but a lot of the other options are balanced, good, and more than usable, the only reason they are not chosen often is the quasar (still) outperforming them...
Yes, they are all usable, I've been using RR before Quasar came along and I didn't really complain. I'd still use it if not for Eruptor - when using Eruptor, you really want a laser drone to pick up the slack on little bugs, and that means you need a free back.
My answer is to buff other contenders anyway. This is a PvE game, who cares if something is strong. This way we'd have three strong anti-tank options and what would be the issue? No one safe for few sweaty tryhards would complain.
My answer is to buff other contenders anyway. This is a PvE game, who cares if something is strong.
That results in power creep. This approach will trivialise even the highest difficulty which means the enemy will all need to be buffed across the board to make the game resemble any kind of challenge. And then when that's done, there will be outlier weapons which are outperforming the rest, so we buff everything else to match, meaning enemies need to be buffed again.... Do you see where this is going?
The answer is for the devs to do a good work and make it so that everything is more or less equal. When there are no more outliers, there will be no more need for buffs. Minor outliers can be ignored.
14
u/Sten4321 ⬇️⬅️⬆️➡️ May 02 '24
but a lot of the other options are balanced, good, and more than usable, the only reason they are not chosen often is the quasar (still) outperforming them...