The gaps in the current arsenal and how to fill them

Feedback/Feature Requests
1

TL;DR: 7.62 caliber kerfuffle aside, we’re underserved in good snipers and some niches lack variety or versatility. But it doesn’t need that much to fix it if we’re smart about it.

Hoboi. This is gonna be a long one. My longest post so far.

Partly because I need to set some fundamentals first, partly because the whole thing is more systemically delicate than a lot of people give credit for (because wow, I see so many complaints about the guns, but going in wildly different directions where almost nobody agrees on anything). And if I don’t start this discussion by presenting the fundamentals, people will whine about stuff without any regard for context.
But let’s try to tackle this.

First, the fundamentals of a loadout (or rather, an “arsenal”, since the “loadout” is the subset of the arsenal that you pick to carry on you).

These vary from game to game, and they vary with what the developers want for their overall experience. I can’t read anyone’s mind and there’s no fixed set of rules, but considering GZ tends to be a game that values creativity and adaptability when approaching enemies, as well as multiple options and also opportunities for teamwork, we can assume that’s part of their ethos on the arsenal as well.

We can also somewhat assume by the attachments, skins, and the overlap between a lot of guns (after the DLCs are taken into account) that “personal preferences and expression via customization” also affect the arsenal somewhat; though this is inside a zone of conflict and we’ll get there eventually.

Next, we need to stablish a few basic things about the game, when it comes to its mechanics and physics simulations.

I don’t have direct access to the devs, and datamining is against the rules, so all I can do is speculate based in observation and in comparisons with similar games. And compared with stuff like STALKER, Tarkov and other sandbox shooters where the bullets have actual ballistics simulations (and as such terminal ballistics, damage, trajectories, etc etc are vastly determined by the ammo and only modified by the gun), we can somewhat assume that’s the case here.

Heck, if we look at the guns from the early “progression” (Walther PP chambered in .32 ACP, Sako 85 chambered in .243 Winchester, Winchester Model 70 chambered in .270 Winchester, Glock 17 chambered in 9mm Parabellum with handgun loading, and Carl Gustaf m/45 chambered in 9mm Parabellum with SMG loading), we can see that almost all of them have their own separate caliber, with their own separate characteristics (range, bullet drop, damage, penetration, etc etc). So we can safely assume that the ammo determines most of those things.

As for the guns themselves, we only have access to 3 vague stats, called “damage”, “handling” and “rate of fire” (which frankly, are kinda useless).

  • Damage ends up kinda meaningless when it’s mostly tied to the ammo than the gun itself (notice how all 3 pistols using 9mm Parabellum – the Glock, the M9 and the (erroneously chambered) Makarov – all have the same damage)
  • Handling is a catch-all term that involves so many individual characteristics that the stat itself ends up meaningless. It should mean “how well the gun behaves”, but this usually tends to amalgamate stuff like accuracy, precision, recoil, vertical spread, horizontal spread, “aim reset”, time-to-aim, sometimes reload time… Notice how these are basically all the characteristics that are NOT determined directly by the ammo/cartridge, but by stuff like… firing mechanism, ergonomics, barrel length, feeding system, aiming systems, etc etc.
  • Fire rate is useful for two things: determining Damage Per Second and determining ammo consumption. It’s a useful stat to have on its own, so no complaints here… other than it’s also a tad misleading (since a lot of pistols fire as fast as you can click; and I know that because I do own a mouse that has a defective switch – and also bolt actions have a weird relationship with fire rate since their mag size and reload time account faaaaar more heavily in the equation other than “how fast they cycle the bolt”).

So.

The next fundamentals we need to stablish is the “gun niches”.
These are WILDLY subjective, vary from game to game, and game designers can debate until the end of time about what constitutes a defined “niche” (Innuendo Studios has an amazing video on the subject, focused on Boomer Shooters).

