Some of my opinions

[MIST GHILLIE]

EDIT: I forgot to mention that I would like all the weapons in the game to be weaker not only the gnasher, in an attempt to raise the skill gap.


I have discussed these arguments in previous threads on the forums but I felt it warranted its own thread.

Before l say anything else I would like to say I am in favour of the reintroduction of the gnasher as the only loadout cqc weapon.
I see a lot of people on these forums say that the gnasher performs too well, be that overall performance or performance inside a specific range bracket or multiple range brackets, I am not one of these people. I believe the gnasher must have this strength in order to compete with the other cqc weapons in the game and to be balanced overall. People at this point are probably wondering why if I think the present system of weapons is mostly balanced why I am asking for such a change.

My dislike for the gnashers strength comes from a duelling perspective, what I personally want is a weak gnasher, this would make instant resolutions to cqc situations scarce, and duels more likely( as the weaker gnasher would make hard aiming down more scarce ), more skill based, longer and from a personal perspective more enjoyable.

The above paragraph is unreasonable in the present climate as the gnasher must compete with the other cqc weapons, hence the want for change.
A second reason as to why an area being swamped with lots of different loadout weapons is a bad thing is that it can lead to the introduction of RPS (rock paper scissors).This reduces the skill curve of the game it becomes more about the weapons in your and your opponents loadouts and less about you and your opponents skill with the weapons. Whereas with the gnasher being the only loadout cqc weapon every player is instantly aware of their equal cqc footing in almost any situation and it is the most skilled player who wins the gunfight.

People may debate that I am against varied playstyles, I assure you I am not. One weapon does not mean one playstyle consider the amount of ways the gnasher could be utilised in gears 1 and 2 there were many different playstyles wallbounce, airbounce, strafe the list is endless. And because they were all contained within one weapon you had access to them all at any given time(well, cover and over environmental factors would limit this accessibility). In gears 3 they split the cqc playstyles between 3 weapons and made each a specialist of a certain set of the styles eg (for hardaim from a distance the retro does best , for cq gibing the sawed off does best).Yes, these 2 new weapons mean there are more cqc playstyles overall but the system works more like this.

I have weapon X and my opponent has weapon Y so I must conform to a small set of cqc playstyles. Whereas where the gnasher is the only loadout cqc weapon the system works more like this. We’ve both got gnashers so we both have the whole arsenal cqc styles at our disposal. (This analogy assumes cover and environmental factors are neutral)

So whilst there may be more styles overall there are likely to be less in any given situation.

[MIST GHILLIE]

I havent recieved any responses to this thread but its getting late so I am going to bump and hope I will have some feedback come the morning.

[FullDiamond]

If the gnasher was weaker, gameplay would be slower and more rifle-centered.

Which is what people are already complaining about. It would be a poor decision to make the gnasher as a whole weaker, maybe the active, but def not everything about it.

[buffymitch]

I am not saying that the gansher should be stronger or weaker. I personally think Gears is a team based game and peopel should work together to win.

A more rifle based gameplay si not a bad thing in my mind. I persoanlly hate the fact that almost everybody runs around with a shotgun. Gnasher of sawed-off. It is the reason I never play MP online.

[DenyThisFlesh]

I am not saying that the gansher should be stronger or weaker. I personally think Gears is a team based game and peopel should work together to win.

A more rifle based gameplay si not a bad thing in my mind. I persoanlly hate the fact that almost everybody runs around with a shotgun. Gnasher of sawed-off. It is the reason I never play MP online.

I can understand that, but the rifles are much stronger now and can easily defeat shotgun users in many situations. If you play smart, people running around with shotguns shouldn't bother you.

As for the OP, I would also prefer the Gnasher being the only loadout CQC weapon. I don't think the Gnasher should be any weaker, except for the active reload boost and range. Those both need to be toned down. The base damage and one shot kill ability are both fine. I would also prefer having all shots use the same spread. No tightening of the spread for hard aim or pop shots.

[MIST GHILLIE]

If the gnasher was weaker, gameplay would be slower and more rifle-centered.

Which is what people are already complaining about. It would be a poor decision to make the gnasher as a whole weaker, maybe the active, but def not everything about it.

In all the times I proof read and checked the op I forgot to say that I want all weapons weaker...

[MIST GHILLIE]

I am not saying that the gansher should be stronger or weaker. I personally think Gears is a team based game and peopel should work together to win.

A more rifle based gameplay si not a bad thing in my mind. I persoanlly hate the fact that almost everybody runs around with a shotgun. Gnasher of sawed-off. It is the reason I never play MP online.

Everyone running around with shotguns, are you sure you havent been playing gears 1 or gears 2.Thats your experience and I cant deny or confirm it but the majority of the gears 3 games I get into are retro/lancer camp fests.

Gears because of its advanced cover system allows for wallbounce gnashering which is a unique gameplay mechanic and leads to really good duels. I would take dependance on this mechanic over a rifle dependant, incredibly generic, cod clone any day of the week.

In order to continue this conversation I need to know how much gears1/2/3 you have actually played.

[MIST GHILLIE]

As for the OP, I would also prefer the Gnasher being the only loadout CQC weapon. I don't think the Gnasher should be any weaker, except for the active reload boost and range. Those both need to be toned down. The base damage and one shot kill ability are both fine. I would also prefer having all shots use the same spread. No tightening of the spread for hard aim or pop shots.

The part about spread tightening, I agree
I did forget to mention that the weakening would be of all guns not just the gnasher so as to increase skill gap.
I think in the present climate the gnasher is fine it has to compete with 2 other guns so it needs to be quite powerful.
I would also like no active boost for any gun apart from faster reload.

[Doctor Pie 7056]

No no we need to nerf the range this won't work IMO

[MIST GHILLIE]

No no we need to nerf the range this won't work IMO

No offence but did you actually read the op, I said in there I wanted the gnasher to be weaker.