to add to that the videos i provided were there to assure my message got across even if my scope of the scale of the numbers was off .... that was an assumption that i "probably got numbers wrong" so i could explain what i wanted the numbers to do. If im assuming i probably made mistakes that doesn't really sound like someone unapproachable to change, i would just prefer to see the in game effect of said numbers ... if i had control of the numbers myself i could sample one at a time and spam change it and observe the effect and that way i could make a better judgement. but i dont have that level of control, and since i have a normal 9-5er i cant make any of the tests run either .... not that they have taken any serious changes of direction like i suggested they just mildly tweaked the weapons which will not really work ..... taking the bolt gun as an example ... it has a 25% SD cone of fire nerfing that 3% and adding 3% recoil does jack all nothing its still a spread run gun ... spread is still the major mitigating factor ... my proposition was to flip its mitigating factor to managing recoil and NOT have spread be a serious issue .... to properly test that you would need to drop the spread to like a 5 SD cone and up recoil till a two shot burst was hard to follow up .. or took leading time or compensatory first spotting. to which my numbers where just a "educated guess" and could have been off by plenty .. without an in game and testing understanding of their scope and scale. so while they may have "considered it" they missed the point despite me putting it in a video and visually and narratively showing the desired end result. and on just said bolt gun there was more than just mechanics involved in that choice ... a heavier recoil ... makes the gun feel subconsciously "weightier." and stronger .... even at the same dps many would likely just "accept" its a stronger weapon just by physicality and tells .... and that was just ONE WEAPON i looked at. so to say my ideas are bad, when they have neither been tested or screened with the community .... is a bit unfair yourself .... i think "concept wise" im on the money for drawing fans back .... im pretty sure i made mistakes in the numbers i had no way to visually test them and see thier impact ... i had to make an educated guess based on how other weapons with slightly different numbers acted ... when many weapon groups had more than one related factor change between them. Thats why in general i paired the ROF down, it made the math and estimation and speed of correcting an issue quicker by removing the multiplicative asset, while dually making the server resolve less weapons fire simultaniously thus helping the hitreg problems ... much the same way mech warrior online fixed its hitreg problems. many of the ideas i posted are not 100% my ideas they are observations of how other successful companies solved similar problems that we face.