But from my experience in this game this far, I would dare to present the following niches in this game:

  1. Pistols (semi-auto handguns and revolvers)

  2. Shotguns (short-to-medium range boomsticks that use 12-gauge shells)

  3. Light Hunting Rifles (very-long-range, medium-damage, bolt-action rifles that can be suppressed – these tend to use relatively low-caliber, high-velocity ammunition, such as .243 Winchester)

  4. Light Assault Weapons (fast-firing automatic weapons that only fit up to red dot sights, made for running-and-gunning. This includes machine pistols, SMGs and very fast-firing light automatic rifles; they’re almost always chambered in 9mm Parabellum, but there are exceptions)

  5. Medium Assault Weapons (this basically includes all assault rifles and battle rifles, able to mount up to medium-range scopes, as well as suppressors. They tend to be chambered in 5.56x45mm NATO or 7.62x51 NATO, and they’re intended for medium-distance engagements, alternating between precision single-shots and full-auto bursts)

  6. Heavy Assault Weapons (LMGs. Mostly belt-fed behemoths that vomit bullets and scream dakka. Chambered in a similar variety of calibers to Assault Rifles, only with more volume of fire)

  7. Designated Marksman Rifles (medium-to-long-range semi-automatic rifles with medium-to-long-range scopes that are made for fast and precise followup shots at medium to long ranges. They can be mounted with suppressors, for stealth. They tend to use specialized cartridge loadings when compared to full auto rifles, and have more range and power – this will be important later)

  8. Sniper rifles (heavy caliber rifles, often bolt-action, fitted with very long range scopes and firing specialized long-range, accurate, high-velocity, high-damage ammunition, such as .338 Lapua Magnum. Made to assassinate high-value targets from range and with efficiency).

  9. Antimateriel Rifles (very heavy caliber rifles, often 12.7mm and above, able to mount scopes and able to deal MASSIVE amounts of damage to stuff like vehicles, armor and structures. They’re often NOT suppressed, as the required sacrifices often defeat their purpose)

  10. Destructive devices (grenade launchers, rocket launchers, explosives, basically anything meant to make things go kaboom)

Wow. 10 niches. That’s a lot, but at least it covers pretty much everything we have in this game, with some neat categories of use.

Now. Let me offend a LOT of you by telling you folks what I think goes into each category (also, I’m sorry, but I’ll be using the guns’ real names, 'cause it’s easier for me to remember):

  1. Pistols: Walther PP, Glock 17, Makarov PM, Ruger Black Hawk

  2. Shotguns: Remington 870, Sjögren semi-auto

  3. Hunting Rifles: Sako 85, Winchester Model 70, Mosin Nagant (yes)

  4. Light Assault: MAC-10, Skorpion, m/45, MP5, AKM (yes) and AS-VAL (…yes)

  5. Medium Assault: H&K G3, FN FNC, M16A2

  6. Heavy Assault: FN MAG, FN Minimi, PKM, M60

  7. Designated Marksman Rifles: M21, Dragunov SVD

  8. Sniper Rifles: NONE.

  9. Antimaterial Rifles: Barrett M107

  10. Destructive devices: Carl Gustaf m/48, RPG-7, M79, multiple grenades, landmines, fuel tank/EMP traps, etc etc.

Sooo… the analysis:

  • We’re VERY well-served in 1, 3, 4, 6, and 10. In LMGs in particular, we’re overfed.
  • We’re reasonably well-served in Medium ARs; an extra gun wouldn’t hurt, specially a secondary 7.62x51 option, but we don’t really need one (specially with some overlap in usage with other categories).
  • …We’re slightly underserved in Shotguns, because both shotties feel somewhat close in combat capability and there’s no upgrade to either (for example, a shotty with a bigger tube, or a better semi-auto).
  • We have only one Antimateriel Rifle (two if we count the experimental) but frankly, that’s good enough.
  • We have NO true snipers, and this is alarming. And it’s not by lack of real-life candidates.
  • Because of the similar ballistics of all 7.62 weapons, DMRs are actually closer in performance with Assault Rifles than with actual semi-auto quasi-sniper precision weapons. This makes them almost completeely useless, as they have less damage than Hunting Rifles, but more recoil and less rate of fire than Assault Rifles.

