u/kingkashue

Embark has displayed this with several changes so far, but this is the most obvious example. Their reasoning for the durability changes is:

>"We've heard a clear frustration that maintaining high tier weapons is very expensive compared to the lower tier ones."

And their solution to this problem was not the very obvious "Make Higher Tier Weapons Last Longer" it was "Keep higher tier weapons almost exactly the same and make the vast majority of weapons wear out waaaaaay faster"

That is bonkers thinking.

"Oh, pink weapons are too expensive? Well, let's make greens & blues much more expensive, now pinks are less expensive by comparsion - does that fix your frustration? You were frustrated because something was too expensive - did we fix that frustration by making a bunch of other stuff significantly more expensive? Did that fix it? Did it?"

Forget the fact that a Renegade or an Anvil now feels like they last less than a single stack of ammo (hey, less ammo frees up inventory space!) that's bad enough (and certainly goes to the "are y'all playtesting some of this?" questioning).

But for Embark's to see an issue and think "Oh, the players are frustrated with this thing that is bad. Clearly the way to fix that is not to make that thing better, but instead to make everything else worse!" is just such a horrifically bad design philosophy that it's mind boggling they followed through with it.