Adjustment to gems

[Bunny]

id like to suggest a few changes to the gems (without knowing what the future donor gems are going to allow us to do).

firstly, the level 2 gem of different kinds is a 2x/1.5x multiplier of the previous level gem, while being rather easy to level up. the next levels though, offer much lower odds of success with lower advantages when you do actually manage to level them up (x1.2 multiplier..).

since gems are already quite the effort to get requiring a hundred if not more kills in a deathmatch game, 150+ CQ runs or 10 clan war wins in a full 5v5 team, can we get some boost on those gem stats?
reload time reduction of 3% doesnt seem that much aswell as only having an additional 3 hp/ap at most before needing hundreds of gems to upgrade to the next level.

[analospony]

Pretty sure they are supposed to be small, near inconsequential bonuses. But you are right, things like 3% are useless. They could use a second pass for sure. For shotguns for example you are only reloading .06 seconds faster with a gem. .5 seconds would at least be somewhat noticeable. The only good ones are HP, DEF and movement, anything else just looks like a meme to me.

[Qwin]

Here's DMG Gems compared against a full clip.

Based off of this math
0% No gems
.8% 2 Lv1 gems
1% 2 Lv2 gems (guessing)
2% 2 Lv3 gems
3% 2 Lv4 gems
4% 2 Lv5 gems (guessing)
5% 2 Lv6 gems (guessing)

Sword 27 dmg x6 slashes
162
163 - 1.00 bonus
163.62 - 1.62 bonus
165.24 - 3.24 bonus
166.86 - 4.86 bonus
168.48 - 6.48 bonus
170.1 - 8.10 bonus

[H] Pistols 39 dmg x14 shots
546
550.48 - 4.48 bonus
551.46 - 5.46 bonus
556.92 - 10.92 bonus
562.38 - 16.38 bonus
567.84 - 21.84 bonus
573.3 - 27.30 bonus

[H] Revs 52 dmg x8 shots
416
419.28 - 3.28 bonus
420.16 - 4.16 bonus
424.32 - 7.32 bonus
428.48 - 12.48 bonus
432.64 - 16.64 bonus
436 - 20.00 bonus

[H] SMGs 34 dmg x38 shots
912
919.22 - 7.22 bonus
921.12 - 9.12 bonus
930.24 - 18.24 bonus
939.36 - 27.37 bonus
948.48 - 36.48 bonus
957.6 - 45.6 bonus

[H] Rifle 21 dmg x40 shots
840
846.4 - 6.4 bonus
848.4 - 8.4 bonus
856.8 - 16.8 bonus
865.2 - 25.2 bonus
873.6 - 33.6 bonus
882 - 42 bonus

[H] Heavy MG 25 dmg x160 shots
4000
4032 - 32 bonus
4040 - 40 bonus
4080 - 80 bonus
4120 - 120 bonus
4160 - 160 bonus
4200 - 200 bonus

[S] Shotgun 10 dmg x5 shots
600
604.8 - 4.8 bonus
606 - 6 bonus
612 - 12 bonus
618 - 18 bonus
624 - 24 bonus
630 - 30 bonus

[H] Rocket 66 dmg x6
396
399.168 - 3.168 bonus
399.96 - 3.96 bonus
403.92 - 7.92 bonus
407.88 - 11.88 bonus
411 - 15 bonus
415.8 - 19.8 bonus

[H] Sniper 64 x3
192
193.53 - 1.53 bonus
193.92 - 1.92 bonus
195.84 - 3.84 bonus
197.76 - 5.76 bonus
199.68 - 7.68 bonus
201.6 - 9.6 bonus

-------------
Herein lies the problem with [DMG]Gems. It's a band aid for actual balancing on the guns. Applying it with a blanket across all guns shows the biggest gains are the ones who have the most ammo to spare (IF you can actually land all of the shots before youre dead), so you could say it's pretty much useless for Shotguns, so people will see that and start using [PRC] instead, and now with that SGs all over will have armor piercing like pistols and revs, completely trashing the balance of SGs has always been it soaks AP first.

This is why I said in the chat, Gems like these should be constrained by gun class as the upgrades, a SG has no place ever having PRC and it makes marginal difference to apply a DMG to a SG in total. Otherwise it just creates more problems.

[Bunny]

id like to add this to the suggestion:

you could possibly make it so that once you failed leveling up a gem, considering you lost both gems in the process which in higher levels, could be an absolute pain to get,

once you failed an upgrade of certain level, the %success goes up by 10% or so, to allow a smoother upgrading experience.
for example; on level 2->3 gems, the success rate is 75%. if you failed, itll go up to 75+7.5=82.5% success. the next upgrade would be 82.5+8.25=90.75%, etc. for that specific gem type, or possibly globally for all gem types of that level.

[Qwin]

id like to add this to the suggestion:

you could possibly make it so that once you failed leveling up a gem, considering you lost both gems in the process which in higher levels, could be an absolute pain to get,

once you failed an upgrade of certain level, the %success goes up by 10% or so, to allow a smoother upgrading experience.
for example; on level 2->3 gems, the success rate is 75%. if you failed, itll go up to 75+7.5=82.5% success. the next upgrade would be 82.5+8.25=90.75%, etc. for that specific gem type, or possibly globally for all gem types of that level.

