Minigun & Flamethrower Comparison

[SashaGryg]

it does not suck. it s still cool weapon

[BiTzSam]

Nice font use =)
Anyways, I agree, GA's do need to make up their mind before releasing the gun

It was 3 dam when released and was only buffed because of the people who bought it saying how bad it was on forums. Minigun is still good just not ridiculously OP, but like I said more of the reason why it was nerfed was because of the problems created from more than 1 person using the mini against you, if mini was a limited gun the 5 damage perfect would have been fine.
Also I would have kept the 5 damage if the slow movement stayed, instead everyone wanted it gone so I removed the timer so it doesn't affect you when you stop shooting and reduced the damage.
People should realise by now that every change I make is a compromise, if something gets removed/ buffed something will get added/nerfed

- - - Updated - - -

When the mini gun was first released the stats r damage 4 in perfect stacks , no slowdown , no recoil

And they buffed it to damage 5 stacks when perfect with recoil , no slowdown (which was ridiculously op ) they did this to make players buy packs since it's all about business

And bam they nurfed it to Damage 4 when perfect "no stacking ",slows u down when shooting and no recoil ( which made mini gun a piece af crap )

R.I.P packers XD

It still does stacked damage, buffing guns after release isn't a 'money making tactic'. As rec and I don't get paid we couldn't care less how much money unixmad gets from guns, if a change is made it is to create more room for balance

[Meph]

Yeah, every gun should undergo appropriate testing phases prior to release, to avoid this kind of mishap.
In the case of the minigun though, I somewhat give some leeway on this rule.

People are really quick to attack the GA's in situations like this.
I must stick up for my own.
You really have to put yourself in their position to understand the progression that the MiniGun underwent.

I think that, even Bitzsam knew the gun he was releasing didn't fit the mold with the other guns.
Bottom line: The goal was to make a gun with an extremely high fire rate.
Any time you release a gun with an above-average stat (such as the fire rate), it's common practice to give it a vulnerability with another stat to compensate.

Typically speaking, the counter for a high fire rate is mobility.
So the idea is, "Yeah, it has superior spamming abilities, but upon spamming, you will be met with a decrease in mobility."

The problem was that, at the time of the MiniGun's release, iEra didn't have the ability to separate freeze and fire rate.
So, if they wanted to have a high fire rate, they had to give it an extremely low freeze. They had no option at the time.

So now they had to compensate for not only a high RoF, but a low freeze. The only option they had then was to give it extremely low damage and a long reload.
Then, to amplify the gun's spamming abilities(and justify the 200k pricetag now that it had low damage), they had the bullets stack, and gave it a high clip capacity.

So Bitzsam's hands were tied.
One one hand, he had players and staff encouraging him to make more edgy guns.
On the other, he had the responsibility as the Guns Admin to make sure it didn't underpower or overpower the other guns in the price range.
At the same time, he had the restrictions highlighted above.

I'd wager that, when he released that gun, even he wasn't satisfied with it.
But by the powers that be, that was the best he could do at the time.

As more people purchased the gun, more complaints came through about exactly what he had anticipated(and probably even feared).
The low damage wasn't enough of a compensation.
MiniGun users has little to no penalty for spamming their gun, and at the same time, the bullets were stacking.

So he went back to the drawing board.
Got with a couple scripters, got recoil added to iEra, and applied it to the gun.
Now it had at least a slight vulnerability upon firing.
In fear of negative reception to this change, he upped the damage +1.

The complaints continued to pour through.
The spammability on this gun simply wasn't being addressed enough by the vulnerabilities in play, and the increased damage added insult to injury.
So once again, he got with the scripters to find an alternative.

This time, the alternative was to lower the walk speed while the user was firing.
That way, the user can spam, but when they do, they'll be vulnerable to bullets.
I think I speak for Bitzsam when I say, this is exactly what he was looking for the whole time.
(Hell- when I was a GA, this is exactly what I was looking for to address spamming.)

And while it took a couple attempts to get it right, I think the end result is perfect.
It addresses the issue of spamming with it, nothing else.

TLDR:
The gun's a kickass tapfire gun.
I've been seeing posts lately saying that "The BAR can run circles around the MiniGun"
That's bull. The MiniGun has more mobility than the BAR, if you use it correctly.
If you tapfire the MiniGun, you'll run circles around BAR users. Period.

