give us infinite ammo

[(PSN)DesecratedFlame]

44 minutes ago, Gelkor said:

I'll be the first admit, it's rare that OP and I see eye to eye on anythying, but I have to say I'm in agreement on this. 

Managing an ammo reserve is, in my mind, just as tedious as managing Stamina was back in the day before Parkour 2.0.

We already have factors in the game to limit gunplay and make it engaging, reloading and clip/magazine size. Total ammo pool is only very rarely an actual problem, and when it is, you simply circumvent it with restores. It's not engaging, only annoying, and that doesn't make it a challenging or interesting game mechanic. I also wouldn't mind that it frees up a lot of clutter on the battlefield. There's also the annoying thing of launchers sharing the same ammo pool, which is just insulting to bow users. 

*shrug*

Yeah, making Bows and certain secondaries use the same ammo pool was a bad choice. Launchers needed a different ammo type, an ammo nerf, or something else to mitigate them back then, but they didn't need all of that stuff heaped together.

18 minutes ago, Rhekemi said:

to mitigate

Band-aids

7 minutes ago, Volinus7 said:

Infinite ammo

OP weapons will be less OP because of longer reloading time.

Automatic/continuous weapons will be viable at high lvl.

No more sniper ammo shared pool controversy.

EXACTLY!

[Gelkor]

8 minutes ago, (PS4)abbacephas said:

The thing is "slightly" is not equivalent to "significantly", which is what I was inquiring about. And just to be even clearer, when I speak about a significant difference, I'm speaking using the scientific definition of significant (ie. there is a statistically measurable change).

So only changes that make statistically significant impacts are worthy of being implemented? Warframe has been built on these kind of small, barely measurable changes in quality of life to the point where it is a vastly different, and largely much improved game today than it was over three years ago.

[Teridax68]

I support unlimited ammo, not just for gameplay reasons, but because it would reduce visual clutter tremendously. Most drops on the floor end up being ammo cases, and in Endless missions, these tend to cluster around into little rainbow puddles, which distracts from combat and more important drops, especially resources.

In the end, infinite ammo wouldn't drastically change gameplay in most cases, but whenever it would have a major impact, that impact would be positive: most weapons have enough ammo to last an entire Endless mission without ever running out (and even in Endless missions, they refill faster than you can empty them, unless you're spectacularly unlucky with ammo drops), and whenever a weapon is so ammo inefficient that you risk running out before the end, that's usually enough to make the weapon undesirable. Switching to unlimited ammo would streamline gameplay overall and reduce dependence on Vacuum, however slightly.

[Krion112]

17 minutes ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said:

I stopped reading right there.

You're the one who's confused why nearly everyone here is opposing your point. Ignoring the argument seems to be your issue, it's not that people aren't giving you a valid one. At least, that's what I get from this statement, the thread at large, and my previous encounters with and observations of your behavior across the forums.

 

17 minutes ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said:

Dude, the only game types were ammo becomes a concern are endless missions, and they all involve being relatively stationary.

Irrelevant point. We're not discussing if the present system works, we're asking if it should be removed in favor of 'infinite ammo'. Survey says it's popular opinion that the system at present is fine, but there is room for improvement.

Also, obviously you must have ammo related concerns in other parts of the game as well, otherwise your main point wouldn't have been about using Ammo Restores. If ammo's not a problem to manage in the first place, why are you complaining about ammo restores?

And, if you're not playing other modes than endless, then you have no right to claim this either because then your sample space only pertains to your perspective, and not the game at large.

 

17 minutes ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said:

If you can't find time to use a restore then you are not even looking.

I don't need to use restores at all. I don't even have any Ammo Restores made, because quite simply, I always effectively apply my weapons in tandem with my abilities and Specters so I never run out of ammo. I don't use Carrier's new ability, and I rarely use mods that improve ammo related stats. Rarely I use Health Restores, but I don't normally stay near them very long. And even rarer than that, I use energy restores, usually only to help other players and not myself.

I don't need to find time to use Restores. I can't even comprehend how you're playing in a way that you are running out of ammo.

 

34 minutes ago, Gelkor said:

...slightly faster paced. I don't personally see how that's a bad thing.

This mentality is the source of Warframe's troubles. This idea of 'Let's keep making it faster'. Is it not fast paced enough for you?

