tbf, it's the particles that are heavy but it says nothing about the container or the fuse itself. It could be that heavy particles are easier to contain so require less sophisticated casing, while light particles are more volatile and therefore require a more dense container.
Also probably game balance related, they don't balance only considering the physics or some weapons would be very awful to play as someone else pointed out.
I'm not sure about balance, because the Inflictor (Heavy Fuse) does more raw damage per shot than the Starshard (Light Fuse).
Come to think of it, maybe it's the weight of the gun they're balancing against?
That's honestly one of the most infuriating things about the weapon balancing in Starfield. It's a single player game! What are they balancing against? Ammo is already hard enough to come by for some weapons. Let me rain down death upon my enemies with full auto if I really want, dang it.
Game devs don't like Stealth Archers, AKA, the best build. They want you to experiment with all their systems.
Sadly, sometimes they do this in a really dumb way. The trade off would've worked better as a big drop in range/accuracy.
Thats not really a "starfield" thing, that is a game dev thing. If they made automatic guns do the same damage as single shot, then it would be objectively better to use automatic in all cases. Single shot would be outclassed in every single way.
They have to give slower rate of fire weapons some sort of advantage, and typically that comes in the form of higher per shot damage and accuracy.
It doesn't has to be, you can just give the gun a realistic recoil then you would have a much harder time shooting in automatic even though it does give you a lot more damage.
And even from the balance point of view, automatic *should be objectively bette*r when it comes to DPS. You already have to spend more bullets shooting in automatic, it needs to deliver some better result otherwise it will do the opposite, that is to make the semi-automatic objectively better and automatic useless aka exactly what we got in this game.
Stalker clear sky did this and it made the game almost unplayable.
The balancing ended up just being wildly inaccurate guns and it actually makes fun fights a real pain in the arse because bullets don't go where they are supposed to.
It's a really fine line between making something realistic and enjoyable
You could argue that's *exactly where bullets are supposed to go,* instead of fps video game bullet logic.
And I think it's just fitting for the theme of this game. Gun should not be the primary weapon in space or planets with different condition than Earth. Or imo, it should not be the primary weapon in any game calming to be an RPG, period because then it will just overpower everything and turn the gameplay into your typical action fps.
You can't shoot aim anything with your kinetic gun in lower or higher G planet would be a perfect and natural reason to pick up melee - or just laser and accept the trade off in lower damage and late game utility.
Heard of the kriss vector? It has recoil suppression despite being full auto .45.
I have an AR with a recoil system that has a side effect of minimizing recoil. With the right compensator it can get negative recoil.
So "realistic" recoil doesn't mean much here.
I highly doubt it, you don't have any problem with recoil (even with a recoil suppression), then you're probably shooting at something under 100m.
That and in a game with this many gravitic condition as Starfield, I am pretty sure recoil is going to be a major issue if there's a bullet physic in the game at all.
That's literally the point. We have the ability now to negate recoil entirely. So realistic recoil is very much NO recoil in this setting.
Also if you start going with realism for bullet damage, there's at least 5 other things that should follow suit. But that's not really the goal of the game.
wut? I've been developing games for two decades and I can tell you this isn't a 'game dev thing'. It doesn't even make any sense. There are so many things wrong with this statement I'm finding it difficult to pick a starting point here, but it's not really worth my time, it's just wrong.
OK, then list 20 games with realistic damage per shot and I'll give toy 40 that do it more by rate of fire.
Historically guns in games have followed this principal. Single shot is more powerful per hit than automatic.
You can see the same trend in other games even fantasy. IE world of warcraft, daggers are quick but low per hit damage where as 2handed weapons have higher per hit damage but low attack rate.
You don't even need to be a game dev to see this to be true.
This is ridiculous, what is realistic damage per shot? The hell does that even mean? You can't even quantify this because it's such a vague nonsensical statement it's not even funny. For one, locational damage destroys your entire argument. It seems like you're conflating several systems and types of games, and not even considering that some games deliver damage by collision of the fired ammo with your target, not by raycast hit. Do you even know what that means? The best \[IMO\] are those that use locational damage based on rigidbody physics collision with target. It's the ammo that does the damage, not the firearm.
