-Don't compare it to other "MMOs." -Don't compare it to other Shooters. -Simply approach the issue within the confines of [i]this[/i] game, and this game [i]alone[/i], and try to find a good argument. It doesn't matter what OTHER games do, because this isn't OTHER games; this is [b]Destiny[/b]. ____________________________________ The #1 reason I hear as to why Year 1 should be left behind seems to be this: [b]"Year 1 is too powerful to compete with Year 2."[/b] Now, I see this posted [i]endlessly[/i] on the forums, despite these two problems with it: [b]1. It's a glaring, unfounded overgeneralization. 2. It implies that (assuming Year 1 gear [i]is[/i] overpowered) capping Light Levels will actually [i]fix that[/i].[/b] With these two points, I'm going to show exactly why cries of "overpowered gear" have no facts to support them, and how leaving Year 1 behind does nothing to address the issue [i]either way[/i] [b](TL;DR at the end)[/b] ____________________________________ [u][b]Point #1- Is Year 1 [i]actually[/i] overpowered?[/b][/u] -The Devil You Know -Murmur -The Scholar -Low-Grade Humility -Praetorian Foil -Fang of Ir Yut -Vanquisher VIII -Atheon's Epilogue -Against All Odds -Gheleon's Demise -The Infinite Theorem Read through that list. Have you ever heard the term "overpowered" associated with any of them? Because, in full confidence, I'm willing to bet that you haven't, nor have you heard it associated with any of the [i]other 95% of the weapons in Year 1.[/i] Sure, many people swear by some of those weapons, and would even call them "great," but never [i]overpowered[/i]. In addition, if you still think Year 1 [i]perks[/i] are still to powerful to be brought forward, you should read the [url=https://www.bungie.net/7_Destiny-Update---09082015/en/News/News?aid=13474]extensive nerfing Bungie did to them in 2.0[/url] When people refer to "Year 1" as overpowered, I imagine these are usually the weapons they have in mind: -Fatebringer -The Last Word -Thorn -Felwinter's Lie/Matador 64/Etc. -The Messenger/Hopscotch Pilgrim/Etc. -Gjallarhorn Now, lets look at the state of these weapons as they exist after the 2.0 patch: [quote][b]Fatebringer:[/b] |NERFED| While still one of the best [i]handcannons[/i] for PvE, the overall HC nerf has brought it down to be more in line with other primaries [i]in general[/i]. And, let's be honest; it was [i]never[/i] viewed as being OP in PvP, and that hasn't changed. [b]TLW:[/b] |NERFED| Specifically addressed with a SEVERE nerf to stability, range, and accuracy in 2.0, it's still a capable weapon in skilled hands, but not at all on the level it was before. [b]Thorn:[/b] |NERFED| Also addressed with substantial nerf, leaving its DOT ability substantially re-tooled, which makes it a more standard 3-shot-kill, and prevents players from relying solely on poison damage. Still great, but no longer the ubiquitous choice for PvP that it was before. [b]Felwinter:[/b] |NERFED| As with all high-impact shotguns, the general consensus has been that the gun itself wasn't the underlying issue; the [i]perks[/i] were. With 2.0, Rangefinder's effectiveness was substantially reduced, and 2.0.1 straight-up removed Shotpackage [i]entirely[/i]. Because of that, the high-impact archetype is much more balanced across the board, with the low ROF becoming a more noticeable drawback in exchange for stopping power. [b]The Messenger:[/b] |NERFED| While not as glaringly "OP" as the other entries on this list, high-impact PRs were generally viewed as being slightly too capable in the HoW Meta. In 2.0, they received a slight, universal decrease in stability to help keep them from dominating PvP going forward, and have since been nerfed [u]even harder[/u]. [b]Gjallarhorn:[/b] |NERFED| Arguably the most notoriously "overpowered" weapon in any game [i]ever[/i], Ghorn's signature "Wolfpack Rounds" perk was given a noticeable damage decrease in 2.0, bringing it [i]somewhat[/i] in line with other Rocket Launchers. It's still arguably the hardest hitting launcher in the game, but it's no longer the boss-melter that it once was. [/quote] There are other examples, but, [i]again[/i], these are generally the most widely-accepted "overpowered" weapons in the game; however, as you can see, they've [i]already been balanced in 2.0.[/i] Not only has the [i]majority[/i] of Year 1 gear been perfectly balanced [i]to begin with[/i], but the small subset that [i]was[/i] overpower has, in large part, [i]already been dealt with.[/i] [b]Saying that "Year 1 is too powerful to compete with Year 2" is not only a glaring, unfounded overgeneralization, but is [i]demonstrably untrue [u]altogether[/u][/i] in the post-2.0 Meta.