Plus, look at the issues caused by how fast it is: Time gates are getting more popular for DE because it has become the only way to spread out our game time; we got Argon, Nitain, Equinox requires Eight Parts to build, Mesa is gated by Alad V keys that take forever to obtain en masse, especially if RNG screws you, and other similar elements in-game. PvP is nothing short of impossible to balance because there's no way to balance when everyone is always moving at an insane speed with insane maneuverability. Even the balance in PvE goes awry because we're untouchable, while casting room-clearing abilities or using room-clearing weapons that just completely trample over what the enemy can do to us, so then DE is forced to add mechanics that are just as 'cheese' oriented to counter us.

Making the game faster paced than it already is is only going to amplify other problems. Faster Pace does not equal good game-design. Every player plays at a different pace, and there's a string of problems that follow when you start forcing specific play-styles in a game designed to cater to multiple play-styles.

If Warframe was already set-up so we did nothing but play on the offensive all the time, with nothing but aggressive play-styles at our disposal, I'd say Infinite Ammo might be a good thing. But Warframe isn't designed like that.

[(PSN)abbacephas]

16 minutes ago, Gelkor said:

So only changes that make statistically significant impacts are worthy of being implemented? Warframe has been built on these kind of small, barely measurable changes in quality of life to the point where it is a vastly different, and largely much improved game today than it was over three years ago.

When it comes to measuring cost of implementation vs benefit of implementation, I would think so. I could be wrong, but it just makes good business sense to weigh these concepts in such a fashion.

[Gelkor]

5 minutes ago, Krion112 said:

This mentality is the source of Warframe's troubles. This idea of 'Let's keep making it faster'. Is it not fast paced enough for you?

*shrug* Personally I'd say players obsession with reaping the most reward for the least effort, and "homer's drinking bird" gameplay is the source of Warframe's troubles. Camping loot-cave farming is were we have problems. Not in people wanting to leap around like superheroes with guns blazing.

Having less ground clutter thus increasing framerates giving faster, smoother gameplay isn't a bad thing.

[(PSN)DesecratedFlame]

-weird double post removed-

Edited October 23, 2016 by (PS4)DesecratedFlame

[Cookusmeow]

This is the dumbest idea I have ever heard in Warframe

[(PSN)DesecratedFlame]

21 minutes ago, Teridax68 said:

Switching to unlimited ammo would streamline gameplay overall and reduce dependence on Vacuum

 

That is actually a really good point, and I hadn't thought of it.

 

[Tricky5hift]

Wouldn't this just encourage people to spam their weapons more rather that be conscious of ammo efficiency?

Slowing down reload times would just be frustratingly annoying.

Also, we already have things like ammo restore pads, which is pretty much just infinite ammo because I really can't see why you'd need all that ammo unless you're guzzling ammo at an unbelievable rate.

As much as I want the game to be streamlined and quick, I also want it to be somewhat tactical in a way.

This would just completely remove the need to bring a secondary or even a melee if you're just never going to run out of ammo.

Edited October 23, 2016 by Tricky5hift

[Gelkor]

13 minutes ago, (PS4)abbacephas said:

When it comes to measuring cost of implementation vs benefit of implementation, I would think so. I could be wrong, but it just makes good business sense to weigh these concepts in such a fashion.

Did you know they recently went through several of the tilesets that have things like railings or grates and ensured that now any opening big enough for a warframe to fit through can actually be jumped through? It used to count as a flat wall with a few transparent sections, for the purposes of wallrunning. 

They didn't need to fix that. Not everyone uses bullet jumps and slide kicks and the like. Lots of people just run on the ground, only bullet jumping when they need to. Lots of people don't even bother with those rooms, preferring to camp in one spot on on tile shooting at the same spot so they don't have to move around a bunch.  But it was a minor quality of life improvement for all players who like to tackle the environment anyway they can.

In practical terms it wasn't a big change, but it did actually require a decent amount of work.  You can't quantify the impact of that change. Unless you can actually quantify the awesomeness of leaping through a 3 foot opening at 40 miles per hour scoring headshots on Grineer. 

Edited October 23, 2016 by Gelkor

[Unus]

Hmmmm, while I may not agree with a blanket replacement as you suggest, you HAVE given me several ideas for "alternate ammo economy" weapons. Thanks for fueling the further growth and progression of my Pit!