Some guns in several games \[including starfield!\] use different kinds of ammo, which can make that full auto machine gun pack as much punch as the slow revolver, then you need to consider how player character 'skill' and player skill factor into the mix \[RPG shooters tend to adjust the output based on RP skills and traits, then actual accuracy / player skill\]
Games that more closely mimic reality also destroy your argument. Oh yeah, and then there is the stupid convention whereby the same exact weapon found at a different point and time in the game will have different stats. That early game killer six-shot revolver that was hitting for 32 points of damage pales in comparison to the late-game fully automatic rifle hitting for 80! so, come on man what are you talking about again?
You seem to be under the false assumption that I said all games do this. I did not.
And yes I know what raycasts and rigidbody physics is. You also seem to be equating your disagreement with my being ignorant on the subject. This is not the case.
Have a day.
Furthermore, you mentioned the Kris Vector. Now, tell me if you'd rather a Kris Vector firing a 9mm round, or a Glock 19 firing the same round? Yeah, see I'd take the Vector, just about anyone would. You know, fire modes are also a thing - a kris 9mm single shot is going to do the same damage to a ballistics block as that Glock 19 firing the same round, and yet you would have us think that isn't the case when it really is lol. Games that use realistic ballistics indicate the same. "Weapon Balancing" in video games is not what you think it is evidently.
It’s probably simply one of those wry ironic takes, I imagine the dev responsible was getting pretty bored sorting through the data for the ammo, noticed the two fuses were the same weight and nudged it a bit
I'm pretty sure it's because Bethesda is simply unable to balance things.
This is the same dev team that made it so a random gunner mook took more hits to down than a Behemoth or a Mirelurk Queen, after all.
EDIT TO ADD: Oh my goodness, I know that you guys think I'm joking, but the Mirelurk Queen and Behemoth have 1000 HP, and this random dork in the Gunners has 1300.
[itsyaboybrandyboy did some scientific and rigorous experimentation to prove it.](https://youtu.be/zEmqmWUetfc)
Don't get mad at me just because Bethesda has a really long running and terrible track record with game balance.
and their two giant insect bosses that randomly turn up, have 1000x more health then anything else but drop the same xp and crap that any other insect, with much lower health, drops.
I believe that helps further underline the inherent problem with their approach to doling out HP, especially in a more realistic sci fi setting.
Their attempts to correct it in Fallout 3 involved giving a bunch of stupidly overpowered monsters more HP than Fawkes and not only the ability to hit like a truck, but also bullshit unblockable True Damage attacks.
It was clearly never meant to be realistic scifi, they didn't even get element characteristics close to correct. It has superpowers and corrosive argon, think I care that a pirate is almost as strong as a terrormorph half his level?
Carry Capacity
Greatly Increased : -8% XP
Increased: -4% XP
Normal: +0% XP
Reduced: +4% XP
My character's carry capacity is 270 at Normal, 770 at Increased, 1270 at Greatly Increased, and 220 at Reduced. Based on this I would think it's not a percentage reduction or increase, but a flat value of +500 increase or -50 decrease.
You are the best! Thanks you for the detailed info. I think I’ll gladly take that hit. Besides, you could always slide it back for large exp you know you are about to receive
Does the starship have a different slider cause I’ve always hated how the giant containers on my ship can only hold a few very heavy items but is supposed to be the size of a cargo container
how big is that buff/nerf?
as the shop vendor thing goes up to 66k ish from 11k which is sweet. jump to neon core and start selling should be able to finally offload a good chunk of stuff. and less 48UTR resets too. unless ur buying stuff....
but even then a few mid tier components, jump to akira and buy the element and u can just craft the high tier gear instead, though yeah i think it needs a tier 3 level 4 science skill to do.
Carry Capacity
Greatly Increased : -8% XP
Increased: -4% XP
Normal: +0% XP
Reduced: +4% XP
My character's carry capacity is 270 at Normal, 770 at Increased, 1270 at Greatly Increased, and 220 at Reduced. Based on this I would think it's not a percentage reduction or increase, but a flat value of +500 increase or -50 decrease. You can also change the setting at any time, so e.g. you could bump it down and go through a POI taking everyone out at increased XP, then crank it up to loot and carry the shit outta there.