[/b] [i]Also, there are still SOME Year 1 weapons and armor that continue to drop at TTK levels, both as Crucible and Story drops, and in these cases, it [u]literally[/u] only serves as a way to artificially inflate playtimes, with no actual effect on the Meta.[/i] ____________________________________ [u][b]Point #2- Does capping Light Levels actually solve anything?[/b][/u] First off- It should be pointed out that overpowered gear has zero [i]negative effects[/i] on players in [i]Cooperative, PvE environments[/i]. As such, no weapon (such as Fatebringer or Ghorn) should ever be held back purely on the basis of being too good against [b]A.I. COMBATANTS[/b]. If Bungie wants to nerf overpowered PvE weapons, that's fine, but no one is being negatively impacted by them in the [i]mean time[/i]. Second- Given that Light Levels don't affect [i]90% of Crucible[/i], capping Year 1 gear almost [i]exclusively[/i] affects PvE players, which (as stated above) does nothing to [i]improve[/i] PvE players' experiences. Instead, it shits on every [u]minute[/u] of effort players have put into Year 1 by needlessly invalidating every [i]single[/i] piece of gear that they've earned; not just weapons and armor, but freaking ghosts and [i]COSMETIC ITEMS[/i] (seriously, WHY?). The only [i]true[/i] way to balance weapons (across both PvP [u]and[/u] PvE) is via [b]patches[/b], which, as I pointed out in Point #1, Bungie has [i]already done.[/i] As such, why the hell is Year 1 gear (that has already been balanced in 2.0) [i]still being held back?![/i] In the case of guns like Fatebringer and Ghorn (which were only ever OP in [i]PvE[/i], to begin with), capping them at 170 only serves to cripple them in the portion of the game they were [i]meant to shine in[/i]. Even if they WEREN'T nerfed in 2.0, these weapons never harmed anyone's experience [u]in the first place[/u], so what's the point? And, in the case of PvP; in addition to the fact that the MAJORITY of PvP has Light Levels disabled, all the most egregiously overpower PvP weapons have been [i]already been nerfed in 2.0[/i]. Seriously, though; standard PvP is clearly more balanced than it was before, which has EVERYTHING to do with the 2.0 patch, and NOTHING to do with capping Light Levels. So, again, if Year 1 weapons are balanced in regular Crucible [i]at the stat level[/i], there is no discernible reason to keep them out of Endgame PvP, and even LESS reason to keep them out of PvE where they never had any negative effect on players [i]IN THE FIRST PLACE![/i] ____________________________________ [b][u]So, Bungie; what gives?[/u][/b] If the groundwork has already been laid, and it isn't going to harm anyone's experience, [i]why isn't Year 1 Infusable?[/i] Seriously, even a simple confirmation that it's being [i]discussed[/i] would be a start. -[u][b]TL;DR[/b][/u]- [u][b]Point #1- Is Year 1 [i]actually[/i] overpowered?[/b][/u] [quote]1. No matter how many times people claim that Year 1 is "overpowered," that statement is demonstrably, [i]provably[/i] false. Since the 2.0 patch, Year 1 weapons have been thoroughly balanced alongside their Year 2 counterparts (both on the individual level, and by way of nerfs to the [i]entire[/i] Year 1 perk set). One look at the current state of the Crucible (which includes Year 1 [i]and[/i] Year 2, mind you), and it's easily apparent that the PvP meta has [i]never[/i] been more balanced- [i]ever[/i]. And, if it's balanced in PvP, then it's [i]definitely[/i] balanced for [i]co-operative[/i] environments.[/quote] [u][b]Point #2- Does capping Light Levels actually solve anything?[/b][/u] [quote]2. Leaving Year 1 behind by capping Light Levels does [i]nothing[/i] to improve player experience [i]in any way[/i]. And, it almost exclusively harm's [i]PvE[/i] players, because Year 1 gear is still perfectly competitive in 95% of PvP arenas, whereas Year 1 is now entirely [i]non-competitive[/i] for serious PvE environments (which, coincidentally, is the one environment where overpowered gear [i][b]doesn't[/b][/i] harm players... Go figure!). And, again, in that same mindset, regardless of how prevalently Elemental Primaries are used (which seems to be a big part of Bungle's reasoning), did that negatively affect [i]anyone?[/i] [b][u]No, it didn't[/u][/b]. As Endgame rewards, Elemental Primaries were prestigious, and accordingly difficult to obtain. As such, it would be weird if they [b]didn't[/b] offer something special to differentiate them from everything else! If the rewards weren't superior, how as many of us even ran HM Raids, at all? Or Skolas? Or Trials? Seriously, it's not rocket science; it's great game design, and I have no clue why Bungie decided to remove that system. [/quote]