The only people I could foresee complaining are those who want to spam their way to victory.
To that, I first ask you to examine what you're doing:
You're holding down the fire button, and maneuvering your character to trap your opponent with the MiniGun's superior RoF and stacked bullets.
Do you really deserve to win using this technique?

Hell no. Victory takes effort, chump. Stop trying to pray-and-spray your way to victory, and put in work.
Replace that "strategy" by tactically dodging bullets, timing your shots, and moving in a way that both can be best utilized.

On the matter of Minigun VS Flamethrower:
I honestly think the Flamethrower should have a similar vulnerability in movement while spamming.
Hell- I think all spamming guns should have this vulnerability.
Spamming should have consequences, regardless of what gun you're using.

[Simplest]

I cant be asked to read mephs post but i know its right anuways cx

[b418smitten]

its only $100 iTunes

[Rezzy Graal]

Meph,what you're saying is a GA will nerf a specific gun's stats after receiving complains about it right? Players always talk loads of crap after losing a spar battle against another player with a gun that they MIGHT not have so they want it nerfed,In the first place,Guns shouldn't be touched on after released as they paid for the stats and not some re-balanced baloney

[Meph]

Meph,what you're saying is a GA will nerf a specific gun's stats after receiving complains about it right? Players always talk loads of crap after losing a spar battle against another player with a gun that they MIGHT not have so they want it nerfed,In the first place,Guns shouldn't be touched on after released as they paid for the stats and not some re-balanced baloney

First off, I don't personally think the GA should have to nerf guns.
I think they should get it right the first time, as I've mentioned before:

That’s the whole idea behind the title ‘Gun Admin’.
It’s not a position of somebody that just sits behind a RC and blindly alters variables.

It’s a position for an individual that takes all play styles into consideration, and in the testing phases, takes the time to applicate the gun in all venues.
Realistically, a Guns Admin is supposed to be 90% player. They spend most of their time playing the game(sparring, basing, PKing) so that they can make the appropriate calls on stats, and get it right the first time.

As I stated in my earlier post in this thread, the restrictions on gun stats that were present upon the MiniGun's release bestowed an excuse for failure.
So in that event, (or any event where a gun is changed), I personally feel that refunds should be an option.
Again, I quote a previous post to save myself some typing:

Please note that these are my personal opinions, and in no way does this reflect Era's staff team's stance on this matter.

In the circumstance of guns being altered, I absolutely endorse the option to refund.

It only makes sense- a person puts up bread for a product as it was when they purchased it.
It's like approving a head upload, drawing a mustache on it a week later, and not giving the player the option to refund it.

Whether we think we're improving it or nerfing it is irrelevant. This decision should be solely up to the person who purchased it.

Everybody benefits from allowing refunds; and I say this both as a player and as a Gun Admin.
The Gun Admin is given the freedom to modify guns how they see fit, and they aren't stuck sweeping a previous GA's mistakes under the rug.
And players aren't stuck biting the bullet when guns are adjusted to promote a more skill-based game.

Plus, I fail to see where nobody loses from this-- it's not like they're going to convert the money back into dollars.
They take that money and purchase another gun on our game. What's wrong with that?

The only conditions I would present are:

• Refunds can only be offered to those who had the gun prior to the change.
• Refunds can only happen once per each gun alteration.
• Refunds are irreversible. By refunding, you assume full responsibility for losing your gun or spending your money elsewhere. You understand that if the gun is changed back to the way it was previously after you refund, you reserve no right to complain.

Quoted Sources:
Era-Go Thread: "We all know minigun got nerfed but"
Era-Go Thread: "Issues With Gun Nerfing And Why Refunds SHOULD Take Place"

[xpiazer]

First was bar, now its minigun... running out of gun options to go against people with flamethrower.

[John J]

I'm pretty sure what Meph said was right. Refunds can fix this whole situation and take heat off the GA's back for good. Instead they continue to endure it which is making them do bad decisions and trying to fix them so they can make era more "balanced" which is really just making more players upset. It's my opinion, but the problem will not go away until something is changed.

[taka]

Oh so they added back the stack ok then I don't see why people complaining XD
after all the buffs and nurfs the only difference is the slow down part eh pretty nice , I think the stats now r balanced