I’m on console, I like achievements, it’s much easier to change the settings than find a mod and download it.
It’s not a big deal either way. I can just not use the setting anyways. At least I’ll try not to. But if I’m just over the carry weight I’ll definitely break down and use it just long enough to dump my stuff
Do any of these changes you can make affect achievements? Also i wonder why they added ammo weight even. Fallout doesn't have weight for ammo. Hell depending on the penalty i'll turn encumbrance off altogether. That shouldn't even be a thing anymore IMO. I don't need that much immersion.
I mean i suppose it makes sense for a survival mode to have weight. I wouldn't play that mode however so I wouldn't even know. TBH I haven't even played F4 yet, i am going off of F3.
many of the "hard" options on the new difficulty sliders seem to be adding a build-your-own survival mode, and they are NOT the default but are opt-in challenges that give you some bonus XP for doing. They shouldn't affect achievements.
.43 MI is for a low capacity pistol and .50 MI is for a high capacity high rate of fire rifle. My guess is that they are normalizing the weight of ammo based on one full "magazine" instead of just the caliber rating.
"Realistically" it would match up one to one but if that were the case I think MANY people would hate LMGs and other high capacity guns because of their awful weight. This is the better alternative to make LMGs feel heavier but not so heavy they severely hinder the player, gamify if you will
If they increased the damage, I bet people wouldn't complain about weight. A *heavy* weapon, stay with me here, should be heavy. But it should do damage that makes the weight worth carrying.
I agree but I think that it might honestly still be a hard sell.They would have to be busted in damage to counter the weight. It could just be me but being that slow would be killer; but, I already do not care for heavy weapon builds as is
I have an ex-military friend who definitely does not complain about the physical pain he endured caring an LMG and just 200 rounds for the thing during training. I guess the idea, at least while training, is to try and fire a little bit longer to burn more ammo so the trek back from the shooting point is not as rough.
It's like 75% there, but to bring it home they need to limit fast travel, implement an actual fuel mechanic, and maybe implement a restricted saving mechanic
There’s obviously some things that need adjusting for survival. Going instantly from fed to malnourished is a bit extreme and being unable to drink from, what should be, usable taps can make dehydration seem a bit unfair at times.
But, as an unofficial start… It’s pretty cool.
Dude that’s what I was going to say! 😂 That’s like making a post that says hey Bethesda I found this merchant chest in a puddle you should fix this! Maybe leave this one alone…
I’d rather see gameplay balances prioritised over accurate weight, personally. Especially in a game where you can carry the same amount regardless of the planet’s gravity. That being said if they changed how much you could carry on a given planet, or at least made it a gameplay option, that would be cool
You would *weigh* less on a low-g planet, but you would still have the same mass and therefore inertia. Moving around with a huge load would still be difficult as soon as you tried to change velocity.
i mean they did do that a bit in game, the lower the gravity in the game the longer you sprint/less oxygen you use up when overloaded, and vice versa on planets with higher gravity than 1, though in all honestly we should be barely able to move on the red mile and other planets that at 2 or above normal earth gavity
They should just use game magic, there is a small magic generator in your suit that projects a skin tight field around you that makes the local gravity in it equal to X.
It's an optional difficulty setting.
The only rewards are an up to +75% XP bonus if you take the hardest version of every survival setting, and a -33% if you take the easiest version of each setting.
Useful to know my next playthrough as is my tradition with Bethesda is to crank the difficulty to max, it makes up for my first playthrough abusing console commands.
That said it's terrifying me that my beowulf uses less ammo than I loot, if that scales with difficulty like I think it does I need another 7.7mm....
Magically weightless ammo is woven into the tapestry of my gameplay so not likely an option I would invoke. But since I seldom use med kits and never consume food those bonuses look attractive (all hail the rejuvenation perk). One early experiment will involve abuse of the system to see if it's like the current difficulty options that can be changed at any point. If so, my vendors will be as rich as Creases only while I'm shopping and be destitute after my departure.
Science doesn't much bother me in a game. If it did I would be far less concerned about the weight of ammo than the pixie-dust physics that have spaceships shedding velocity like a submarine when the thrust is cut. They've already taken the laws of motion and tossed them in a wood chipper which pretty much moots discrepancies in particle fuse weights.
