Player Report- FusionThunder

[ShadowPL]

4 hours ago, Cecil Stedmen said:

- support

I'll be honest,  I'm not sure if this is enough to prove he DELIBERATELY abused the glitch mentioned. I'm always on the side of "rather have a guilty person go free than an innocent person get locked up", and here I just don't see enough to say beyond a reasonable doubt he abused the glitch.

However I do think this report brings up a couple of key points that need to be discussed about the sword itself. I do 100% agree with Pure's sentiment that "High Command shouldn't be easy to kill", but I think this sentiment can be accomplished without making high command miniature SCPs. This is seen with how the Nu-7 and E-11 commanders are setup in stats/weaponry alongside Site Administration + O5. Gonna take a quote from Panda's response where he said "The second clip you were using a bolt action sniper. the swords block cooldown would have been over by the time you cycled the bolt, aimed in, and fired again.", I think the fact the block cooldown ends so quickly is the issue. I think the sword block drain should be similar to how it works with wiltOS lightsabers to where it can block a set amount of damage and if the sword doesn't block damage for a good period of time (typically around 5 seconds), it can regen the amount of dmg it can block slowly but surely instead of instantly like it seems to be occuring in the clips. Regardless, I would +support a temporary restriction on the sword while SMT looks into it and in exchange temporarily buff the HP and Armor of the D5 Commander until a decision is made by SMT in regards to the sword.

TLDR: Don't see proof Fusion is abusing a glitch but the parry cooldown feature should 100% be investigated by SMT for balance purposes. If I got any facts wrong about the sword in this then feel free to correct me.

 

[Jack (utility one)]

16 hours ago, Knuckles said:

I think the real issue here is how such an easily abusable weapon made it onto D5 classes

Because we payed for it to get added and thought it looked and sounded cool. Everything else was just found out through playing with it.

If you want to see the other weapons which was there prior to the sword go look at the proton cannon, which would made it if it didn't freeze everyone online if it was spawned in.

[Gyara]

11 hours ago, Cecil Stedmen said:

- support

I'll be honest,  I'm not sure if this is enough to prove he DELIBERATELY abused the glitch mentioned. I'm always on the side of "rather have a guilty person go free than an innocent person get locked up", and here I just don't see enough to say beyond a reasonable doubt he abused the glitch.

However I do think this report brings up a couple of key points that need to be discussed about the sword itself. I do 100% agree with Pure's sentiment that "High Command shouldn't be easy to kill", but I think this sentiment can be accomplished without making high command miniature SCPs. This is seen with how the Nu-7 and E-11 commanders are setup in stats/weaponry alongside Site Administration + O5. Gonna take a quote from Panda's response where he said "The second clip you were using a bolt action sniper. the swords block cooldown would have been over by the time you cycled the bolt, aimed in, and fired again.", I think the fact the block cooldown ends so quickly is the issue. I think the sword block drain should be similar to how it works with wiltOS lightsabers to where it can block a set amount of damage and if the sword doesn't block damage for a good period of time (typically around 5 seconds), it can regen the amount of dmg it can block slowly but surely instead of instantly like it seems to be occuring in the clips. Regardless, I would +support a temporary restriction on the sword while SMT looks into it and in exchange temporarily buff the HP and Armor of the D5 Commander until a decision is made by SMT in regards to the sword.

TLDR: Don't see proof Fusion is abusing a glitch but the parry cooldown feature should 100% be investigated by SMT for balance purposes. If I got any facts wrong about the sword in this then feel free to correct me.

-support

[Dick Grayson]

17 hours ago, Jack (utility one) said:

+support

I mean from the second clip so far it does seem like an abuse of a known glitch. It COULD just be due to the swords glitchy nature from switching from parry to attack but eh. The second clip I do think is some form of abuse just from looking at it.

just because hes trying to get it fixed doesnt mean anything he still abuses it against DCLASS 

[MysteryGamer]

-support 

just git gud and learn how to shoot straight 

[Eyelander]

+support

[Gʟᴏʙᴀʟ]

1 hour ago, Mystery Gamer said:

-support 

just git gud and learn how to shoot straight 

 

[Eaten]

18 hours ago, Its Buck said:

-support bro y’all are complaining about a swords feature. That’s like me reporting everyone that uses a keycard cracker to breach SCP’s because it’s “not designed to breach them” it’s a sword that was designed to reflect bullets 

Right, so we here this from a D5 Commands point of view. Now think about putting yourself in perhaps a d-class's shoes for once or even any other persons point of view who is being affected by this. Would someone, wielding a sword that was "designed to reflect bullets" be able to deflect every single bullet shot at them? Not tryna sound like a nerd or virgin but that seems unlikely. To add on to that with the argument that it was "payed for" isn't valid. Yes we know it was payed for however take an example like the riot shield. People donated $10 for a riot shield for it to be nerfed in some way because people though it was too good. Keep in mind the riot shield didn't completely reflect damage, but just decreased by a lot. So if anything this should be able to be nerfed too. I know this suggestion isn't really about that but anyways you can see it in action in the second clip where hitmarkers appeared yet no damage was done... yeah.

[Coltable]

We will fix the weapon.

[Coltable]

Denied