What I find strange is, the level 6 AG4 with shock ammo can take down a APOC tank a lot faster than a level 6 PVG. What is even faster at destroying an APOC tank is the level 5 KVM 59 with shock ammo. Wouldn’t that make both of those two weapons more powerful than the level 6 PVG90? Or the use of the KVM59 level 6 when taking on a reaper and it spawns a bunch of runners that you can zap all of the runners by just hitting the reaper. That is a lot faster than picking them off with the PVG at the correct distance.
You can even take down the reaper faster with the KVM59 or AG4 with shock ammo than you can with a PVG 90. My question is by what standard makes the PVG to powerful when I listed 3 weapons that can do more damage faster than the PVG?
Problem with the 3 other weapons is, you have to be a lot closer for those weapons to be more effective than the PVG. So in a given scenario, you have to choose the best weapon for the outcome you would like. But you want to take choices away from other players and force them to play the way you want to play, even if you NEVER play with them.
A sniper hunter can use their railgun (a version of the level 6 PVG90) that can take a player’s health from 100% to close to 0%, same with any tank that has the railgun, but a volley of rockets from a tank or harvester does somewhere around 50 to 40%, but that is balanced and realistic? If the player is using the same railgun and you feel it is to powerful, then the machines weapons also need to be nerfed?
All players have a choice to use which ever weapon they would like and as a host, you can control others that join YOUR map on what choices you allow on your map. But what right do any of you have on limiting those choices when most players you will never play with?
I have played a few hundred hours of public co-op with all levels of players, and they all use different weapons at different times throughout the map, I for one have no desire to try and control those choices.