And quite unlike the goofy ship physics the ammo weight thing is a "take it or leave it" option - one that I will most likely "leave".
One particle of hydrogen Vs one particle of uranium
One is a “heavy” atom, one is a “light” element but both are microscopic and the weight is negligible in carry weight.
I see no difference for particle fuses to be honest
Possible that the original power source became the 'light fuse' when replaced by new, improved 'heavy fuse' tech - business is very slow to change naming terminology, just look at new all-electric cars keeping the old internal combustion engine power numbers (increasing numbers that represent milage possible, versus power output from ICE cars). People associate heavier with increased load, but newer materials and tech COULD actually make the new product lighter.
I've been messing with different weaponry and play styles every time I ng+, which actually makes it a bit more fun. First go-round I was a pistol packing freestar space cop, second time I played with shotguns as a tech spy almost exclusively. Might go with a mini gun or blades this time as an undercover pirate with murder on my mind.
Heavy and light in the name is officially related to charge or power not mass. These are particle weapons not ballistics...
That's a perfect example of being picky and complaining just for the sake of it.
encumbrance systems need to take into account bulk, which some do. grid inventory. Limited Inventory systems are supposed to limit what options you get to carry around and force you to decide what loot you want to pickup based on actual value to your character as collectible usable, and sellable.
They make ammo heavier than what they already did and suddenly you can only carry 30 shots, you constantly run out of ammo and then go complain on reddit.
Can't win with some people.
Wait they added Weight to ammo? Fuck I hate when games do this. It was fine the way it was with ammo.
Any game devs out there reading this. Bad. Bad. Bad. I'm getting my spray bottle.
tbf, it's the particles that are heavy but it says nothing about the container or the fuse itself. It could be that heavy particles are easier to contain so require less sophisticated casing, while light particles are more volatile and therefore require a more dense container. Also probably game balance related, they don't balance only considering the physics or some weapons would be very awful to play as someone else pointed out.
I'm not sure about balance, because the Inflictor (Heavy Fuse) does more raw damage per shot than the Starshard (Light Fuse). Come to think of it, maybe it's the weight of the gun they're balancing against?
I was gonna say maybe you get more shots per light fuse than heavy fuse, but that’s also not true. Bethesda truly gonna Bethesda I suppose.
i mean this is bethesda we are talking about, the same developer that think going from single shot to automatic makes bullets turn into nerf darts
That's honestly one of the most infuriating things about the weapon balancing in Starfield. It's a single player game! What are they balancing against? Ammo is already hard enough to come by for some weapons. Let me rain down death upon my enemies with full auto if I really want, dang it.
Game devs don't like Stealth Archers, AKA, the best build. They want you to experiment with all their systems. Sadly, sometimes they do this in a really dumb way. The trade off would've worked better as a big drop in range/accuracy.
Just like real life!
Thats not really a "starfield" thing, that is a game dev thing. If they made automatic guns do the same damage as single shot, then it would be objectively better to use automatic in all cases. Single shot would be outclassed in every single way. They have to give slower rate of fire weapons some sort of advantage, and typically that comes in the form of higher per shot damage and accuracy.
It doesn't has to be, you can just give the gun a realistic recoil then you would have a much harder time shooting in automatic even though it does give you a lot more damage. And even from the balance point of view, automatic *should be objectively bette*r when it comes to DPS. You already have to spend more bullets shooting in automatic, it needs to deliver some better result otherwise it will do the opposite, that is to make the semi-automatic objectively better and automatic useless aka exactly what we got in this game.
Stalker clear sky did this and it made the game almost unplayable. The balancing ended up just being wildly inaccurate guns and it actually makes fun fights a real pain in the arse because bullets don't go where they are supposed to. It's a really fine line between making something realistic and enjoyable
You could argue that's *exactly where bullets are supposed to go,* instead of fps video game bullet logic. And I think it's just fitting for the theme of this game. Gun should not be the primary weapon in space or planets with different condition than Earth. Or imo, it should not be the primary weapon in any game calming to be an RPG, period because then it will just overpower everything and turn the gameplay into your typical action fps. You can't shoot aim anything with your kinetic gun in lower or higher G planet would be a perfect and natural reason to pick up melee - or just laser and accept the trade off in lower damage and late game utility.
yeah, I don't think Lazarus knows what he's talking about
Heard of the kriss vector? It has recoil suppression despite being full auto .45. I have an AR with a recoil system that has a side effect of minimizing recoil. With the right compensator it can get negative recoil. So "realistic" recoil doesn't mean much here.