This is a good compromise to the awful RNG+RNG with getting gems and upgradeing gems.

GunZ was best when it didnt have any RNG, because everyone was on even ground if they wanted to be. Either leveling or even paying for premiums (which reduced the skill of the game but it still wasnt a luck based system). RNGs are only a method of extortion used on the player and imbalances the game shifting towards P2W for those who have money to burn, or extreme luck in BP, so people can gloat about it. Not skill based or time spent grinding which drives players away.

With a +% every time you failed on gem upgrades (even as low as 1%) it helps take away the idea that you will NEVER get it all if you have bad luck, and it would encourage people to try again next time instead of giving up on the gems entirely.

They are even applying the concept of RNGs to donor gems because they intend to add it like a luckybox so you may constantly be throwing away coins to get trash gems you dont care about.

McSic thinks that it's OK to make people feel hopeless with this miserable system of extortion and let me tell you... It's not. And I Quote: "Maybe now you will understand how hard it is to get any Lv6 gem" "It will drive you mad either way."

[S1lent]

There is code in there that makes it so you could fail and have a chance to not lose both gems. But it was disabled. A +% chance of success would be good if it fails. Unless they can think of a better idea.

[TTrickstah]

This is a good compromise to the awful RNG+RNG with getting gems and upgradeing gems.

GunZ was best when it didnt have any RNG, because everyone was on even ground if they wanted to be. Either leveling or even paying for premiums (which reduced the skill of the game but it still wasnt a luck based system). RNGs are only a method of extortion used on the player and imbalances the game shifting towards P2W for those who have money to burn, or extreme luck in BP, so people can gloat about it. Not skill based or time spent grinding which drives players away.

With a +% every time you failed on gem upgrades (even as low as 1%) it helps take away the idea that you will NEVER get it all if you have bad luck, and it would encourage people to try again next time instead of giving up on the gems entirely.

They are even applying the concept of RNGs to donor gems because they intend to add it like a luckybox so you may constantly be throwing away coins to get trash gems you dont care about.

McSic thinks that it's OK to make people feel hopeless with this miserable system of extortion and let me tell you... It's not. And I Quote: "Maybe now you will understand how hard it is to get any Lv6 gem" "It will drive you mad either way."

I agree with you. I have horrendous luck. The whole concept of lucky boxes were already a bad idea to me; it didn't make things any better when they put the strongest shotgun as the reward. I opened up 46 boxes the other day and didn't get a limitbreakerX while there are some people getting up to 3 in less boxes. Makes me consider if I should continue. I'm using up more money just because I have bad luck and have nothing to show for it. The least they could have done is make a 50 box limit before they must give you the permanent lucky box item you were aiming for. Gems is just another reason to consider leaving this server.

[AnnaLOVESYOU]

There is code in there that makes it so you could fail and have a chance to not lose both gems. But it was disabled. A +% chance of success would be good if it fails. Unless they can think of a better idea.

should of not disabled that keeping the gems on failure should be around 30-50%

[Qwin]

There is code in there that makes it so you could fail and have a chance to not lose both gems. But it was disabled. A +% chance of success would be good if it fails. Unless they can think of a better idea.

Returning to the thread again they could implement it like this the status for gems can dictate the failrate and lesson the grinding of failing over and over, instead of a +% succcess rate on fail it's dictated by chance of obtaining the gems.

If combining two different probability class gems, the one with the higher success rate is used, they do not stack

(Common) 51% chance to get from box. Common gems will always be destroyed upon fail to upgrade.
90% Lv1->Lv2
75% Lv1->Lv2
50% Lv3->Lv4
25% Lv4->Lv5
5% Lv5->Lv6

(Uncommon) 25% chance to get from box. Uncommon gems have a 25% chance they will not be destroyed.
100% Lv1->Lv2
80% Lv1->Lv2
60% Lv3->Lv4
35% Lv4->Lv5
10% Lv5->Lv6

(Rare) 15% chance to get from box. Rare gems have a 50% chance they will not be destroyed
100% Lv1->Lv2
90% Lv1->Lv2
80% Lv3->Lv4
55% Lv4->Lv5
15% Lv5->Lv6

(Epic) 10% chance to get from box. Epic gems have a 70% chance they will not be destroyed
100% Lv1->Lv2
100% Lv1->Lv2
90% Lv3->Lv4
65% Lv4->Lv5
20% Lv5->Lv6

(Legendary) 1% chance to get from box. Legendary gems are indestructible, even if they fail to upgrade.
100% Lv1->Lv2
100% Lv1->Lv2
100% Lv3->Lv4
75% Lv4->Lv5
25% Lv5->Lv6


Or do a 2 step randomizer: 75% chance to get a Common, 25% chance to get one from the rarity pool.

Rarity pool
50% (Uncommon)
30% (Rare)
15% (Epic)
5% (Legendary)