Okay. We have a few problems here. Let’s tackle them one by one:
.
.
[The big 7.62 kerfuffle]

Frankly, we use “7.62” to represent at least 6 different cartridges:

  • 7.62x39mm Soviet, the weakest, that’s used in the AKM and it’s the reason why I said it’s closer to the SMGs than to the medium assault rifles
  • 7.62x51mm NATO, the standard cartridge used in the G3, the FN MAG and the M60
  • 7.62x51mm M118/L42A1 Sniping Rounds, the ones used in DMRs like the M21, as well as the L96A1 and other 7.62x51mm sniper rifles, with heavier, low-drag bullets, longer ranges and manufactured to higher standards for more accuracy.
  • .308 Winchester, a commercial cartridge that’s virtually identical to 7.62x51mm NATO but that’s usually loaded hotter, so it’s more common for hunting rifles and semi-auto rifles that shoot harder.
  • 7.62x54mmR Rimmed Russian, the cartridge used in the Mosin Nagant and in the PKM, slightly more powerful than standard 7.62x51mm NATO (by a small margin, but argually it has more penetration power)
  • 7.62×54mmR 7N1 sniper round, used for the Dragunov and sometimes the Mosin Nagant.

…So technically:

  • The AKM should be weaker than it currently is
  • The M21, the Dragunov and maybe the Mosin (depending on ammo loaded) should be stronger, more accurate and with less bullet drop
  • The PKM should have slightly more penetration.

…But that would require splitting the cartridges into their real-life respective variants.

…We could, however, try to reach a compromise by having 3 cartridge variants:

  • 7.62 Soviet (either for the AKM only, or for the PKM and Mosin only)
  • 7.62 Auto (G3, MAG, M60, AKM if it was left out of 7.62 Soviet)
  • 7.62 Sniper (Dragunov, M21 and… well, you’ll see in the next suggestions).

…Or forget “Soviet” and just separate into “Auto” and Sniper".
This is a bit inelegant but would leave us at a better situation than where we are right now.

Okay, next issue.
.
.
[ We have too few shotguns ]

We only have two shotguns, with tiny tubes. We should get at least an extra one to keep the niche relevant, preferably a semi-auto with a bigger magazine tube or a detachable box mag.
Here are possible suggestions that make sense for the era and/or place (plus some have “80’s action movie” cred, just like the M60 and the M16A2)

  • A double-barrel break-action hunting shotgun: The boomstick. The “Super Shotgun”. The Hillbilly Cannon. Double the shells in a very short time, but then immediately having to reload. Would be able to equip a choke but nothing else (and would have tritium/night sights at 5c). Simple, deadly and an eternal classic.
  • Franchi SPAS-12: the classic beast from 1972. Up to an 8+1 tube magazine, and unlike featured in most movies and games, it’s actually intended to be used in semi-auto.
  • Franchi SPAS-15: Based on the SPAS-12, this 1986 model is magazine-fed (6-round box mag), meaning it would have the fastest reload of all shotties, at the cost of not having the highest capacity (tied with the Remmy 870).
  • Daewoo USAS-12: This Korean oddity from 1989 could fire semi-auto or full-auto, out of a 10-round box magazine. It would probably be the top shotgun in the game if it’s ever considered.
  • Saiga-12: Technically anachronistic, as it only began production in the mid-90’s, but then again, we already have the anachronistic Meusser (a 2006 Sako 85), as well as our Glock 17 being more of a Gen 2 and our Barret being the far more recent M107 instead of the time-accurate M82A1. So… we could give this one a pass, since it’s basically a “12-gauge AKM” and actually fits the setting. It commonly feeds from 5 to 10-round box magazines and fires in semi-auto.

…Personally, I’d only add the SPAS-12 and maybe the Saiga, but I’m leaving other options here just in case.

