.17 HMR hv ammo is too OP

[SoftShoe]

The difference is that the guns power for a mere .17 cal bullet can drop animals that big rifles can do.

Once again, how does it matter? This is just a game, not real life. The rifle that we all whined about not being able to do what it was designed to do has been corrected. It now does it so well we can harvest anything in the game. However anything we shoot with it larger then its ethical list doesnt count so how is game play or game balance impacted? The answer... It isn't.

Personally I think EW needs to move on & this isnt worth their time. If you want to continue to waste your time shooting things you arent going to get credit for then have at it.

[Kriss18]

The difference is that the guns power for a mere .17 cal bullet can drop animals that big rifles can do.

Once again, how does it matter? This is just a game, not real life. The rifle that we all whined about not being able to do what it was designed to do has been corrected. It now does it so well we can harvest anything in the game. However anything we shoot with it larger then its ethical list doesnt count so how is game play or game balance impacted? The answer... It isn't.

Personally I think EW needs to move on & this isnt worth their time. If you want to continue to waste your time shooting things you arent going to get credit for then have at it.

AMEN!

[lmp1986]

However anything we shoot with it larger then its ethical list doesnt count so how is game play or game balance impacted? The answer... It isn't.

It is. Species at the top end of the permitted species list should demand at least a little care in shot placement. This thing will go right through even a water buffalo, penetrating the shoulder blade and hitting every organ there is. Right now there's no point in .223 rifles anymore with their lower flexibility and louder report.

The .17 lever gun is a cute little rifle that I got to really like, but let's face it. The new ammo is too good and needs to be fixed.

[SoftShoe]

Right now there's no point in .223 rifles anymore with their lower flexibility and louder report.

The 223 is also ethical for goats, sheep, wolves & roo's which the 17 isn't.

If you are looking for a "point" in buying guns you're better off giving up now. You can get by in this game with about 4 guns & hunt everything. Spoiler: Neither the 17 nor 223 would be on that list.

[ratcat]

I don't wanna create new topic with only one question, so please can comeone tell me what is the spooking range of 17. HMR shots?

[lmp1986]

I'm not saying the game is perfectly balanced otherwise but this is beyond the point. The new ammo is clearly unrealistic (and thus immersion killing for many) and it negatively affects balance. I understand it might not be a top priority bug for you, but I don't get the insistence on leaving it broken.

[SoftShoe]

I don't wanna create new topic with only one question, so please can comeone tell me what is the spooking range of 17. HMR shots?

IIRC a hard number is not available. It is commonly held that is in excess of 150m. A few weeks ago I shot a rabbit with the 17 with a doe a measured 140m away that did not spook. Based on that alone I would guess the spook range on wary game is probably around 200+

The new ammo is clearly unrealistic (and thus immersion killing for many)

IRL it is entirely possible to kill every animal on Gods green earth with a 22lr if not with the same gusto as the 17 so I do not see how it could be immersion killing but to each his own I guess.

and it negatively affects balance.

How so? The 17 can now kill all it was designed for & its still not allowed to kill the things it wasnt designed for (sure its possible to kill it but you wont get credit so whats the point?). In what way does this unbalance the game?

[lmp1986]

In that it should be more shot placement sensitive for coyotes, bobcats etc. You want long range one shot stops at any range or angle? Use a .223 or better yet a .243 and deal with the spook radius. Want a quiet gun that won't spook as much and can also shoot rabbits? Use the .17 and aim carefully. Wouldn't that be more interesting and fair?

I treat the water buffalo case more as an example of how stupidly overpowered the rifle is rather than the crux of the problem. The .17 should be a bit iffy when you shoot the bigger animals from its permitted species list at long range. It should still reliably kill them (unlike how it was before), but not go through them like butter, head to rump. You should FEEL the difference between a little rimfire cartridge and an intermediate or rifle calibre one.

IRL it is entirely possible to kill every animal on Gods green earth with a 22lr if not with the same gusto as the 17 so I do not see how it could be immersion killing but to each his own I guess.

Sure, if you aim it right. But I bet you it won't penetrate the shoulder blade of a water buffalo, hit both lungs, stomach, liver, intestines and drop that beast right where it was standing. There is a reason we aren't all shooting .22LR and nothing else.

[gas56]

The difference is that the guns power for a mere .17 cal bullet can drop animals that big rifles can do.

Once again, how does it matter? This is just a game, not real life. The rifle that we all whined about not being able to do what it was designed to do has been corrected. It now does it so well we can harvest anything in the game. However anything we shoot with it larger then its ethical list doesnt count so how is game play or game balance impacted? The answer... It isn't.

Personally I think EW needs to move on & this isnt worth their time. If you want to continue to waste your time shooting things you arent going to get credit for then have at it.

This coming from you is I don't understand why you would want something in the game that is not working correctly?
I replied with a large response of the reasons why it shouldn't remain the way it is,.. and you quote me on 1 sentence where I had explained why afterwards.
I guess I'm not explaining it again so you just might want to re-read it over to understand the aspect of their letting things go without correcting them the way they
are supposed to work. And that is exactly what they did. So you are accepting they're not fixing it, and it is good enough for you.
Actually I'm glad you let me know where you stand at this point,.. They even stated they couldn't get the Harvest Value at 100%.
But I thought most IRL hunter players would have more insight to detail for the game and pursue those thoughts.
Have fun in a mediocre game that you want it to be.. but on the opposite side of the coin you will find me...
get it right the 1st time, but don't stop if you don't get it right and leave it as it is until it is fixed right............GAS

[SoftShoe]

This coming from you is I don't understand why you would want something in the game that is not working correctly?

I would prefer if it did work correctly but this is what they gave us. I have to assume that they did what they could with it & came up with a compromise that allowed the rifle to work as intended without breaking anything else. Hell, look how long it took them to come out with the new ammo. I am reasonably certain creating a 2nd type of ammo wasn't their 1st choice. It was the compromise they had to make.
Having a overpowered small game rifle doesnt break anything that I can think of. My concern is the law of unintended consequences. If they put more time into this what might they break doing so? Moreover since this is just a small issue in the grand scheme of things I would prefer that EW puts their time into other improvements/enhancements that we would really like to see.

I replied with a large response of the reasons why it shouldn't remain the way it is,.. and you quote me on 1 sentence where I had explained why afterwards.

I quoted the salient point I wanted to address. I understand your reasoning on the rest of your post & dont disagree with it but I see it as an etiquette thing in only quoting the part of someones post you want to discuss. Quoting someones entire post makes other readers reread a post to find the corollary plus it bloats the boards IMO. I wasnt discounting what you were saying by not quoting it is what I am trying to say.