[Volinus7]

Ammo box VS Infinite ammo

TF2 vs Overwatch

lulz

[Krion112]

2 minutes ago, Gelkor said:

Personally I'd say players obsession with reaping the most reward for the least effort

Ie, Make it faster. Reaping the most reward with the least effort is just another way that players want instant gratification is just another way of saying they want it to go faster. But, they don't really enjoy it faster. Human wants are contradictory things; what we think we want can hurt what we actually want. It's one of the many reasons why game-developers tend to ignore certain player feedback.

So, effectively, you just prove my point. Like I said, if Warframe was 100%, completely dedicated to aggression, certain systems in-game would be made to reflect that, ammo included, but Warframe is not 100% dedicated to aggression. Aggression is highly rewarded, but DE has slowly been working towards bringing together the other play-styles as well.

 

4 minutes ago, Gelkor said:

Having less ground clutter thus increasing framerates giving faster, smoother gameplay isn't a bad thing.

Warframe needs fewer of a lot of things, not just the clutter of items on the ground. Getting rid of ammo won't solve this issue. Plus, there are other solutions, arguably better solutions, specifically to solve ammo cluttering the ground decreasing framerates.

 

2 minutes ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said:

-snip-

Repeating what you said when I already addressed it is condescending, and is spam. Answer me properly.

[(PSN)DesecratedFlame]

13 minutes ago, Krion112 said:

Also, obviously you must have ammo related concerns in other parts of the game as well, otherwise your main point wouldn't have been about using Ammo Restores. If ammo's not a problem to manage in the first place, why are you complaining about ammo restores?

I have ZERO ammo problems. I already said this. Why? Because ammo inefficient weapons get tossed on the shelf permanently or scrapped entirely.

My secondary that I use constantly is the Atomos. It is ridiculously ammo efficient, and I don't run out of ammo with it. Meanwhile, I sold one of the most fun secondaries in the game, imo, the angstrum, simply because it could not keep up in the ammo department. As such, you saying, "I have no ammo issues," is not a valid excuse. I know all the workarounds too, but that doesn't address the core issue.

5 minutes ago, Tricky5hift said:

Wouldn't this just encourage people to spam their weapons more rather that be conscious of ammo efficiency?

Yes, and no. Bullet hose weapons could actually be used as the bullet hoses they were meant to be, but mirages with simulors would have to be more discerning with where their shots.

7 minutes ago, Tricky5hift said:

unless you're guzzling ammo at an unbelievable rate.

Try making an end-game viable Amprex and running with that for awhile.

[(PSN)DesecratedFlame]

3 minutes ago, Krion112 said:

Repeating what you said when I already addressed it is condescending, and is spam. Answer me properly.

It was a double post, and I removed it like 10 minutes before you replied to it.

[(PSN)abbacephas]

4 minutes ago, Gelkor said:

Did you know they recently went through several of the tilesets that have things like railings or grates and ensured that now any opening big enough for a warframe to fit through can actually be jumped through? It used to count as a flat wall with a few transparent sections, for the purposes of wallrunning. 

They didn't need to fix that. Not everyone uses bullet jumps and slide kicks and the like. Lots of people just run on the ground, only bullet jumping when they need to. Lots of people don't even bother with those rooms, preferring to camp in one spot on on tile shooting at the same spot so they don't have to move around a bunch.  But it was a minor quality of life improvement for all players who like to tackle the environment anyway they can.

You can't quantify that change. Unless you can actually quantify the awesomeness of leaping through a 3 foot opening at 40 miles per hour scoring headshots on Grineer. 

While I did not know this (thank you for the information, though) this is a change that, as you pointed out, only a minor number of players either: a) noticed or b) made use of. This will not be the case for what is being proposed here. The effects of a change to infinite ammo would affect every player and would be noticed by everyone. And once again, the benefits of such a widespread change are insignificant at best.

I don't know how much effort it took to make the changes you mentioned above. Nor do I know how much effort it would take to make the changes to infinite ammo. But, in my mind, the scale of the change proposed in the latter is larger than the former. And, once again, the added benefits are so trivial, it doesn't seem like the effort is worthwhile.

As for you final point:

[Gelkor]

9 minutes ago, Krion112 said:

Ie, Make it faster. Reaping the most reward with the least effort is just another way that players want instant gratification is just another way of saying they want it to go faster. But, they don't really enjoy it faster. Human wants are contradictory things; what we think we want can hurt what we actually want. It's one of the many reasons why game-developers tend to ignore certain player feedback.