Next issue:
.
.
[ We have no true snipers ]

We do have hunting rifles, but unless you wanna keep them around just to silently pop-off runners at a distance and nothing else, we kinda need something more powerful; but at the same time, something that can still be used to shoot off components of bigger targets while staying hard-to-see. So here are my suggestions:

  • Accuracy International AW: Originated in 1982 as the L96A1 and then solidified as the AW in 1988, this green legend was adopted by Sweden in 1988 as the Psg90 (so around the same time as the already-in-game M107 Barrett, the “Pvg90”). It’s a bolt-action rifle that fires the special sniper version of the 7.62x51 NATO round, and feeds from a 10-round box magazine. It can fit a suppressor.
  • Sako TRG: 1989 Finnish beast chambered in .338 Lapua Magnum fed from 5-round box magazines, and technically in use by the Swedish Army as the Psg-08 (a 2008 modernized TRG-42). It can fit big sights, it has a beefy boolet, and it can fit suppressors. Please add this to the game, I beg you.
  • Tikka M65: Granddaddy of the Sako TRG, this is a 1969 bolt-action rifle from Finland. Might not look like much, but it can be chambered in .338 Winchester Magnum (a very beefy bullet, less powerful than Lapua Magnum, but not in a distance that would matter in this game) and feeds from a box magazine fitting 7 rounds.

…Actually, please add all 3 into the game, plus the “.338 Sniper” cartridge.

And let’s go to the last issue:

[ Our DMR’s currently suck ]

And by our assumptions up there, most of it is due to being limited to whatever characteristics are tied to the “generic 7.62” cartridge. So I reinforce the suggestion of separating a “7.62 sniper” cartridge for the DMRs, and also maaaaaybe adding one or both of the following to the game, if possible:

  • H&K MSG90: Okay, it’s in th edge of the possible timeline, at 1990, but it’s a less expensive, DMR version of the legendary PSG-1 sniper rifle from 1972. Also it was used in Norway and Finland, so it makes sense to find a handful. Naturally, it would fire “7.62 Sniper”.
  • VSS Vintorez: C’mon, we only have a single weapon using 9x39mm, in the form of the AS-Val. So might as well add the VSS and make it artificially more slow-firing but also more accurized in semi-auto mode.

And one less thing that I alluded to before but it’s a small thing to the point that I’m not sure if I should consider a bigger issue, unless more design decisions make it worse: it feels like some of the gun options here are added for flavor rather than mechanical variety (examples being the three 9mm guns, or why the heck is the M16A2 here at all). I’d personally try to focus on adding flavor through customization via parts and skins, since that fits the dual-purpose of also fine-tuning the niche use of the gun, without having to add new guns and new cartridges and fudging the game’s balance. But this is a decision for SR to make.

So… I guess this covers almost everything? There could be minor nitpicks, such as “oh but why no Swedish Mauser” (answer: adding yet another cartridge), or “why not more handguns such as the 1911” (answer: adding her another cartridge) or “some of your suggestions are unrealistic to dates or real cartridges” (our Makarov is chambered in 9mm Parabellum and our Barret is based on the modern M107, we’re past that barrier long ago bucko) or “why are LMGs so overpowered” (answer: because most of their real-world downsides are on things that don’t exist on this game, such as relying on a bipod for stability, or being too heavy, or being a hassle to prepare all the belts), etc etc.

But for now, I think this covers the arsenal issue.

See ya next time, folks.

2 Likes
3

None of this makes a difference to anyone playing the game. We’re looking for them to get rid of 9mm Handgun and 9mm SMG and give us just 9mm. There’s 9mmx39mm (or whatever) and I have no use for it. I never pick it up, not even to break it back down again. As far as I’m concerned, it’s a waste of programming time. All I care about is 9mm. Only gun enthusiasts care about ammo types. Gamers only care about what round goes in what gun and do I have enough ammo to destroy my target.