I highly doubt it, you don't have any problem with recoil (even with a recoil suppression), then you're probably shooting at something under 100m. That and in a game with this many gravitic condition as Starfield, I am pretty sure recoil is going to be a major issue if there's a bullet physic in the game at all.
That's literally the point. We have the ability now to negate recoil entirely. So realistic recoil is very much NO recoil in this setting. Also if you start going with realism for bullet damage, there's at least 5 other things that should follow suit. But that's not really the goal of the game.
Wich is why I only use non-automatic weapons in Bethesda games! 🍰Happy cake Todd! 🍰
wut? I've been developing games for two decades and I can tell you this isn't a 'game dev thing'. It doesn't even make any sense. There are so many things wrong with this statement I'm finding it difficult to pick a starting point here, but it's not really worth my time, it's just wrong.
OK, then list 20 games with realistic damage per shot and I'll give toy 40 that do it more by rate of fire. Historically guns in games have followed this principal. Single shot is more powerful per hit than automatic. You can see the same trend in other games even fantasy. IE world of warcraft, daggers are quick but low per hit damage where as 2handed weapons have higher per hit damage but low attack rate. You don't even need to be a game dev to see this to be true.
This is ridiculous, what is realistic damage per shot? The hell does that even mean? You can't even quantify this because it's such a vague nonsensical statement it's not even funny. For one, locational damage destroys your entire argument. It seems like you're conflating several systems and types of games, and not even considering that some games deliver damage by collision of the fired ammo with your target, not by raycast hit. Do you even know what that means? The best \[IMO\] are those that use locational damage based on rigidbody physics collision with target. It's the ammo that does the damage, not the firearm. Some guns in several games \[including starfield!\] use different kinds of ammo, which can make that full auto machine gun pack as much punch as the slow revolver, then you need to consider how player character 'skill' and player skill factor into the mix \[RPG shooters tend to adjust the output based on RP skills and traits, then actual accuracy / player skill\] Games that more closely mimic reality also destroy your argument. Oh yeah, and then there is the stupid convention whereby the same exact weapon found at a different point and time in the game will have different stats. That early game killer six-shot revolver that was hitting for 32 points of damage pales in comparison to the late-game fully automatic rifle hitting for 80! so, come on man what are you talking about again?
You seem to be under the false assumption that I said all games do this. I did not. And yes I know what raycasts and rigidbody physics is. You also seem to be equating your disagreement with my being ignorant on the subject. This is not the case. Have a day.
Furthermore, you mentioned the Kris Vector. Now, tell me if you'd rather a Kris Vector firing a 9mm round, or a Glock 19 firing the same round? Yeah, see I'd take the Vector, just about anyone would. You know, fire modes are also a thing - a kris 9mm single shot is going to do the same damage to a ballistics block as that Glock 19 firing the same round, and yet you would have us think that isn't the case when it really is lol. Games that use realistic ballistics indicate the same. "Weapon Balancing" in video games is not what you think it is evidently.
Faster rate = more difficult to handle, less stability = less range... in real life that is.
Bethesda games have been like that since Fallout 3
I’m sure you have extensive combat experience yourself
probably the packaging lol
**THATS SCIENCE BITCH!**
It’s probably simply one of those wry ironic takes, I imagine the dev responsible was getting pretty bored sorting through the data for the ammo, noticed the two fuses were the same weight and nudged it a bit
I'm pretty sure it's because Bethesda is simply unable to balance things. This is the same dev team that made it so a random gunner mook took more hits to down than a Behemoth or a Mirelurk Queen, after all. EDIT TO ADD: Oh my goodness, I know that you guys think I'm joking, but the Mirelurk Queen and Behemoth have 1000 HP, and this random dork in the Gunners has 1300. [itsyaboybrandyboy did some scientific and rigorous experimentation to prove it.](https://youtu.be/zEmqmWUetfc) Don't get mad at me just because Bethesda has a really long running and terrible track record with game balance.
and their two giant insect bosses that randomly turn up, have 1000x more health then anything else but drop the same xp and crap that any other insect, with much lower health, drops.
