Can the M4 Carbine please be made not garbage.

[Knight]

So for anyone who has spent sometime either in game testing different weapons or on the range, you may have noticed something odd. While the M4 Carbine has 66 "Firepower" which you are led to believe this numerical value is a summary of a weapon's statistical values like rate of fire, reload speed, mag capacity, and of course the damage the weapon deals on a per shot basis I want to bring some exposure to a very disheartening fact. When comparing the M4 with it's 66 Firepower to say the Scar with it's 72 Firepower, based on these numbers, how do you expect the M4 to perform? Do you expect it to sport higher rate of fire mag capacity and maybe 20% less bullet damage? 10%? maybe even 30? No, the M4 has an insanely awful 50% lower bullet damage, you will have to shoot enemies 50% more to get the same effect as the Scar, with a very similar rate of fire. The M4 currently has the same bullet damage as the M9... I was hoping they would fix this very obvious issue with this weapon, as it lags behind the others of it's class by miles after Beta. But I have the suspicion that between the misleading firepower stat, and the typical love for this weapon type, it was not being picked up a low enough number of times throughout testing to warrant being looked at. So here I am, looking to expose a very serious balance issue with this weapon, maybe it leads to this being fixed. If you read this and often choose to spec for assault rifles or lmgs, pick up a compensator and use literally anything that is not this trash gun. Your team's ammo stock will thank you for not burning it away every half mission.

[Jammin]

as a general rule i dont pick up an m4 unless it has single shot capability. Ive had pretty good luck with it and depending on what mods you get for it, and what deck you are running it can be quite good.

[Knight]

Whatever attachments you find whatever cards you play, the Scar will put out 50% more damage per bullet and perform just by the numbers better. I can put attachments on that make the Scar as accurate, I can put attachments on that give me more bullets in the mag, there is nothing you can do that will close the 50% base damage gap between these two weapons, or make the M4 ammo efficient in comparison to absolutely any other option. You can use the MP5, and at close range before damage fall off, have the exact same base damage as the M4, while spending a far more available ammo type. You can deal the same damage per bullet as the M4 with the M9 at close range, The Vector has more base damage, the UMP has more base damage, the Uzi has the same base damage, the only difference again, effective range. The Scar deals 50% more damage per bullet for 5 rounds in the magazine, more recoil and a small difference in fire rate, The AK slightly worse at 40% more base damage, the M249 deals 30% more base damage, more mag capacity more recoil etc. This is not ok, there is no way you can look at those numbers and say it is ok for the numbers to stay as they are, These are factual numbers, this is not just an opinion piece here.

[HoboBobulus]

It's a starter weapon. Like the rest of the starters, it's meant to be bad on purpose. The m4, the uzi, the bat, and the 870 express are all strictly inferior to the other weapons of the same class. IMO the only starter that competes with its upgrades is the M1A.

[Dusty!]

In a game where ammo matters the high fire rate guns are all bad. RPK is the best assault rifle followed by SCAR.

The concept of "starter guns," is retarded since you are supposed to advance attachments, not the guns themselves.

[Knight]

See the problem with that is the M4 isn’t better for hordes, it’s not better for anything. The Scar can very easily stack enough damage to kill commons with one body shot, the M4 cannot do this, you will spend 40 bullets of its 25 round magazine doing what the Scar does with its 20. As for the starting guns all being bad this is both true and untrue, The Bat is not a bad melee weapon by any stretch of the imagination because unlike the M4 it is actually extremely useful for hordes while going entirely stamina neutral utilizing Holy+Adrenaline Fueled, The Axe kills mutations, the Bat clears hordes, the Machete sits in between. The Uzi is the worst sub machine gun but it’s base damage is still the same as the laughable M4 with a higher rof. The 870 Express has the second highest base damage per pellet of the main slot shotguns meaning if built with reload speed (which makes you pump quicker) It becomes a lot more ammo efficient with better range then either of the other shotguns. The m9 the base pistol which is a sidearm and by this logic meant to be bad does the same bullet damage range aside as the M4 so even if we were to assume starter guns are intentionally bad, The M4 is the worst of all starters when compared to any other starter as well as other weapons of its class, this weapon is pure and simply lagging behind the pack. The pack being, any other weapon in this game. If we say well run more ammo perks.. this is just wrong too, instead of playing cards to make a bad gun playable just play a good gun and run more damage cards instead. The misleading icing on the cake is the incredibly flawed math behind the “Firepower” stat, people are picking this thing up thinking how all the other numbers go up and firepower only drops 6 points, surely that’s worth it. They don’t expect those 6 points to mean a difference of 50% damage on a per bullet basis. The firepower stat feels like an oversimplification for journalists or it was designed by someone who does not play video games.

