MORE WEAPONS!!!

(Tanker_Ray) #21

How about XM-8 and F-2000?

XM-8 did failed in test stage, but whatever, DB is near-future right?

Just confirm it was successful, and then put it in.

XM-8 and F-2000 looks the most futuristic gun imo.

I guess they will fit in DB well.

(Grave_Knight) #22

[quote=“ThunderPro;117910”]How about XM-8 and F-2000?

XM-8 did failed in test stage, but whatever, DB is near-future right?

Just confirm it was successful, and then put it in.

XM-8 and F-2000 looks the most futuristic gun imo.

I guess they will fit in DB well.[/quote]

XM8? You’re kidding right? That thing was a waste of development money and it didn’t go anywhere. It was suppose to be this great replacement for the standard M16. Turns out building a module gun with a bunch of different parts was more novelty than effective.

Besides, the TAR-21 is much more futuristic looking.

(CCP115) #23

[quote=“god1;114868”][quote=“S3nf;114663”]Everyone wanting his favorite RL gun inside the game, while I’d be ok with a mp40 and a thompson :*
balance > diversity[/quote]

Blishlok is a modernized Thompson.[/quote]

Blishlok is based off the Kriss Vector, one of my favourite guns, since it looks so fucking cool. It also has elements from the Thompson, but not really.

(omegaskorpion) #24

[quote=“CCP115;118311”][quote=“god1;114868”][quote=“S3nf;114663”]Everyone wanting his favorite RL gun inside the game, while I’d be ok with a mp40 and a thompson :*
balance > diversity[/quote]

Blishlok is a modernized Thompson.[/quote]

Blishlok is based off the Kriss Vector, one of my favourite guns, since it looks so fucking cool. It also has elements from the Thompson, but not really.[/quote]

It has more elements from Thompson, but it also has elements from Kriss Vector.
i have looked all 3 side by side and there are elemets from both guns.

But about new guns.

I would actualy like if they dint go full regular guns. It would be good if they did more weapons like Blishlok, Weapons that are unique or hydrids and not just straight up copies.

(Captain_Forward) #25

I will kill everyone after I’ll get a semi-auto shotgun in this game.[/quote]

(GregHouseMD) #26

Balancing guns is a tricky task. Adding in more weapons just for the sake of it could easily lead to a situation like what you have in Battlefield 4: Practically every AR has exactly the same performance if you look at the numbers.

If DB does get new guns - which it no doubt will, at some point - they have to serve some purpose beyond looking cool or adding variety. Otherwise, they may as well be reskins.

Which actually isn’t a bad idea, and I know SD talked about in the past, so . . . why not?

(Grave_Knight) #27

[quote=“GregHouseMD;118571”]Balancing guns is a tricky task. Adding in more weapons just for the sake of it could easily lead to a situation like what you have in Battlefield 4: Practically every AR has exactly the same performance if you look at the numbers.

If DB does get new guns - which it no doubt will, at some point - they have to serve some purpose beyond looking cool or adding variety. Otherwise, they may as well be reskins.

Which actually isn’t a bad idea, and I know SD talked about in the past, so . . . why not?[/quote]

You shouldn’t take this thread too seriously. These are more weapons we would like to see in the game, not weapons we demand. And, come on, you know you want a sawn-off MTs-255. Just look how badass that gun is! It’s a fucking 5 shot, shotgun converted into a pistol cause “WHY THE FUCK NOT!?”

Only thing that would make it better is if you loaded 12 Gauge Frags into the thing (cause I like turning my opponents into usable canoes).

(omegaskorpion) #28

[quote=“GregHouseMD;118571”]Balancing guns is a tricky task. Adding in more weapons just for the sake of it could easily lead to a situation like what you have in Battlefield 4: Practically every AR has exactly the same performance if you look at the numbers.

If DB does get new guns - which it no doubt will, at some point - they have to serve some purpose beyond looking cool or adding variety. Otherwise, they may as well be reskins.

Which actually isn’t a bad idea, and I know SD talked about in the past, so . . . why not?[/quote]

Well in case of BF they did make 90% rifles to have same damage and only variation between fire rate and accuracy very similary to the M4 and Timik exepth with over 20 guns.

Now you can make alot of weapons with simple stats.
But Developers could just go out of their way and create more unique guns that dont function the same way as others do.

Like explosive shotgun.
Pistol with rockets.
Rifle that can mark enemy and the shoot slightly following flechettes.
Guns with bayonets in the front.
Smg with 100 ammo mags.
Guns that shot healing or ammo giving darts.

i mean, everything is possible if we dont stay in the traditional guns, the game is about close future so they can use the setting to do some more interesting weapons.

(KattiValk) #29

As long as they don’t make getting specific loadouts even more RNG dependent. I’m running out of sacrificial goats.

[quote=“Grave Knight;118148”][quote=“ThunderPro;117910”]How about XM-8 and F-2000?

XM-8 did failed in test stage, but whatever, DB is near-future right?

Just confirm it was successful, and then put it in.

XM-8 and F-2000 looks the most futuristic gun imo.

I guess they will fit in DB well.[/quote]

XM8? You’re kidding right? That thing was a waste of development money and it didn’t go anywhere. It was suppose to be this great replacement for the standard M16. Turns out building a module gun with a bunch of different parts was more novelty than effective.

Besides, the TAR-21 is much more futuristic looking.[/quote]
@ThunderPro @“Grave Knight” Knight The XM8 is a victim of classic DoD drama. It is the XM2001 of the assault rifle world. The weapon itself is an admirable build with a very good performance record in testing, but the requirements for it were high to put it mildly and most of the barrel lengths weren’t exactly the best for 5.56. However, you should keep in mind it’s made by the same people who made the G36 and that little bit of product quality failure likely means the already fragile casing for the XM8 would of suffered from the same issues. The fact remains that a lot of the issues with the weapon stem from the requirements it had to meet.

The DoD has had a history of axing things that weren’t good enough, and 4 weapons met the same fate as the XM8 due to this in the turn of the '90s. The ACR program (no not the tacticool thing you see in the CoDs) turned out 4 interesting gun designs that all were highly unique and pretty Twilight 2000 as far as how Cold War they were. However, the program required the replacement for the M-16 to be a full 2x improvement, and naturally, none of those weapons met that very high bar.

Bureaucracy is lovely.

(Someordinaryguy) #30

My personal list
Pistol: G17C, M9 (the Beretta one), FN57, USP Match, Jericho (mini-DEagle), Walther P99, VP70, Mateba Model 6 Unica
Machine Pistols: 93R, G18, OTs-33, MAC-10, TEC-9
SMG: UMP-45, P90, Kriss Vector, CBJ-MS, IMI UZI, MP7 (for Sparks [Empire 9 is MP9 I know]SD plox), Bizon, Scorpion EVO 3, KRISS Vector, SIG-Sauer MPX, AS VAL
Assault Rifles/Carbines: G36C (or K with that futuristic sight), F2000, SG553, SCAR-H, AUGA3 (full auto Stark without scope),MTAR-21, ACW-R, L85 (c’mon how a game set in London doesn’t have this British classic)
Heavy/LMG: L86A2, FN FAL (semi), U-100mk5, LSAT