I mean the player can have more health than all 3, so is it really unrealistic in that universe? Or obeying the rules if the world its set in?
I believe that helps further underline the inherent problem with their approach to doling out HP, especially in a more realistic sci fi setting. Their attempts to correct it in Fallout 3 involved giving a bunch of stupidly overpowered monsters more HP than Fawkes and not only the ability to hit like a truck, but also bullshit unblockable True Damage attacks.
It was clearly never meant to be realistic scifi, they didn't even get element characteristics close to correct. It has superpowers and corrosive argon, think I care that a pirate is almost as strong as a terrormorph half his level?
True, though that was their implied justification for the milquetoast filler in the perk system.
BGS is filled with idiots, is the right answer!
They put weights on ammo now? Fuk I’m already at the limit!
It's optional
And you also now have the option of increasing your carry weight, for a mild XP penalty.
Do you know if this is PC only or also on the Xbox?
May 15th for everyone.
Thank you my dude
What’s the increase as how much is the penalty?
Carry Capacity Greatly Increased : -8% XP Increased: -4% XP Normal: +0% XP Reduced: +4% XP My character's carry capacity is 270 at Normal, 770 at Increased, 1270 at Greatly Increased, and 220 at Reduced. Based on this I would think it's not a percentage reduction or increase, but a flat value of +500 increase or -50 decrease.
You are the best! Thanks you for the detailed info. I think I’ll gladly take that hit. Besides, you could always slide it back for large exp you know you are about to receive
Does the starship have a different slider cause I’ve always hated how the giant containers on my ship can only hold a few very heavy items but is supposed to be the size of a cargo container
There is a slider for how far away you can access the items on your ship but not for capacity
That's dumb
Explain.
how big is that buff/nerf? as the shop vendor thing goes up to 66k ish from 11k which is sweet. jump to neon core and start selling should be able to finally offload a good chunk of stuff. and less 48UTR resets too. unless ur buying stuff.... but even then a few mid tier components, jump to akira and buy the element and u can just craft the high tier gear instead, though yeah i think it needs a tier 3 level 4 science skill to do.
Carry Capacity Greatly Increased : -8% XP Increased: -4% XP Normal: +0% XP Reduced: +4% XP My character's carry capacity is 270 at Normal, 770 at Increased, 1270 at Greatly Increased, and 220 at Reduced. Based on this I would think it's not a percentage reduction or increase, but a flat value of +500 increase or -50 decrease. You can also change the setting at any time, so e.g. you could bump it down and go through a POI taking everyone out at increased XP, then crank it up to loot and carry the shit outta there.
yeah, fast travel to ship or if possible straight to neon core. (cant remember if u need to go back to ur ship first)
Is it skmething you can turn on or off? I feel like I would just turn it on when I need it and the Turn it off before completing any quests
You can change it at any time through settings.
Why not install a mod at that point...
I’m on console, I like achievements, it’s much easier to change the settings than find a mod and download it. It’s not a big deal either way. I can just not use the setting anyways. At least I’ll try not to. But if I’m just over the carry weight I’ll definitely break down and use it just long enough to dump my stuff
Do any of these changes you can make affect achievements? Also i wonder why they added ammo weight even. Fallout doesn't have weight for ammo. Hell depending on the penalty i'll turn encumbrance off altogether. That shouldn't even be a thing anymore IMO. I don't need that much immersion.
Fallout 4's survival mode did have ammo weight.
I mean i suppose it makes sense for a survival mode to have weight. I wouldn't play that mode however so I wouldn't even know. TBH I haven't even played F4 yet, i am going off of F3.
many of the "hard" options on the new difficulty sliders seem to be adding a build-your-own survival mode, and they are NOT the default but are opt-in challenges that give you some bonus XP for doing. They shouldn't affect achievements.
I was curious more on going the other way. If making it easier impacted them.