Since I’m a sniper build, there are three ammo types I care about: .50 cal, 7.62 and 9mm SMG for my main duty, medium range packs, and point blank back-off. I use them in my rail gun (Experimental .50 cal PVG 90), lightning gun (Experimental 7.62 KVM 59), and burp gun (Experimental 9mm “Kpist” SMG). The rest of my loadout depends entirely on my missions and what my squad is interested in doing for the few hours a day we play. It might be EMP grenades to knock out robots, a baseball bat to go tick hunting for Anarchy, The Thunder Hammer for base assaults (knock-knock-knock-BOOM!), or The Riot Barrier for Reaper spawning (Portable Shields will block the fire fart).

None of these tasks require me to know or care about ammo types other than what goes in what gun. If I wanted ammo management, I’d be playing Metro (which is a good game, and I love the problem of shooting your entire wallet away).

Of greater concern to me is how fast my storage builds up (maxed boxes have been maxed out several times now, and still keep hovering within 20kg of maxing out again), how little there is to spend Command Points on (I have over 1500), and how barren and empty the world is, especially after beating FNIX and creating bases that should be attracting survivors (and we know there are some since we have a Resistance).

We know they can create dynamic events, and change the state of an area. They’ve done it for quests in the campaign, and for rival and Reaper spawns, so they just need to add more Control Points and create new missions, like save a small band of survivors from a FNIX or Soviet attack at (random town/city). Go to said city and there are 20-30 robots attacking various buildings. Goal is to save at least (70% min/100% max) survivors from the attack be destroying all the robots attacking. Success adds random NPCs to your Resistance bases, doing things like training in weapons, making food, bandaging up wounded survivors. And when you start your Base Defense, they disappear into tents and caravans until everything is over, or die if you fail the mission and you lose those survivors from your ranks.

These are the changes we want to see. We don’t really care about making the game more realistic regarding ammo types. For heaven’s sake, when you get hit by a rocket, you get blown TOWARDS the direction you got hit from, not away from it. I’m at full health, I slide 2m down a gentle hill and die, but if I ride a bike off the top of a mountain and land JUST RIGHT I take no damage. What? Realism is not something programmed into this game.

We need fewer ammo types, not more. Sorry.

4 Likes
4

We shall agree to disagree then, because I disagree with almost everything your said.

But what it feels like is that you want the game to be laser-focused on the way you like to play.

And I’m sorry to say, that’s not how game design works.

1 Like
5

I don’t know if laser-focused on how I like to play is accurate, as I only provided my play style as an example of one where your changes aren’t useful. But I do agree to disagreeing about play styles.

I have no use for 50 million forms of ammunition, and from a programming standpoint, I really don’t see the use of creating more ammo than can be reasonably dropped from a loot tables when a robot goes down. I already see a ton of ammo I don’t personally, use, and with only 8 quick slots to equip weapons, I can’t imagine a world where more than a dozen ammo types would be useful, much less encouraged. Particularly now that we can craft them, which means that most dropped ammo will simply be broken down at half-cost to be turned into the ammo that players actually want. Its a waste of time and resources to include things in a game that player won’t use, don’t use, or aren’t using. And right now that’s most of the weapons they’ve already added.

I use a wide range of weapons, not just the ones for my Sniper character. I have a Commander who uses Assault Rifles and Machine Guns, as well as a 9mm pistol sidearm and an Engineer who uses all small arms pistols and SMG plus tick pods, hacking, and tracking, as well as thrown explosives. I can’t imagine that any of their play styles would be enhanced by having 16 new calibers of ammo, split among 4 different types. for 64 new ammo types to be added to the game. In programming terms, that’s called “Bloat”. Its a sign that you needlessly overcomplicated your code.

I also suggested actual problems that need to be fixed, like the wonky physics.

Obviously your mileage is going to vary.

((Edit: Oh, and we don’t need true snipers because snipers go after soft targets, like squishy flesh. When you’re sniping a tank, you use an anti-materiel rifle, which the PVG 90 is.))

