to give some infamous pistols bypass damage also, and this caused those guns to instantly become the new exclusive meta of Warframe. Once an exclusive meta formed the people against the existence of such things quickly complained, and the devs reacted poorly. Rather than doing the smart thing and returning bypass to the exclusive domain of melee, which had poor damage stats inherently balanced around assuming they'd always get free bypass, they simply took bypass away from everything without buffing the stats of melee weapons in the process to compensate for what they just lost.

Ergo, your point is actually defending my original argument as what I was trying to get across - but was perhaps too tired at the time to fully articulate - is that I believe the devs are about to make another sweeping change to nerf a small handful of weapons without any regard to how these changes will maligns everything else once more.

However, the fact that you're praising the multi-shot nerf means you obviously - in light of the fact these devs make only sweeping changes without compensatory buffs - want all pistols to be come the new melee of forever-destroyed stats (all hail the rifle only meta). Currently rifles are balanced around the assumption of 1.9 shots - and pistols around 2.8 shots - which means that afterwards rifles will only lose roughly half their damage, but pistols will lose roughly 60% of their damage. Unless their base damage - which was inherently balanced around the idea of 2.8x multi-shot - isn't buffed to compendate for these changes, all current pistols will go straight to trash tier afterwards. This is further worsened by pistols also having a worse reserve ammo pool than rifles, meaning that rifles will be further meta-impowered by the multi-shot nerf (as they'll be more free to get their lost damage back with less hurting in the process).

I do believe the devs will do such a balancing change, because these are the only sort of balancing changes they've ever historically made where sweeping changes were concerned (yet I've always valued precision-strikes on just one weapon, such as the Brakk).

 

Edited February 23, 2016 by Clovis15

[(PSN)Magician_NG]

The sooner flat damage mods (serration, point blank, hornet strike, and pressure point) get removed the better.

I'd like room for body count and blood rush on my current obex build while keeping the same base damage.

[LeifKlover]

13 minutes ago, Clovis15 said:

The bad balance of melee damage is actually because - back in the day - melee weapons originally had the benefit of bypassing armor, and at first only melee weapons had this perk. Their low damage didn't matter, since - using an old-style charge attack - they'd hit for 100% of their full value (where as other weapons would have their damage massively reduced by various factors). As a result their apparent low damage would often hurt enemies far more than primaries and secondaries would with higher base stats. Then one of the devs thought it'd be a funny idea to give some infamous pistols bypass damage also, and this caused those guns to instantly become the new exclusive meta of Warframe. Once an exclusive meta formed the people against the existence of such things quickly complained, and the devs reacted poorly. Rather than doing the smart thing and returning bypass to the exclusive domain of melee, which had poor damage stats inherently balanced around assuming they'd always get free bypass, they simply took bypass away from everything without buffing the stats of melee weapons in the process to compensate for what they just lost.

Ergo, your point is actually defending my original argument as what I was trying to get across - but was perhaps too tired at the time to fully articulate - is that I believe the devs are about to make another sweeping change to nerf a small handful of weapons without any regard to how these changes will maligns everything else once more.

The serration nerf would nerf EVERY weapon, though.Yes, I remember the Boltor Kunai Orthos/Gram meta. The problem at hand is, again, the fact that a mod is allowing one group to blow a section of weapons out of proportion to others. Melee weapons were great back then, I still miss those days, but it's just not good practice to now have them at a level that is well below proper scaling. The only way my Obex stand anywhere close to anything now is with Shattering impact. Bloodrush, Bodycount, Shattering Impact, Collision Force, Berserker, Pressure Point, True Steel, and Organ Shatter. Basically, the way primaries and secondaries are currently, they enforce strict mod-layouts across the game. Sure, that may stay the same, but dedicating a slot on every weapon to Serration is terrible to think about.

 

Quote

However, the fact that you're praising the multi-shot nerf means you obviously - in light of the fact these devs make only sweeping changes without compensatory buffs - want all pistols to be come the new melee of forever-destroyed stats (all hail the rifle only meta). Currently rifles are balanced around the assumption of 1.9 shots - and pistols around 2.8 shots - which means that afterwards rifles will only lose roughly half their damage, but pistols will lose roughly 60% of their damage. Unless their base damage - which was inherently balanced around the idea of 2.8x multi-shot - isn't buffed to compendate for these changes, all current pistols will go straight to trash tier afterwards. This is further worsened by pistols also having a worse reserve ammo pool than rifles, meaning that rifles will be further meta-impowered by the multi-shot nerf (as they'll be more free to get their lost damage back with less hurting in the process).

I do believe the devs will do such a balancing change, because these are the only sort of balancing changes they've ever historically made where sweeping changes were concerned (yet I've always valued precision-strikes on just one weapon, such as the Brakk).

There are mods in this game that provide you with increase ammo return. With the removal of damage increase mods like Hornet strike, that provides placement and usage of those mods as necessary. Yes, you can use a sidearm with multishot on it. Sidearms are more of an emergency weapon that IS NOT INTENDED for liberal use outside of emergencies, be it an ammo shortage or otherwise being downed. Shot for shot, you will still deal the same damage. However, you must be more careful in your usage of those shots. At the end of the day, the change to multi-shot is a bug-fix, much like the fix to Coptering (which changed melee meta entirely). Sidearms are not balanced around multishot damage. They are balanced around being sidearms. With the change to multishot and the removal of damage mods, this means you are allowing build diversity. With adding multishot, you are allowing people to double or triple their damage on an RNG. Extreme damage increases with no penalty are not healthy for balance. The same could be said for event mods that provide their 60/60 bonuses, but I would have to say that the flat status mods need to be brought up to a middle status so that they are worth using in place of those event mods.

Edited February 23, 2016 by LeifKlover