[Bo Bandy]

Formatting is your friend

[Stryker]

M4 needs high damage, and bullet penetration to balance its low rate of fire and ammo size. I usually swap it out for the uzi right away till i get an automatic rifle.

[Dude Justice]

Originally posted by Knight:

See the problem with that is the M4 isn’t better for hordes, it’s not better for anything. The Scar can very easily stack enough damage to kill commons with one body shot, the M4 cannot do this, you will spend 40 bullets of its 25 round magazine doing what the Scar does with its 20. As for the starting guns all being bad this is both true and untrue, the Uzi is the worst sub machine gun but it’s base damage is still the same as the laughable M4 with a higher rof. The 870 Express has the second highest base damage per pellet of the main slot shotguns meaning if built with reload speed (which makes you pump quicker) It becomes a lot more ammo efficient with better range then either of the other shotguns. The m9 the base pistol which is a sidearm and by this logic meant to be bad does the same bullet damage range aside as the M4 so even if we were to assume starter guns are intentionally bad, The M4 is the worst of all starters when compared to any other starter as well as other weapons of its class, this weapon is pure and simply lagging behind the pack. The pack being, any other weapon in this game. If we say well run more ammo perks.. this is just wrong too, instead of playing cards to make a bad gun playable just play a good gun and run more damage cards instead.

I've used it plenty of times with one of my decks designed to get precision damage and buff with jim getting headshots. It holds more ammo than the scar, I find it to be more versatile with my mutation killing deck than the scar because of that, and with bullet pen I can sweep hordes that surround me. They have different uses, scar shoots too slow and has a small magazine which is why I don't use it.

[Dusty!]

The guns are unrealistic to their real life counterparts; not complaining, just stating. The Ranch rifle fires a .223 round, which is weaker than the SCARs .308 and should kick less, but it's the opposite. I get the aesthetic of the ranch is that of a battle rifle and people think the SCAR is an assault rifle when it's a battle rifle, but still. The m1a can be chambered in 6.5 creedmoor but 99% of them are chambered in .308 (7.62x51 NATO, not 7.62x39 ak47 round) the same exact round as the SCAR, but the m1a is considered a sniper while the SCAR is considered an assault rifle.

[Dude Justice]

Originally posted by Feng!:

I'd also like to state the balance is all over the place. The Ranch rifle fires a .223 round, which is weaker than the SCARs .308 and should kick less, but it's the opposite. I get the aesthic of the ranch is that of a battle rifle and people think the SCAR is an assault rifle when it's a battle rifle, but still. The m1a can be chambered in 6.5 creedmore but 99% of them are chambered in .308, the same exact round as the SCAR, but the m1a is considered a sniper while the SCAR is considered an assault rifle.

Don't try to bring too much realism into a zombie horde shooter with rpg-lite elements as point of balance, that just doesn't make sense dude. There's a card that makes you reload more bullets into a magazine if you time your reload properly, gears of war style. There's loads of totally unrealistic things about this game if the zombies themselves weren't enough to prove that.

[Knight]

Originally posted by Dude Justice ( ͡ʘ ͜ʖ ͡ʘ):

Originally posted by Knight:

See the problem with that is the M4 isn’t better for hordes, it’s not better for anything. The Scar can very easily stack enough damage to kill commons with one body shot, the M4 cannot do this, you will spend 40 bullets of its 25 round magazine doing what the Scar does with its 20. As for the starting guns all being bad this is both true and untrue, the Uzi is the worst sub machine gun but it’s base damage is still the same as the laughable M4 with a higher rof. The 870 Express has the second highest base damage per pellet of the main slot shotguns meaning if built with reload speed (which makes you pump quicker) It becomes a lot more ammo efficient with better range then either of the other shotguns. The m9 the base pistol which is a sidearm and by this logic meant to be bad does the same bullet damage range aside as the M4 so even if we were to assume starter guns are intentionally bad, The M4 is the worst of all starters when compared to any other starter as well as other weapons of its class, this weapon is pure and simply lagging behind the pack. The pack being, any other weapon in this game. If we say well run more ammo perks.. this is just wrong too, instead of playing cards to make a bad gun playable just play a good gun and run more damage cards instead.

I've used it plenty of times with one of my decks designed to get precision damage and buff with jim getting headshots. It holds more ammo than the scar, I find it to be more versatile with my mutation killing deck than the scar because of that, and with bullet pen I can sweep hordes that surround me. They have different uses, scar shoots too slow and has a small magazine which is why I don't use it.

