Yeonne Greene, on 16 March 2017 - 08:34 PM, said:
What on Earth makes you think you would be belly rubbing with one or two effective weapons? Whether or not a weapon is good depends entirely on the surrounding environment, AKA whether or not it's better than the other options. If the few good options we have now are brought down, that makes them not only not good, but the other weapons better. That is, mathematically, how it works and this game is very much based on numbers.
Respectfully, if we buff all of the other weapons, you'll still be "belly rubbing" with one or two effective weapons because people like you and me and Quicksilver and Ultimax will always find that edge and exploit it. Thus, our view tends to be rather narrow unless we pull back and examine the whole system...which I do because I'm a sIut for game theory and I get more enjoyment out of that these days than playing the actual game (I am massively looking forward to new equipment though).
The reason I laughed in posting is not that I think it's absolute truth but because it was an old joke back when Large Pulse Lasers became viable sometime after they nerfed ppcs and the gauss rifle. It made it a much closer ranged game (a system, logically ending with belly rubbing mechs).
On the contrary, if the rule of thumb is to make weapons better in balance and not worse, even though they may not all be the best, the one thing for sure is that at they will all at least be more effective than before. If there is a problem with the rest, buff them.
We tried to suggest this before it all went down around 4 years ago, advocating that even other, shorter ranged weapons should be buffed to equal ppc's at the bottom of our post here:
https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__2535843
Edited by XxRingWraithxX, 17 March 2017 - 01:35 PM.