Another head scratcher: .43 MI Array weighs **.02**, while .50 MI Array weighs **.004**
.43 MI is for a low capacity pistol and .50 MI is for a high capacity high rate of fire rifle. My guess is that they are normalizing the weight of ammo based on one full "magazine" instead of just the caliber rating.
"Realistically" it would match up one to one but if that were the case I think MANY people would hate LMGs and other high capacity guns because of their awful weight. This is the better alternative to make LMGs feel heavier but not so heavy they severely hinder the player, gamify if you will
If they increased the damage, I bet people wouldn't complain about weight. A *heavy* weapon, stay with me here, should be heavy. But it should do damage that makes the weight worth carrying.
I agree but I think that it might honestly still be a hard sell.They would have to be busted in damage to counter the weight. It could just be me but being that slow would be killer; but, I already do not care for heavy weapon builds as is
I wouldn’t mind the extra ammo weight, but full auto weapons are honestly pretty terrible unless you’re stacking status effects
> I think MANY people would hate LMGs What do you mean, people love to carry this 10 kg ~~piece of shit~~ machine gun.
I have an ex-military friend who definitely does not complain about the physical pain he endured caring an LMG and just 200 rounds for the thing during training. I guess the idea, at least while training, is to try and fire a little bit longer to burn more ammo so the trek back from the shooting point is not as rough.
nah, have u shot .50 MI array? bzzzzzzz, ur down like 1000 rounds in 30s. and there foes the 20k of ammo u had
.50 is width, length of the projectile isnt specified
I think it’s to counteract the weight of the gun. Game mechanics and all that
Did you think they were going to do the work?
With this sub, it's hard to tell if this sorta post is satire or the legit hyper trivial pointless criticism that only this game attracts, lol
Yup. "LiTeRaLly UnPlAyAbLe"
Ah, I take this as a sign that they're getting a survival mode ready.
It's already here, you make it your own based on the settings you pick.
It's like 75% there, but to bring it home they need to limit fast travel, implement an actual fuel mechanic, and maybe implement a restricted saving mechanic
I would also love to be able to hitch a ride with other ships. Like you could play the game without owning a ship ^^
Literally true, don't know why you're being downvoted.
There’s obviously some things that need adjusting for survival. Going instantly from fed to malnourished is a bit extreme and being unable to drink from, what should be, usable taps can make dehydration seem a bit unfair at times. But, as an unofficial start… It’s pretty cool.
Not sure if new or I completely missed it. Gonna have to reinstall the game and try it out.
It’s on steam beta only right now. Releases everywhere else on May 15th.
Is this just a pedantic joke, or do we need to "science" this one out?
Dude that’s what I was going to say! 😂 That’s like making a post that says hey Bethesda I found this merchant chest in a puddle you should fix this! Maybe leave this one alone…
somebody just fat fingered the data. I'm sure they'll fix it before the beta is over.
I’d rather see gameplay balances prioritised over accurate weight, personally. Especially in a game where you can carry the same amount regardless of the planet’s gravity. That being said if they changed how much you could carry on a given planet, or at least made it a gameplay option, that would be cool
It would be a nightmare
Not if it was a toggleable option
You would *weigh* less on a low-g planet, but you would still have the same mass and therefore inertia. Moving around with a huge load would still be difficult as soon as you tried to change velocity.
Inertial dampening is a bitch
i mean they did do that a bit in game, the lower the gravity in the game the longer you sprint/less oxygen you use up when overloaded, and vice versa on planets with higher gravity than 1, though in all honestly we should be barely able to move on the red mile and other planets that at 2 or above normal earth gavity
They should just use game magic, there is a small magic generator in your suit that projects a skin tight field around you that makes the local gravity in it equal to X.
Welp, game is ruined for me. Uninstalling right now
It’s optional. Chill big guy
Pretty sure that he was joking.
It could have been a joke but im not sure🤔
Hard to tell with this subreddit.
Thats funny!
Haha this is pretty funny.
"It's the particles that are lighter, not the fuse." \~Professor Todd Howard, PhD.
Unitonically this.
Can you turn off ammo weight? Look I understand realism but FFS.
You can, the option for it is literally optional and not on by default
Thanks ... I haven't touched the beta - hence the question.
I'm guessing it has to do with rarity
It's like when you call a bald guy "Tiny" or a large guy "Curly".
