Removal of Grenades from US Green Beret : Breacher

[Tora1 889]

+1 

In my personal opinion I'd rather have less grenades on the server. Adding more grenades would eventually turn the server into a explosion-fest and basically who ever has more nades win. Especially with redbulls playing a huge role in wars now, a person ( with redbull ) who can easily stack 10+ grenades can go to an objective throw a few nades, clear either the entire objective or a clear a good amount so others can push in then easily run to another objective and do the same thing. 

For those saying the breacher class will lose it's character due to the loss of grenades. Instead I'm suggesting to buff shotguns entirely, as of right now they're not reliable as the damage input is completely random etc. With a buff to shotguns not only would it increase everyone's range of weaponry that they could use, but It would also improve players game sense, overall aim etc. Instead of just relying on grenades which is as easy as holding M1 in a general direction of enemy's and letting go, instead It would teach players how to actually use the shotgun and properly play the role.  

[Arizona 169]

Maybe, just maybe, instead of removing the grenades you can just nerf them? Not sure if the CW 2.0 grenades can be changed stat wise, but since GB (used to be) a lower tier faction (not saying their skill level, just their ranking among seals DF and marsoc), you could just nerf their grenade damage, grenade stacks, grenade throw range, and splash damage. This could be very hard or very easy depending on how easy it is to switch stats on grenades, or ultimately not work at all. But it's worth a try at least 

[AlexConway 1,168]

2 hours ago, Frosty said:

This is not a "Buff Shotgun" suggestion - its a balancing suggesting that will even out both sides.

Yes because balance is removing the factions appeal and giving them a horrible shotgun and nothing else. That makes perfect sense! 

[Phantom 1,548]

So US has more factions than RU, more grenade class (6 slots minimum + however many people would play jugg), and more classes that already have more appeal than most RU classes considering players join the server thinking "I'm going to become a US Navy SEAL or a Green Beret." No one says "I'm going to become a Special Operations Forces member" from the start. Yet, most of what I see are people saying "Well since you are taking my grenades, what can you do to facilitate this loss in appeal." Makes them sound like entitled snobs. Your appeal is the fact that people join your country and even faction en masse because they know what it is. Let's completely forget the fact that RU automatically loses numbers and has a hard enough time recruiting that it needs the default spawn to be in their recruit room, which still results in US having more numbers. Let's also forget that with the tickrate increase (which was a good thing, better hit reg is always better) the SSO SMG firerate drastically decreased while it's equivalent, the SEAL MP5, only increased in firerate. I'm more impartial to the suggestion since I am the one who accepts/denies it, but just looking objectively here, it seems that US mains in general have closed their eyes to the rest of the server and only think "Me Me Me" in more ways than one. Honestly, the comments that are just looking for the benefit of US instead of looking for the benefit of the server as whole will just be overlooked and won't really get a say in the overall opinion of the thread. And don't take this as "Phantom is only taking RU opinions on this, that's biased." That's not what I'm doing, I didn't say I won't take US opinions into account, but those who have the opinion of "What can you do for me since you are 'nerfing' me more than I can stand to handle" will not really make their way into the decision process. 

Edited September 12, 2018 by Phantom

[Tayler 395]

32 minutes ago, Phantom said:

So US has more factions than RU

Is the third country still in circulation? Because honestly RU could probably just take a third SOC (the frogmen) which as far as I know is actually accepted but put on "standby" for if RU ever needs it.

[Apple 3]

Lets say that the grenades for green beret actually do get removed. The only thing left on breacher is a terrible shotgun. We don't get all/the same attachments as the RU one. There would be no point in keeping the class that way, since you can get the same class way easier in army than in Green Beret. (no offense) Seals rarely use their grenade class while Green Beret use it every war. At first, people were complaining that no one in GB used the class but as soon as we started using it, more people complained about it. If you do get rid of the grenades for our class, I suggest adding something to replace it. Green Beret wouldn't have a specialty anymore and we wouldn't be a proper SOC faction (we are a soc faction). If you are complaining that US has way more numbers than RU so we shouldn't use breacher since its not necessary, then let us know. We will get off the class if its not needed, but if there is a class that counters us like RPG, then we will keep at least 1 person on the class. I understand its kind of hard finding a perfect balance between everyone so im trying not to offend anyone in any way. Im just stating my opinion on this issue (even though it doesn't really matter). If you want to try something, let us only play with the shitty shotgun for a war and see how "balanced it would be". You can slo lower the amount of nades you can hold. Currently it is at 7. Lower it down to 2 or 3 kind of giving it that call of duty feel.