3 Likes
6

Yes, we don’t have soft targets, so we don’t need weapons in the game against soft targets. Why don’t remove all the guns “we don’t need”? Oh, there aren’t many guns left…

If a shooter would want us just to have the best weapons against our targets, many shooters would become very boring regarding the available weapons… And keep in mind that our enemy is one noone expected. And many guns are found in civilian arsenals.

Don’t having a real sniper rifle is having a gap in the arsenal.

Making one available in late game (as part of a dlc and dropped by high classed big machines) wouldn’t be helpful either. It would have to be integrated into the story at a good point. The PVG instead should be made available even later, as it’s the king of the guns.

Btw. I agree that we don’t need so many different ammo types. In the first 1 to 2 years it was ok to have them. The ammo was limited and if you wanted to use your strongest weapons, you had to use it economically. Placed shots against components or armor with the appropriate ammo type.
The game changed. There are now more enemies, especially in base assaults and defenses. You often don’t have the time to choose the best ammo for your situation.

Of course it’s nice to have different experimental ammo, but having AP and FMJ rounds for each bullettype, or having three different 12G ammo types, is just too much.

Having different calibers for different weapon-categories is ok. In general it should be a tool to limit the available ammo for the strongest or special weapons.
Here we have some confusion in game design, I think.

There are too many non-special-weapons in the base game that have exclusive calibers.
Möller, Magnus, Klauke (which could have shared ammo with 9mm MP), Meusser, Älgstudsare, PVG and Granatgevär.

They just come to some kind of speciality by the experimental versions where we now have a Magnus, Klauke, Älgstudsare, PVG and Granatgevär.

With the DLCs there came some more weapons with exclusive calibers. AT-WAD, RLG, G79, Flamethrower, Bow.
While it’s reasonable for the RLG, G79, Flamethrower and Bow (they are special weapons), there is no reason for the AT-WAD. Maybe even the RLG could also share its ammo with the granatgevär. Well, they are different, but they follow the same purpose.

Now we also got some more weapons by DLCs for previously exclusive calibers (.32 and 9mm pistol). That’s fine, but they are still just DLC weapons and that’s no reason to still have their caliber exclusive in the base game. Know what I mean?

The only reason for these seperated calibers in my eyes is the existance of different experimental ammo for different weapons. But isn’t there another way to solve this?

And keep in mind: the experimental ammo came later to the game, so they can’t have been the initial reason.

7

Reminds me of Jagged Alliance 2, still best weapon/ammo diversity in my eyes.

8

Wow. You definitely don’t need to play a sniper when you miss the point that badly. The barn you were supposed to be aiming for is in the next county over. sad trombone noises

9

Sorry, I don’t know what you want to tell me.

10

Splitting ammo types for 7.62 makes micromanagement more cumbersome and one thing we don’t need is more ammo types (stating consensus from my time in the forums here, you are free to disagree). Yeah, everything medium-cal is crunched into 7.62 and it’s the most versatile ammo type in this game. I agree on the shotguns and the fact that some niches are lacking, I would pay double the price for a shotgun DLC. The .50 cal is too common in the game and scarcity doesn’t exist since crafting, so snipers would be welcome but fall in the “nice to have but not really useful” category. Desin-wise I would not know where to locate its damage, if it can be suppressed and take off the main gun of a runner on skirmish difficulty, but have a lower RoF than the .50?

There are four mainline bullet calibers that only have one weapon currently:

Both hunting rifle cals, Magnum and .50 Cal.

These would be very up in the prio list to get new weapons, Snipers could be chambered in the HR cals while a Deagle could eat the magnum (there is no really good way to get rid of all the magnum ammo). The Fiddy does fiddy things and can keep doing fiddy things.

The devs are in the know about the DMR discussion and I agree that they should perform differently, comically they also don’t support RDS despite having rails, making them even worse for the gameplay that you would do with them.