Originally posted by Dude Justice ( ͡ʘ ͜ʖ ͡ʘ):

Originally posted by Knight:

See the problem with that is the M4 isn’t better for hordes, it’s not better for anything. The Scar can very easily stack enough damage to kill commons with one body shot, the M4 cannot do this, you will spend 40 bullets of its 25 round magazine doing what the Scar does with its 20. As for the starting guns all being bad this is both true and untrue, the Uzi is the worst sub machine gun but it’s base damage is still the same as the laughable M4 with a higher rof. The 870 Express has the second highest base damage per pellet of the main slot shotguns meaning if built with reload speed (which makes you pump quicker) It becomes a lot more ammo efficient with better range then either of the other shotguns. The m9 the base pistol which is a sidearm and by this logic meant to be bad does the same bullet damage range aside as the M4 so even if we were to assume starter guns are intentionally bad, The M4 is the worst of all starters when compared to any other starter as well as other weapons of its class, this weapon is pure and simply lagging behind the pack. The pack being, any other weapon in this game. If we say well run more ammo perks.. this is just wrong too, instead of playing cards to make a bad gun playable just play a good gun and run more damage cards instead.

I've used it plenty of times with one of my decks designed to get precision damage and buff with jim getting headshots. It holds more ammo than the scar, I find it to be more versatile with my mutation killing deck than the scar because of that, and with bullet pen I can sweep hordes that surround me. They have different uses, scar shoots too slow and has a small magazine which is why I don't use it.

The magazine is not small it is 20% less, M4 hits 50% less damage for 20% magazine capacity, there is no world this is valuable vs. the alternatives, If you want magazine capacity use the M249, It has more capacity and 30% more base damage a bullet. A good damage deck is not exclusive to the M4. Running the same cards every weapon in it’s category outperforms it or is able to play better cards due to higher raw damage.

[Doktor Kaputt]

The 20 mag of the scar suggests its the 7.62 version.
Of course that would be much more powerful.

[Dude Justice]

Originally posted by Knight:

Originally posted by Dude Justice ( ͡ʘ ͜ʖ ͡ʘ):

I've used it plenty of times with one of my decks designed to get precision damage and buff with jim getting headshots. It holds more ammo than the scar, I find it to be more versatile with my mutation killing deck than the scar because of that, and with bullet pen I can sweep hordes that surround me. They have different uses, scar shoots too slow and has a small magazine which is why I don't use it.

Originally posted by Dude Justice ( ͡ʘ ͜ʖ ͡ʘ):

I've used it plenty of times with one of my decks designed to get precision damage and buff with jim getting headshots. It holds more ammo than the scar, I find it to be more versatile with my mutation killing deck than the scar because of that, and with bullet pen I can sweep hordes that surround me. They have different uses, scar shoots too slow and has a small magazine which is why I don't use it.

The magazine is not small it is 20% less, The hits 50% less damage for 20% magazine capacity, there is no world this is valuable vs. the alternatives, If you want magazine capacity use the M249, It has more capacity and 30% more base damage a bullet. A good damage deck is not exclusive to the M4. Running the same cards every weapon it’s category outperforms it or is able to play better cards due to higher raw damage.

I've used it plenty and it works fine and I prefer it, I generally do well with it. The m249 takes forever to reload dude, I wouldn't use that gun over anything else at the moment, I might tinker with an lmg style deck later but that's just not my style. I realize my deck isn't exclusive to the m4, I've found I perform just fine with the m4 with my deck because the damage difference is negligible once I can one shot every zombie around me and have more ammo in the mag.

I like the scar too, but I find myself doing better with the m4 because of the things it does better than the scar, like the things I already said which you haven't really acknowledged. You throwing numbers out and ignoring what I've said doesn't make you more believable or make me change my opinion; I guess I can try the other ARs out again but I doubt I'll start using them often.

[Knight]

Originally posted by Dude Justice ( ͡ʘ ͜ʖ ͡ʘ):

Originally posted by Knight:

The magazine is not small it is 20% less, The hits 50% less damage for 20% magazine capacity, there is no world this is valuable vs. the alternatives, If you want magazine capacity use the M249, It has more capacity and 30% more base damage a bullet. A good damage deck is not exclusive to the M4. Running the same cards every weapon it’s category outperforms it or is able to play better cards due to higher raw damage.

I've used it plenty and it works fine and I prefer it, I generally do well with it. The m249 takes forever to reload dude, I wouldn't use that gun over anything else at the moment, I might tinker with an lmg style deck later but that's just not my style. I realize my deck isn't exclusive to the m4, I've found I perform just fine with the m4 with my deck because the damage difference is negligible once I can one shot every zombie around me and have more ammo in the mag.

I like the scar too, but I find myself doing better with the m4 because of the things it does better than the scar, like the things I already said which you haven't really acknowledged. You throwing numbers out and ignoring what I've said doesn't make you more believable or make me change my opinion; I guess I can try the other ARs out again but I doubt I'll start using them often.

Originally posted by Dude Justice ( ͡ʘ ͜ʖ ͡ʘ):

Originally posted by Knight:

The magazine is not small it is 20% less, The hits 50% less damage for 20% magazine capacity, there is no world this is valuable vs. the alternatives, If you want magazine capacity use the M249, It has more capacity and 30% more base damage a bullet. A good damage deck is not exclusive to the M4. Running the same cards every weapon it’s category outperforms it or is able to play better cards due to higher raw damage.