So, effectively, you just prove my point. Like I said, if Warframe was 100%, completely dedicated to aggression, certain systems in-game would be made to reflect that, ammo included, but Warframe is not 100% dedicated to aggression. Aggression is highly rewarded, but DE has slowly been working towards bringing together the other play-styles as well.

I think the key thing is the differentiation between gameplay, and progression. I like fast gameplay, I don't l particularly care about the progression or it's pace. Draco-style gameplay is indicative of people wanting fast progression, not fast gameplay. Gameplay and Progression are two different sides of Warframe and I don't think they are applicable for the discussion here, which is purely about gameplay. 

Just because people want fast progression doesn't mean they want fast gameplay, and as evidenced, usually the opposite. People who want fast gameplay don't necessarily want faster progression.

Edited October 23, 2016 by Gelkor

[Tricky5hift]

Just now, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said:

Bullet hose weapons could actually be used as the bullet hoses they were meant to be, but mirages with simulors would have to be more discerning with where their shots.

Try making an end-game viable Amprex and running with that for awhile.

I don't think so. I thought the idea behind bullet-hose weapons was to suppress enemies but the catch is they eventually have to reload or run out of ammo. Same goes for Simulor + Mirage, if they don't have to worry about ammo then why do they have to be more discerning with their shots? Nothing is stopping them from just hiding out for a bit and reloading their weapon. And that would kill the flow of the game as well.

I don;t have an end-game viable Amprex but I know Ignis with Vile Acceleration totally gobbles ammo but that's what keeps it in check.

[Gelkor]

-double post, forum being slow-

Edited October 23, 2016 by Gelkor

[(PSN)DesecratedFlame]

4 minutes ago, Krion112 said:

Make it faster. Reaping the most reward with the least effort is just another way that players want instant gratification is just another way of saying they want it to go faster.

What about me? I want more (in-game) speed and more challenge. I think focusing on high-speed/fast-paced combat is what will make WF be the best that it can be. The speed (and abilities) are what set it apart.

[(XBOX)SweatyPick3L]

12 minutes ago, Tricky5hift said:

Wouldn't this just encourage people to spam their weapons more rather that be conscious of ammo efficiency?

Slowing down reload times would just be frustratingly annoying.

Also, we already have things like ammo restore pads, which is pretty much just infinite ammo because I really can't see why you'd need all that ammo unless you're guzzling ammo at an unbelievable rate.

As much as I want the game to be streamlined and quick, I also want it to be somewhat tactical in a way.

This would just completely remove the need to bring a secondary or even a melee if you're just never going to run out of ammo.

100% agree with this statement. It would make 100% of secondary and melee weapons unnecessary. Great point. 

[Tricky5hift]

3 minutes ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said:

What about me? I want more (in-game) speed and more challenge. I think focusing on high-speed/fast-paced combat is what will make WF be the best that it can be. The speed (and abilities) are what set it apart.

You want more challenge? Try not running out of ammo. Isn't that a challenge?

You can go as fast as you want but everything should have a consequence if you push too hard.

That's what makes the game challenging. It keeps you aware instead of just blindly spamming.

Edited October 23, 2016 by Tricky5hift

[NobleParadox96]

giving infinite ammo... not sure how I would feel about this.

 

I mean you can always bring a melee weapon whenever you're out of ammo but this is not the case. To me it is more fun to have an ammo limit because this causes you to change tactics like either going in melee (that is, if you bring a melee weapon with you) or retreat and recover so you can fight back. I mean if infinite ammo were to happen then I'd probably would barely touch any melee weapons at all.

[Rhekemi]

Quote

Correct. I am saying the "scans" part was just for reference, not the disliking tedium part. Hence why buying Cat DNA is irrelevant to the conversation about Ammo because the concept doesn't carry between the two.

Okay. That's fine. But my my point stands that your intention was unclear and unstated.

Quote

Exactly, you came into the argument already convinced you were correct on these points. Until you are at least willing to entertain the idea that it is, we will get no where.

Actually, I didn't.

I came into the thread after having read every post and six pages.

I wanted context, as always, to see the arguments and supporting logic presented for both sides of the debate, and I didn't want to read the first page, decide I needed jump you with a snarky comment.

Also, you do realize that when I say it's only a minor annoyance, and not a problem that needs a solution, you have already said as much, right?

So has Gelkor, but because he agrees with your idea, you can see his points for what they are. Because I disagree, it seems hard for you to see.