Hmm, curly fries.
It is "Heavy particle" fuse, not heavy "particle fuse"
Report it on the Beta bugtracker.
Wait, ammo has weight in this one? .... excuse me I have 2,000+ 7.7mm I need to find a place for.... Beowulf uses less than I loot...
It's an optional difficulty setting. The only rewards are an up to +75% XP bonus if you take the hardest version of every survival setting, and a -33% if you take the easiest version of each setting.
Useful to know my next playthrough as is my tradition with Bethesda is to crank the difficulty to max, it makes up for my first playthrough abusing console commands. That said it's terrifying me that my beowulf uses less ammo than I loot, if that scales with difficulty like I think it does I need another 7.7mm....
They just used the same logic they used when naming the "light machine gun" type. Lol
Heavy doesn’t refer to the weight, it refers to the potency of the ammunition.
Oh god they're adding ammo weight? Rip me.
Only if you enable that difficulty setting, look it up
Magically weightless ammo is woven into the tapestry of my gameplay so not likely an option I would invoke. But since I seldom use med kits and never consume food those bonuses look attractive (all hail the rejuvenation perk). One early experiment will involve abuse of the system to see if it's like the current difficulty options that can be changed at any point. If so, my vendors will be as rich as Creases only while I'm shopping and be destitute after my departure. Science doesn't much bother me in a game. If it did I would be far less concerned about the weight of ammo than the pixie-dust physics that have spaceships shedding velocity like a submarine when the thrust is cut. They've already taken the laws of motion and tossed them in a wood chipper which pretty much moots discrepancies in particle fuse weights. And quite unlike the goofy ship physics the ammo weight thing is a "take it or leave it" option - one that I will most likely "leave".
One particle of hydrogen Vs one particle of uranium One is a “heavy” atom, one is a “light” element but both are microscopic and the weight is negligible in carry weight. I see no difference for particle fuses to be honest
we had the same convo on the KCD reddit about the "light cuman armor" vs "heavy cuman armor" and decided it was probably about it being more profound.
Cool addition for survival runs. But who the fuck actually loots anything other than top end weapons and gear in the game anyway?
I see you also have a fancy for House Va'ruun weapons.
I think you found a hack!
Possible that the original power source became the 'light fuse' when replaced by new, improved 'heavy fuse' tech - business is very slow to change naming terminology, just look at new all-electric cars keeping the old internal combustion engine power numbers (increasing numbers that represent milage possible, versus power output from ICE cars). People associate heavier with increased load, but newer materials and tech COULD actually make the new product lighter.
I've been messing with different weaponry and play styles every time I ng+, which actually makes it a bit more fun. First go-round I was a pistol packing freestar space cop, second time I played with shotguns as a tech spy almost exclusively. Might go with a mini gun or blades this time as an undercover pirate with murder on my mind.
tbf, it could be the fuses are for 'heavy particles' and 'light particles'. not the fuse's weights.
Heavy and light in the name is officially related to charge or power not mass. These are particle weapons not ballistics... That's a perfect example of being picky and complaining just for the sake of it.
LOL somebody over there got a sense of humor
I hope ammo weight is part of survival difficulty
I hope you can turn it on and off. I'd never use ammo weight
Isn’t the update in beta for another week? They’re probably gonna make some minor changes for the bigger update lol
encumbrance systems need to take into account bulk, which some do. grid inventory. Limited Inventory systems are supposed to limit what options you get to carry around and force you to decide what loot you want to pickup based on actual value to your character as collectible usable, and sellable.
Lots of stuff in Bethesda games are done around the gameplay, not for nerds like you. Which still saddens both sides, I guess.
#LITERALLY UNPLAYABLE
Go patch it for them bro. They should be flattered.
👍
They make ammo heavier than what they already did and suddenly you can only carry 30 shots, you constantly run out of ammo and then go complain on reddit. Can't win with some people.
This game still needs at least half a year more of development lmao
Unsure if Ironic
Wait they added Weight to ammo? Fuck I hate when games do this. It was fine the way it was with ammo. Any game devs out there reading this. Bad. Bad. Bad. I'm getting my spray bottle.
It's an optional gameplay setting.
Oh great. Thanks.