I've used it plenty and it works fine and I prefer it, I generally do well with it. The m249 takes forever to reload dude, I wouldn't use that gun over anything else at the moment, I might tinker with an lmg style deck later but that's just not my style. I realize my deck isn't exclusive to the m4, I've found I perform just fine with the m4 with my deck because the damage difference is negligible once I can one shot every zombie around me and have more ammo in the mag.

I like the scar too, but I find myself doing better with the m4 because of the things it does better than the scar, like the things I already said which you haven't really acknowledged. You throwing numbers out and ignoring what I've said doesn't make you more believable or make me change my opinion; I guess I can try the other ARs out again but I doubt I'll start using them often.

I’m using numbers because numbers are facts not opinions. The M4 hits 50% less damage per round then a Scar, It hits 30% less then the M249. I have to reload less because I am killing faster, Unless you are an aim bot you cannot just as easily precision kill every common as fast as the Scar simply body shots them out of existence. I’m going to assume you meant you one shot with the M4 via precision’s because it’s base damage is so low Until your cards are all played it will never 1 shot to the body. You are not one shotting the mutations If you are lucky with a full deck and Jim’s full passive maybe they die in one magazine. While the Scar clears them in half a magazine with a full set of cards. This is not a negligible difference. The Scar will kill a Breaker at the right angle 50%-0 on one magazine. This is not a negligible difference. I did acknowledge you said the M4 is better for hordes, I said it isn’t because it simply isn’t. The Scar cleans hordes easier due to having enough bullet damage to put commons down with body shots very early in a run which makes better use of penetration then trying to headshot lines of enemies. Early game the Scar will kill more commons in the same number of rounds as the M4 unless we assume 100% precision killing accuracy which is unrealistic in a horde situation, and also does not take full advantage of bullet penetration. Being Jim doesn’t change this either, I only run Jim with my damage build. I stack my 10 precision kills then hold it the whole run because anything that I look at instantly dies body shot head shot no difference. Mutations are gibbed before they even try to animate an attack.

[Dude Justice]

Originally posted by Knight:

Originally posted by Dude Justice ( ͡ʘ ͜ʖ ͡ʘ):

I've used it plenty and it works fine and I prefer it, I generally do well with it. The m249 takes forever to reload dude, I wouldn't use that gun over anything else at the moment, I might tinker with an lmg style deck later but that's just not my style. I realize my deck isn't exclusive to the m4, I've found I perform just fine with the m4 with my deck because the damage difference is negligible once I can one shot every zombie around me and have more ammo in the mag.

I like the scar too, but I find myself doing better with the m4 because of the things it does better than the scar, like the things I already said which you haven't really acknowledged. You throwing numbers out and ignoring what I've said doesn't make you more believable or make me change my opinion; I guess I can try the other ARs out again but I doubt I'll start using them often.

Originally posted by Dude Justice ( ͡ʘ ͜ʖ ͡ʘ):

I've used it plenty and it works fine and I prefer it, I generally do well with it. The m249 takes forever to reload dude, I wouldn't use that gun over anything else at the moment, I might tinker with an lmg style deck later but that's just not my style. I realize my deck isn't exclusive to the m4, I've found I perform just fine with the m4 with my deck because the damage difference is negligible once I can one shot every zombie around me and have more ammo in the mag.

I like the scar too, but I find myself doing better with the m4 because of the things it does better than the scar, like the things I already said which you haven't really acknowledged. You throwing numbers out and ignoring what I've said doesn't make you more believable or make me change my opinion; I guess I can try the other ARs out again but I doubt I'll start using them often.

I’m using numbers because numbers are facts not opinions. The M4 hits 50% less damage per round then a Scar, It hits 30% less then the M249. I have to reload less because I am killing faster, Unless you are an aim bot you cannot just as easily precision kill every common as fast as the Scar simply body shots them out of existence. I’m going to assume you meant you one shot with the M4 via precision’s because it’s base damage is so low Until your cards are all played it will never 1 shot to the body. You are not one shotting the mutations If you are lucky with a full deck and Jim’s full passive maybe they die in one magazine. While the Scar clears them in half a magazine with a full set of cards. This is not a negligible difference. The Scar will kill a Breaker at the right angle 50%-0 on one magazine. This is not a negligible difference.

It is precision, It's pretty negligible to me since I one mag most of what I shoot, I have pretty decent aim thanks. Maybe you can make a video of you wrecking a breaker and prove me wrong since you're so bent on being right over something that's an opinion since there's too many variables for you, one person, to be empirically correct. You're not a scientist bud, stop trying so hard.