Here are a few examples of you agreeing that it's a minor annoyance, and not a vast, true, problem that requires a solution. I will not truncate your remarks like you do mine to cherry-pick just the one sentence. They will be left in full for context, but the part I reference bolded:

On 10/21/2016 at 6:02 PM, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said:

Reload times are a massive part of DPS. Currently, ammo capacity doesn't really affect anything because you can just drop multiple pies and never stop shooting. It just slows things down before the mission because you have to stand around waiting for ammo restores to build in the foundry.

You don't work for DE, so you can't make this claim. You can't even claim that it not being in proves that because they have made plenty of dramatic changes, even some that fly completely counter to previous statements.

Another instance:

On 10/21/2016 at 6:12 PM, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said:

I am not saying it is perfect just yet, just a first step in the right direction. The entire idea here is you get infinite ammo so you can keep using what you like without extra hassle, but reload times are adjusted to balance DPS. In other words, weapons with higher burst damage have longer reload times so there is a reason to use more than just a single weapon.

I read extra hassle as, again, not a problem, but just a minor annoyance. Something you just didn't want to do for various reasons.

Here's another instance:

On 10/21/2016 at 6:43 PM, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said:

But I already use Soma P., Atomos, and Galatine P./Redeemer as my load out. Ammo mutation or Ammo pies make it so I never run out of ammo. They just add tedium without balance. Adding infinite ammo at the costs of longer reloads would actually be a nerf to DPS.

And here is another:

On 10/22/2016 at 0:38 AM, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said:

How does "flashes of light = ammo" make any more sense?

I want it to invalidate pies. Pies are far more annoying. Having to stand around several minutes just to make a stack of pies gets old, and adds nothing to the game.

Universal ammo picks ups that restore 25% of your max ammo for every weapon would be helpful too, but I don't think it goes far enough.

I have no idea what you are trying to say . . .

You even use the same language to describe the issue that I do. It's annoying. 

It's minor. 

Here is Gelkor agreeing that it is a minor issue:

1 hour ago, Gelkor said:

I'll be the first admit, it's rare that OP and I see eye to eye on anythying, but I have to say I'm in agreement on this. 

Managing an ammo reserve is, in my mind, just as tedious as managing Stamina was back in the day before Parkour 2.0.

We already have factors in the game to limit gunplay and make it engaging, reloading and clip/magazine size. Total ammo pool is only very rarely an actual problem, and when it is, you simply circumvent it with restores. It's not engaging, only annoying, and that doesn't make it a challenging or interesting game mechanic. I also wouldn't mind that it frees up a lot of clutter on the battlefield. There's also the annoying thing of launchers sharing the same ammo pool, which is just insulting to bow users. 

*shrug*

But because he supports the idea, you're okay with him using the exact same language I did.

It's not a major issue or a problem that needs a solution. 

That's not me refusing to bend, that's just factually what this issue is. 

A problem that needed fixing was Tipedo coptering. So was Sentinel usage being skewed toward Carrier/Prime because of loot.

This simply isn't on that level. 

It's a minor annoyance.

I don't know how to be any more clear on why I call it a minor annoyance and why I will never agree it is a major issue, or a true problem that needs a solution.

That doesn't, however, mean I won't entertain the idea that the issue itself (whether we call it a problem, a big issue, a little issue) cannot be addressed. I have entertained it. Please look back through my posts here to see that. I can't copy-paste them in now, or I'll break this post and have to start over. 

Quote

Pot, meet Kettle.

I don't think I'm always right. I'm often right, and confident when I believe myself to be, but not arrogant enough to think I'm always right. I'm simply not always right, can be wrong, and when I am, will own up to it.

I don't know how else to address that but honestly. 

Spoiler

 

You have ignored my points just as much as you claim I have ignored yours. Rather than say why there idea is bad, you continue to try to deflect the conversation instead. Why is it bad? "It's not even an issue," "this other thing over here is better," etc.

The thing is, there has been exactly one so-called "flaming-loop," and I even made it orange for you.  If you could successfully jump through it then you would "win," which is clearly what you are trying to do here. Yet, you can't even look at it.

And yes, you are trying to win. Notice how you said I am arguing in such a way as to assume I can't possibly be wrong. Have you not even looked at your own arguments while thinking about that same phrase? Didn't you come into this thread to "destroy a ""bad"" argument," in your own words?

