I do not get the point of your first sentence.

I agree that a bigger arc would also be beneficial for that role (It's pretty flat right now, but not impossible to shoot on top of platforms or above low obstacles). As is, it would be pointless though, because it would still be a waste of ammunition not to simply shoot it at targets right in front of you.

My point is that you hold out the ability to strike over cover as a large enough benefit that it should trade away its defining characteristic of confusion and disorientation for it, when in fact it is minuscule.

If you think that the current arc facilitates shooting over cover you haven't been using it long.

Define scrub without using Google. What you use? An assault rifle?
Forgot the assault rifles requires skill.


Oh wait.....



1.4lolaimassist.

No you misunderstood, I said that this would make a more interesting role for the MD, but it would require some tweaks to make it viable (I mentioned this in my concrete suggestions, which you didn't quote). Right now the MD can fill that role to some extend, but I completely agree that it wouldn't be feasible as is.

I'm not saying "nerf the close combat capabilities and it will become a viable long range / area denial weapon", I'm saying "nerf the close combat capabilities and then increase it's power to make it a more viable long range / area denial weapon". Then it would do what I'd expect a grenade launcher to do, and it certainly would require more tactical gameplay than "get close to a target and start spamming".

That said, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with keeping it as it is. It might require a few tweaks to keep it in line, but it doesn't seem too far off. However, in that case it's not ever going to be a weapon that requires a ton of skill to use effectively. Even a shotgun is far more hit and miss. And it should go without saying that a weapon that is a lot more forgivable than others (not to mention resistant towards lag issues) cannot be at the top of the power curve without causing significant balance problems in the long term.

Ah, I misunderstood you incorrectly...

I maintain that without the confusion aspect it wouldn't be an area denial weapon at any range. People would just rush or tank it and get through. The longer the range the easier that task would be as it takes several seconds to lob a round at maximum range.

It's a challenge and great fun to fire at long range, but I couldn't run it as a logi if that were all it was good for. With no sidearm it would mean zero protection in mid to close ranges where I might be trying to play medic. Basically it would become some sort of long-range artillery weapon that relies upon luck for a kill.

And let's face it, there really isn't any need for area denial at the moment. This game is all about slaying and KDR.
Yes, on occasion I'll try to position myself such that I can scare the enemy away from an objective (usually up on a building top), but it doesn't take long before a sniper or FG chases me off.

And there is the ignorant reply I referred to at the bottom of my opening post.

Had you bothered to read the actual post itself, you will see I had noted that damage from the MD was not, in any way shape or form, the problem. Good job making yourself look stupid, though.

You forget that Explosives deal 130% damage to Armor.


So that 100 would be 130. That 150 would be 195.


You could totally take down a heavy with 6 to 8 shots.

Here's a novel idea: Stop complaining about the MD until AFTER the armor buff. My feeling is that it will even out a lot of the issues people have with it. It has already been stated that armor will be buffed, so why bother wasting the 18th wall of text to complain about an anti-armor weapon until we see how a significant and known forthcoming adjustment affects things?

Buff armor plox.