1 Like
11

I’m telling you that we have nearly half a dozen weapons being under utilized/being massively sub-optimal, and that needs to be addressed before we start thinking that different ammo types is a problem. I’ve collected Rank5 of every weapon, or Rank6 if that exists, as well as Rank5 Accessories for every slot conceivable.

After analyzing the performance of the weapons, I can firmly state that there are, with only one exception, NO WEAPONS IN ANY DLC that are worth the money you pay for them. They suck substantially in damage, rate of fire and/or handling that makes one of the base weapon that fills the same role as vastly superior weapon. It’s a Master Class on how NOT to make DLC. If you want people to spend the money, you need to make what they’re buying worthwhile, and the Eastern European, Soviet Packs 1 and 2, and the US Weapons are all useless. The AG4, AG5, KVM59 and 89 and PVG90 are all VASTLY Superior weapons in performance, ammo compatibility, accessory compatibility, and ease of use in battle. And every one is in the base game.

The Devs need to make the weapons they have in the game more worthy of use (making them work with the dailies would be a GREAT START). The last DLC has a SMG that uses pistol ammo, which makes it confusing what it’s role is for. I’d use it over the “Kpist” if it worked on SMG Base Assault days, but it doesn’t. It also doesn’t work for Handgun days, so it’s worthless.

The problems with the game don’t need new things, they need to have what’s already in the game be addressed by the devs and made useful.

Oh, and the useful DLC? The Resistance weapons DLC. The Bow is awesome and perfect for stealth kills. I also like to his runners with Flarrows and watch them do zoomies while their pack chases them. The bow’s unique scope used to accept optics upgrades, but they patched that out and I’m upset by that. The Flamethrower is situational, so it’s a B tier weapon to me, but it is great for when I need to make life hell for ticks, so that’s fun, too. And the pitchfork is just cheeky. A little slower than a bat, and a little less damage than a hammer, but it’s a nice upgrade to the bat unless you’re doing Anarchy where you need speed or you have a Thunder Hammer for base assaults. Knock-knock-knock-BOOM is great for clearing mines. That makes the pitchfork a transitional weapon until I get a Thunder Hammer on my new alt.

And don’t get me started on the complete lack of replayability between alts and worlds. A total failure of design goals. They revamped the new player experience and put in some new quests, but having already progressed in the game past the final FNIX base, that didn’t help. Started a new alt, but he didn’t get the quests, either. So sad that the only thing the reset on alts was the achievement progress, which they absolutely should NOT HAVE TOUCHED.

Maybe I’m not actually talking to you, but putting these up to let the devs know how we’re disappointed with the game and some of its direction. So much potential and it just needs to be fixed in small ways to make it better.

1 Like
12

Thx for the details, but too much to answer each single opinion with my opinion.
Yes, finally it’s all about opinions.

And I agree that most weapons are useless if you already have the basic 5c or 6c versions.
Damn, I’ve written somewhere what should be changed to make the weapon packs more worthy, especially how the weapons are provided is bad, but it’s too long to repeat now again.

But there are still some weapons I love.
The N9 has a cool animation, the pitchfork is cool and has a great chance for an emp effect in my eyes. I never got a mjölnir.
The RLG always seemed to me to be stronger than the granatgevär, has a scope, but is without special ammo (emp, smoke, experimental).
The bow is fun, but almost useless in my eyes. Sadly I never found the 5c version. The flare arrows often seemed to have no effect, the explosive ones often just don’t explode.
The flamethrower is one of my favourite weapons: nothing is better against ticks.

That’s not much, but some weapons I never found until now (eastern european pack some guns or 5c versions) and some weapons I just don’t like optically that much.

In the end:
I don’t buy the DLCs for GZ to get better weapons, more and more superior stuff.
I even don’t buy them because I think it’s a great support of the devs (oh, and I never bought any skin pack!)
I buy them to have some more different options. To try some funny things or to find some special use cases.
It’s for fun. And if, after some testing, there is just one item per pack that brings me some fun, then it’s good.

…

Ehm, did I get off the rails? Excuse me.

2 Likes