 

I am as dogged as you, that much is true. But I don't think I've ignored your points, and I have stated why I thought your idea was bad. It was the very first thing I did here. Actually, no it wasn't. The first thing I did was to try to clear the topic of the undue insults being aimed at you, and ask members to return to true debate.

After that I pointed out why I thought it was bad. You simply disagreed. I can't create new reasons just because you didn't accept them, man. My reasons stand.

I jumped through your hoop, too, but you said it was inadequate and an opinion, then disregarded it. If there is a way to win, I sure as hell haven't found it.

 

1 hour ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said:

Yeah, making Bows and certain secondaries use the same ammo pool was a bad choice. Launchers needed a different ammo type, an ammo nerf, or something else to mitigate them back then, but they didn't need all of that stuff heaped together.

I thought this was interesting (you agreeing with Gelkor on the ammo) only because I'd earlier mentioned the same thing. I think you probably tune out people (for various reasons) once you feel their comments are going a certain way or sometimes if they don't agree with you, and then you miss out points raised, don't even notice when they agree with you. 

If we're both dogged, that's one area where we are different: If I'm going to respond, I will read the comment fully, digest it, and then respond. Even if I ignore the point, I did read the post. 

Me generally agreeing with Gelkor and you on the ammo type issue:

19 hours ago, Rhekemi said:

I can see some kind of passive being applied to ammo-hogs, but unlimited ammo still seems like a bridge too far.

Then every other favorite weapon will want unlimited ammo.

So either these problematic weapons need to be placed in a new category or class, or weapon types/classes need broad passives to make them more useful, appealing, and support varied gear as intended.

I don't just want Syndicate passives, but default weapon ammo classes (like shotguns), or families (like Heks) need to have passives like warframes (and like the Gazal!).

I also think the weapon categories need some work (and the ammo types), not to mention sub-categories for rifles (even if their ammo types remain the same).

As for Archwing, I think my points were valid, but Bobtm nailed it better than I could have.

 

By the way, here's me jumping through the orange hoop:

 

12 hours ago, Rhekemi said:

All right. Let's unpack that question.

1) I did explain how it's a bad thing, how it hurts the game. I also gave other solutions (with the passives coming up later in another post), explained why unlimited energy doesn't exist, and why Archwing weapons aren't comparable to unlimited ammo on primaries/secondaries. (Though, Bobtm did a better job on the last point.)

  Reveal hidden contents

Why unlimited ammo is a bad idea in Warframe:

Ammo conservation and consumption are mechanics that work to balance video games, ensure difficulty, and encourage loadout variety.

It is working as intended, and as many have told you, there are several methods to increase a weapon's ammo efficiency.

We prefer these methods because they keep weapons, builds, and mods we have invested time, effort and (in some cases) money in viable.

I do understand that you don't like ammo restores and would like them removed, but changing the entire system to run on unlimited ammo is an unnecessary, game-wide rework that solves a very small annoyance.

Again, running out of ammo is a small annoyance on a select few weapons, and only a serious problem in select conditions (endless missions, maybe sorties).

Making a massive change for a small issue is bad design.

It isn't so much that I hate it.

You simply disagreed, and find that explanation (and others like making melee weapons, or the need to switch to them obsolete) inadequate.

That's not the same as having no reasons provided.

2) Your question poses a point I never, not even once, raised. I never asserted building and spamming multiple ammo restores with a hotkey was any different than an innate unlimited ammo restore on all weapons.

3) That it isn't any different, your assertion, not mine, would seem to invalidate your very request. If it isn't different, why can't you just use team ammo restores? What valid reason do you have for not wanting to use them and requesting a game-wide overhaul to the way ammo restoration and reloading works? And you do have to answer this question because that is your request.

You have asserted that you do not like ammo restores and want them eliminated. If they are no different from unlimited ammo, why can't you use ammo restores like many/all of us do, and as the system intends you to?

Why does the system have to change?

And yes, I admit that I do want to win the argument (and to destroy yours), but not at all costs, and not if I know I'm wrong.

I don't want to win an argument just to win it, but because I'm right, and you're wrong, and I can show you why. (Which I've attempted to do.)

If I cannot win it, if I actually am wrong, if I cannot destroy your argument, if through debate we work out a better solution or a compromise solution, all those aims are positive to me.

Simply winning the debate is not the end goal.

Edited October 23, 2016 by Rhekemi