At least a third option would have been nice.
I have a "yes, but… ".
The way how these weapon packs are provided must change (as always, in my opinion).
I want to find them randomly in world loot, not initially in my plundra and better or worse versions in loot from high class machines…
I want to have more options of weapons during doing the main story. Finding different stuff in different qualities that let me think about what to use. That let me compare the pros and cons.
Every weapon should be worth to be used.
Either due to their unique qualities (damage, range, rate of fire, magazine capacity, reload time, firing modes, available ammo) or due to available attachments or their benefits.
A total revamp of the weapons needs to be done for that, I know… just dreaming
There are a lot of people that wouldn’t like this, i.e. “I paid for it where is it?” and although it’s not my stance I do see where they’d be coming from.
Back when we got the very first US DLC pack I’d hoped we’d get a mission to go and find a hidden cache / downed helicopter or similar but no, unfortunately not.
Personally, I scrap / drop the ‘free’ 3C weapons that come with each of the DLCs and hunt for my own 5C variant before trying them out. (Which backfired a little with the 5C N16 and Vintakova!)
I know this reason… In a Call of Duty (multiplayer) I would agree with that. But not in a story based open world loot shooter.
In this kind of games I expect tasks to get what I want.
And if I buy a weapon pack, I do that to enrich my world and my experience… Not my initial loadout.
This would be much nicer implementation of the DLC guns.
When I played through the game for the first time the meager weapons and the hunt for better was something I really found to be a nice challenge on top of the story, getting 3C weapons in your plundra from the get go is sort of killing the atmosphere of the game IMO.
If the DLC 3Cs would be found in drops it would make sense that these would be on the northern half of the map IMO.
No, not necessarly.
Would fit the story better of course (soviet and maybe eastern european), but those are no superweapons. Why hiding them behind a dangerous journey to the northern part of the island?
I think it could work the same as the new weekly missions as I once suggested…
But you want something changed that affect new players, not yourself, not me, since we are endgame players. And if you start a new game, you can if you want, (if you have some discipline) easily not use the 3c DLC weapons, until you have cleared the begin regions. And new players can do the same, if they want. Is your idea really so much better that it justifies a lot work for the devs, and all the things that might go wrong?
O, on PC players can simply deactivate the DLC’s they don’t want to use yet, or anymore. I have a few disabled, so that my plundra is clear of them. I think, I read the that’s not possible on consoles, but I am not sure.
No, on console (at least on Playstation) you cannot deactivate DLCs.
Yes, you can just don’t use what you don’t want to use.
The answer to any complaint about optional stuff.
It WOULD affect my play. I still don’t have all DLC weapons or at least not the best qualities of all.
And for a new world I would love to find them…
Ah, I described it often now.
Really? I did start a new game in a new world just to play through all revamped missions, but not without my weapons I carry normally. Playing the from scratch does not appeal to me at all. There nothing new for me. I play other new games for that.
BTW, do you want to collect all weapons from 1c upto 5c ?
I get rid of almost every weapon as soon as I find a better quality. Except for a couple of experimental weapons of which I like a few doubles, just in case.
Because even the 3C weapons in the DLCs are better than most of what you have to make do with when starting from scratch.
Note that I said northern half of the map, but maybe that was a bit to far north, air base would be a logical place to find US-weapons and for Soviet/east-block weapons the Soviet bases and resistance weapons from resistance locations would be more fitting.
If you already have played alot or some of the game the DLC weapon drops would not be hard to reach. If you are new it would not be much different than having to scavenge for the base lineup of guns.
I mean I bought the base game and didnt expect to get a whole arsenal of 3C weapons from my first safehouse with a plundra so I dont really understand the reasoning from some in this topic for getting the DLC weapons immediately after buying a DLC…
Of course people can choose scrap the 3C stuff as soon as they launch the game but I still find that having a lot of weapons from the start removes from the experience.
Now that’s a DLC I would buy. I once suggested a mission where you had to traverse through a deep labyrinth-like cave system, and where you had to use parkour to get over crevices, and you had to make use of movable objects and such, to finally get to the mission destination.
How whould a helicopter with loads of us weapons just appear on the islands? that is probably one of the most unlorefriendly things i have heard in a long time.
Well the US could have sent it to the Swedish mainland and they sent a helicopter with the weapons and soldiers to help the people on Östertörn. But they got shot down on the way and the helicopter with weapons was the only one that got to Östertörn. maybe that could be a DLC to help the few military soldiers set up camp and help them with some objectives. This could be added to all DLCs to make them more real and lore friendly.
You know that Sweden probably had enough weapons to supply the resistance for years. Why whould there be a lonley american helicopter? it just doenst make sense.
Yes.
But does it make sense just to send landbound troops to support the resistance? (soviets)
A few allied destroyers, battleships and aircraft carriers and the way should be cleared.
I dont think that the Soviets are in östertörn to help. It is clearly an invasion not a mission to help. And the Soviets came from the east where there is a sea. If a NATO helicopter whould go into östertörn then they whould have to travel all over Sweden, a neutral country, with a helicopter loaded with ammunition and weapons to get to a very small set of islands just to crash. It sounds very wierd for that scenario to happen. And Sweden probably has mobilized its entire army and it is preparing for war. Why whould they let one american helicopter do something Sweden can more easily do?