Edited September 12, 2018 by Apple

[Apple 3]

(Bad Post/Removed)

Edited September 12, 2018 by Apple

[Jesus 67]

This may need to be a separate suggestion thread for this to be considered, and the wording might not make sense, but if Breacher grenades are removed, just remove the class. Removing grenades will basically turn Breacher into Demolition on 2GA and just be really unappealing if we have donor weapons on us.

That being said, if Breacher nades are removed, it needs to be replaced with a totally different type of combat. I know DF is the long range class, and SEALS are mostly CQC, but GB will need a new appeal if the "precious" grenades are removed. I think most of GB would be pretty happy if they became a mid to long range faction and would gladly give up grenades for that. Even if it is similar to DF, the current GB is very similar to SEALS. So either way, not everything will be unique.

 

Again, i'm just hypothesizing, but the point is, i'd support removing grenades if its guaranteed that GB's combat range will receive an overhaul and we get a new class.

[Shrugger 48]

6 minutes ago, Talenti Lid said:

This may need to be a separate suggestion thread for this to be considered, and the wording might not make sense, but if Breacher grenades are removed, just remove the class. Removing grenades will basically turn Breacher into Demolition on 2GA and just be really unappealing if we have donor weapons on us.

That being said, if Breacher nades are removed, it needs to be replaced with a totally different type of combat. I know DF is the long range class, and SEALS are mostly CQC, but GB will need a new appeal if the "precious" grenades are removed. I think most of GB would be pretty happy if they became a mid to long range faction and would gladly give up grenades for that. Even if it is similar to DF, the current GB is very similar to SEALS. So either way, not everything will be unique.

 

Again, i'm just hypothesizing, but the point is, i'd support removing grenades if its guaranteed that GB's combat range will receive an overhaul and we get a new class.

Honestly if they replaced the SEAL Tactical grenades with flashbangs or vice versa, i'm sure no one will complain.

[Lex_ 506]

Rather than the removal of just grenades, why not just completely remove the Breacher class from GB? Or go with what Shrugger has just mentioned about giving SEALS flashbangs instead. Or whatever other suggestion someone may come up with. I'm not -1'ing or +1'ing since it doesn't affect me personally (but will affect my other GB mates) and because I believe that simply removing grenades is not a solution to the problem. If you want balancing on the server then you need to understand there is more to it than just removing a grenade class. The AEK is almost as good as the M95 at long range. In fact, the AEK has the stats and capability of getting RNG that allows a player to constantly jump and get a lucky one-tap headshot around a corner; something not possible with any other guns to my knowledge. SMGs in general (except for the SEAL MP5) are all messed up because of the tickrate being highered. And I understand the importance that is balancing for RU. You guys are still outnumbered (although it is much less now, as more often than not both sides are equal in total numbers) even after setting the default class to RU recruit. US has more classes (since US has more factions total because of our numbers).

[Frosty 89]

5 hours ago, Alex Conway said:

Yes because balance is removing the factions appeal and giving them a horrible shotgun and nothing else. That makes perfect sense! 

Obviously you don't understand what type of balance this is, not to be rude. This isn't about the faction being balanced - that can be fixed in a separate suggestion. This is RU v. US balance.

[PrisonNightmare 741]

+1

I'm not the smartest/most knowledgeable when it comes to these things, especially since I don't get on very often but from what I've see in this thread RU does have a good point. Ever since the new map change I think less people have been joining the RU side (Although it has gone up a bit since the default job when people first join was set to RU Recruit, still isn't perfect though), and that added onto the fact US has more SOC factions than RU (Which I never understood why) there does need to be some nerfing in some way for US. I don't think it will affect anything too major gameplay during war wise, so I think this is a good idea to try to balance out the disadvantage RU has when it comes to wars. I may be wrong, but this is what I think from what I know as of now.

[Cypher 72]

8 hours ago, Frosty said:

DF = All-Around.

Just to add DF is not all around, it's recon. Atleast that's what i've been told from Phantom & Garnut

[Arizona 169]

6 minutes ago, [GG] Cypher said:

Just to add DF is not all around, it's recon. Atleast that's what i've been told from Phantom & Garnut

We have recon weapons as well 

[Lucher 199]

I have an idea for this.

How about we do what shrugger says and give the Seals Flashbangs or Concussions, or anything that stuns the enemy.

 

How can we appeal the unbalance between one tactical & one lethal on US vs the one lethal on RU?

Give a tactical grenade to GRU to balance it out, or Vega, either one works really.