1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.

SHOULD WE KEEP THE LIGHTNING GUN?

Discussion in 'Unreal Tournament 3' started by ->Sachiel<-, Feb 6, 2006.

?

Should Lightning Gun Stay?

  1. YES!!!

    126 vote(s)
    71.2%
  2. NO!

    51 vote(s)
    28.8%
  1. ThirtySixBelow

    ThirtySixBelow tactical inaccuracy

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    538
    Likes Received:
    0
    Switch times are horrible. I think they need to slow them down, that way you can't shoot an LG shot, switch to shock, then back to the lg and do 185 damage in 1.5 seconds.
     
  2. briach

    briach ಠ_ಠ DaReTaL ಠ_ಠ

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2005
    Messages:
    928
    Likes Received:
    0
    I like the emphasis on switching weapons to max out damage per sec.

    It makes weapon combinations more powerful than the weapons themselves. That's one thing I like about ut2k4 and is specific to ut2k4.
     
  3. Monster Kill

    Monster Kill New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    138
    Likes Received:
    0

    It's just crazy enough to WORK!!! To the Batcave!!!

    Good Idea. That would probably work. That's using your noggin'
     
  4. Sahkolihaa

    Sahkolihaa Ow...

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2004
    Messages:
    1,277
    Likes Received:
    0
    I love the LG, so keep it.
     
  5. neilthecellist

    neilthecellist Renegade.

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    Messages:
    2,306
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'd like to see not just the lightning gun, but more lighting effects on the lightning gun depending on the environment. But I guess that's more engine-based and not weapon-based.
     
  6. brdempsey69

    brdempsey69 Original UT Owns !!

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    1
    +1
     
  7. -AEnubis-

    -AEnubis- fps greater than star

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2000
    Messages:
    3,298
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well if not the switching, then what aspect of it should be toned down to adress it's excess usefull ness at short ranges? Pretty much half the stuff can think to do to it otherwise would hurt it too much at long ranges...
    • Making it projectile would only be noticeable at really long ranges. Not adequet.
    • An decrease in ROF would have to be hella drastic if the switch time is to remain in tact.
    • Elimination of un-zoomed cross hair would be easily circumvented, especially with current zoom scheme.
    Functional ideas...
    • Weapon reload time is put on hold when holstered.
    • Damage is decreased, but ammo is increased as well as ROF to maintain Dmg/s and Dmg/a. (this might conflict with shock beams, and the HS mutiplyer would be interesting)
    • Swtich away time is increased.
    • Sniper weapon goes to a "charge" system (like the impact hammer).
    Balancing the weapon will be tricky considering another weapon has such similar physics. It limits options since you don't want virtually the same weapon twice, and you want them to be effective at different ranges/situations.
     
  8. T2A`

    T2A` I'm dead.

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2004
    Messages:
    8,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    There's a very easy way to balance a sniper weapon: increase the switch time. The main reason people don't like the UT2004 sniper is because in addition to being less powerful (60 damage) and more annoying (smoke puff wtf), it's got an extra switch time to boot. All this added together makes it a worse weapon than the lightning by far.

    I've forgotten which threads I've posted in, so I've probably said this before in this very thread, but... The lightning is unbalanced simply because it's more powerful to switch to another weapon after one shot and then switch back to it than it is to just shoot it twice. Try that in Q3 with the rail and you'll get your balls handed to you on a platter. The reason? Long switch time on the rail. But you know why a long switch time isn't annoying on the rail like it is on the sniper? Because the rail is a good weapon, whereas the sniper is pretty horrible. Don't lower the damage it does (up it!), don't mess with the rate of fire (it's slower than the Q3 rail already (I think)), just keep it powerful but make it so you're at a disadvantage if you try to switch away from it in the middle of a heated fight.
     
  9. Saverous

    Saverous New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2006
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    If SR will have a projectile trace as in Halo, at least it will not be such a camping weapon.

    it's a problem of a Shock Rifle, not a LG. If you switch to a Flack or RL, they will not give the same efficiency as a Shock.
     
