This is an expansion of this explanation on the current thread that I've raised here:

https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=99917

But this isn't feedback - it's an inquiry as to whether or not the Flaylock Pistol should have been nerfed now that we have more information.

Essentially what it boils down to is that Splash Damage isn't affected by shield/armor resistance - so it's going to do it's full damage no matter what. A standard mass driver does 116 splash damage, and to shields it -should- do around 80 (-70%) but it is fully capable of doing full damage.

So, that being said, when you look at the old stats (and the new stats) of the Flaylock Pistols in regards to Direct/Splash damage we actually come to find that it does -MORE- Splash Damage than Direct Damage, meaning that for every 'near miss' the player was actually doing more damage than if he were aiming directly at his target.

Standard Variant Pre-1.3 Balance Pass (Example)

Direct: 218 -/- Shield damage: 152.6
Spash: 195 -/- Shield damage (theoretical): 136.5

Now what this also means is that while a direct shot would do more damage to Armor (explosive weaponry) splash damage would not, it would retain it's normal damage.

So, considering this, what do you think? Was the Flaylock Pistol actually well balanced by design but flawed because of this bug or was it a good thing that the balance occurred?

Personally, I still feel that the balance pass was entirely necessary and that even if the splash damage bug was fixed at the time it would have still out-performed many other alternatives because it would have actually been doing more damage to armor than what it already was.

Dude....... just let it go.

It was absolutely necessary being a armor tanker was like being Hell when that (SIDEARM) was op

Not the weapon's fault, armor tanking on dropsuits just sucks lol

This is an expansion of this explanation on the current thread that I've raised here:

https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=99917

But this isn't feedback - it's an inquiry as to whether or not the Flaylock Pistol should have been nerfed now that we have more information.

Essentially what it boils down to is that Splash Damage isn't affected by shield/armor resistance - so it's going to do it's full damage no matter what. A standard mass driver does 116 splash damage, and to shields it -should- do around 80 (-70%) but it is fully capable of doing full damage.

So, that being said, when you look at the old stats (and the new stats) of the Flaylock Pistols in regards to Direct/Splash damage we actually come to find that it does -MORE- Splash Damage than Direct Damage, meaning that for every 'near miss' the player was actually doing more damage than if he were aiming directly at his target.

Standard Variant Pre-1.3 Balance Pass (Example)

Direct: 218 -/- Shield damage: 152.6
Spash: 195 -/- Shield damage (theoretical): 136.5

Now what this also means is that while a direct shot would do more damage to Armor (explosive weaponry) splash damage would not, it would retain it's normal damage.

So, considering this, what do you think? Was the Flaylock Pistol actually well balanced by design but flawed because of this bug or was it a good thing that the balance occurred?

Personally, I still feel that the balance pass was entirely necessary and that even if the splash damage bug was fixed at the time it would have still out-performed many other alternatives because it would have actually been doing more damage to armor than what it already was.

It doesn't matter anymore.
Its first sin was its simplicity in practice. It made every DS user as good as a Mouser.
Its second sin was, though easy to avoid, it was too easy to fit so -easy to spam.
Its third sin was that it was explosive. Forums hate explosives.
There were reams and reams of data of both sides of the issue.
The forums have decided that it was OP.

Long live the pillow fighters. Hail AR-514.

Hey Aeon did you also know that for a direct hit in dust they add the direct dmg together with the splash dmg? So the proto flaylock for a direct hit did 480 dmg (not including any bonus or negative dmg).

the 'nerf' only made the flaylock a really good weapon, before it was instakill. If your KDR didnt quadruple for every day that you used a flaylock, then you sir, are garbage.

The Flaylock nerf doesn't really seem that bad. I still see players use effectively.

Did agree after I talked to some people that it was OP. But damage wise. They nerfed the radius now aything below the core sucks. It's pretty hard to get a direct hit and most if the time I've noticed it doesn't registere a lot. Probably due to the hit detection. I think they shouldn't had touched the ammo and radius. before i was nerfed I used to aim it at people, now that doesn't seem to work. Most of the time it flies right passed them or doesn't even do damage so I've using smg lately and I've gotten very good with it that I use it as my main lol. Maybe that'll get nerfed also

I believe ALL explosive guns should make the user focus on the direct hit. Making a gun do massive damage on splash is IMO foolish. You should not want the user to focus on splash damage. The splash damage should be there as a small bonus for missing the direct shot and still doing damage. I don't agree with most of these explosive weapons having so much splash damage that awards the user for concentrating mostly on splash damage. Other wise why have direct damage at all.

Hey Aeon did you also know that for a direct hit in dust they add the direct dmg together with the splash dmg? So the proto flaylock for a direct hit did 480 dmg (not including any bonus or negative dmg).

Do you have evidence to back this claim up? I have no reason to believe it being as I have heard of it maybe once before and there was no evidence behind it either.

Well the only evidence you can present is the dmg is does to enemies. A single direct hit from the flaylock will insta kill almost every armored heavy (assuming they have no shields). The direct dmg before the latest patch only did enough dmg to maybe do 300 dmg. But heavies start with more armor than 300......a direct hit from the flaylock actually did 600 dmg against armor before the nerf and the only way to get that much dmg in one shot is to add the direct dmg and the splash dmg together.

Plus this is how the MD works.......in testing out the MD myself a direct hit will insta kill most of the enemies you face. The only way for that to be true (especially at standard lvl) is to add the direct dmg and splash dmg together.

Well the only evidence you can present is the dmg is does to enemies. A single direct hit from the flaylock will insta kill almost every armored heavy (assuming they have no shields). The direct dmg before the latest patch only did enough dmg to maybe do 300 dmg. But heavies start with more armor than 300......a direct hit from the flaylock actually did 600 dmg against armor before the nerf and the only way to get that much dmg in one shot is to add the direct dmg and the splash dmg together.

Plus this is how the MD works.......in testing out the MD myself a direct hit will insta kill most of the enemies you face. The only way for that to be true (especially at standard lvl) is to add the direct dmg and splash dmg together.

It's a grenade launcher. Grenades mostly kill due to splash damage. Well let's take it real world. Grenades mostly kill due to the shock waves it creates. Not because a direct hit. And still direct hits with a mass driver is very hard, especially since hit detectionis soooo bad. Like how the shot gun doesn't register at times. Because now the flaylock even the direct damage got nerfed. When already getting a direct hit is pretty much hard. Tbh its not hsrd to counter explosives, I've done it many times against proto mass driver's while I only own a level 3 mass driver. I tend to switch to assault rifle and pick him off at a distance.