  10. -AEnubis-

    -AEnubis- fps greater than star

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2000
    Messages:
    3,298
    Likes Received:
    0
    We talked about it in one of the "sniper rifle" threads... I agree, I'm just throwing out other ideas for the nay-sayers.

    I'd like to see projectile sniper, where the bullet carries through a target, does massive damage, similar or maybe slightly longer RoF, and a switch away time equivalent to the RoF. With more damage, I'd also like to see the HS multiplyer dropped to like 1.5x. It's a bit steep right now IMO.
     
  11. Krazy K

    Krazy K .....

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've been thinking and hearing people talk about the LG switchaway time and ShockR is a deadly combo. But what if the LG stayed the same, only the Shock was weaker? Shock combos and cores kept their current dmg, but if the shock prim was weaker I think it would really balance things out nicely. Or maybe just make the shock prim about 1/3 slower? I really don't wanna change the LG but maybe if the ammo was really limited it could balance out.

    Or maybe the LG could have a "overheat" feature. Like if you fired 3 succesive shots it would over heat and not be able to fire for roughly 3 seconds or so.

    What do you guys think?
     
  12. Saverous

    Saverous New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2006
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Shock Rifle must be nerfed, maybe decreased rof. LG overheat is a good idea, but not only for succesive shots. Something like "the more often you shoot, the more quickly lg is heated". For example you may shoot five times quickly, but then must to wait for XX seconds for cooling. Or you can shoot a little bit slower and lg won't be overheated at all.
     
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2006
  13. Neophoenix

    Neophoenix Bast's Pet

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thx, least someone liked my idea. :D
     
  14. gregori

    gregori BUF Refugee

    Joined:
    May 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,411
    Likes Received:
    0
    The slight delay before firing on the LG is horrible,

    if there were no delay

    I reckon the LG rate of fire could be slowed down or does less damage except for headshots

    Ultimately the a bright flash from the LG should temporarily obscure the players vision by bleaching out most of the screen for about 0.6 seconds
     
  15. briach

    briach ಠ_ಠ DaReTaL ಠ_ಠ

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2005
    Messages:
    928
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yuck. If ut2k7 had that, I wouldn't buy it.
     
  16. Neophoenix

    Neophoenix Bast's Pet

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    0
    My thoughts exactly.
     
  17. Krazy K

    Krazy K .....

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    0
    hrmmm. I don't know, its not that bad of an Idea. As long as the "bleaching" wasn't too severe, and the LG's dmg was maybe amped up a little, I could see it working.

    Like when you walk into a flash grenade in KillSwitch, something like that.
     
  18. Neophoenix

    Neophoenix Bast's Pet

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    0
    AA did that with their flash bangs, and it was annoying as hell, having your screen bright white.

    However, maybe if the video display got distorted by the EM field so you couldn't use the scope for about a second. That could work, and it would be less annoying too.
     
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2006
  19. T2A`

    T2A` I'm dead.

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2004
    Messages:
    8,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    You guys are acting like you don't have brains. The only reason lightning > shock is a deadly combo is because the lightning has a quick switch-away time.

    Nerfing weapons only makes a game suck. No more nerfing, no more dropping the power of weapons so everything sucks. Things need to be more powerful. It's the weapon switch times and the rates of fire that need to be worked on to achieve balance.

    The shock has a good power. It is not overpowered on its own. No matter how you look at it, it still takes five or more primary shots to kill someone with 100+ health who grabbed the 100a. Are you telling me you want it to take upwards of eight, nine, or ten shots to kill that person with shock? Don't be stupid. The shock seems overpowered when you add it into the equation of having multiple weapons, all of which switch at the same rate. Think about it... If the lightning had a slower switch time, there wouldn't be a good reason to complain about lightning > shock.

    Something similar to CPMA weapon switching would be good (i.e. you can't switch a weapon until it's ready to fire again). Of course, there should be a lower limit because in CPMA you can switch from lightning/pulse immediately since they have such a high rate of fire, and that's pretty dumb.
     
  20. Kantham

    Kantham Fool.

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    18,034
    Likes Received:
    2
    LOLOLNONONLOLOLNONO NO NO LOLOL NO.

    No.
     

Share This Page