MW3 guns need balancing. Here's how I'd do it. « Thread Started on Nov 12, 2011, 1:30am »
Assuming all the info here is true..
ARs -Buff M16A1's damage from 45-25 to 45-30. It will still kill in the same amount of hits.. But a slighter edge against juggernaut users? -Decrease Type 95's RoF from 1000 to 780(to match the M16A1) maybe? This will make the M16 more evenly balanced with the Type95, instead of Type95 being more superior to the M16 in kill time at all ranges(pretty much). Type95 being only more powerful up close and having less recoil overall, while M16 being a little more powerful at long range + having faster reload time.
SMGs -Give the PM9, the Uzi reload time of 2.45 and raise time of .7 seconds from BO/previous versions -Slightly decrease the UMP's recoil from 6 to 5.5, and increase its minum range damage from 17 to 20.
LMGs -Just give them back their infinite ranges again(M60 being a 2 hit kill at AR range and dropping to 3 beyond that like previous games) and take out their rapid fire attachments.
Snipers -Give the Dragunov a OSOK 1.5X multiplier to the neck and chest, and possibly switch its raise/drop and reload times with the RSASS. -Take out the AS50(or take out the Dragunov and make the AS50 into a "Dragunov" and give it a 10 mag size). It's a garbage version of previous Dragunov w/ 5 clip mag size.
Machine pistols -Trade the FMG9's RoF with Skorpion's -If not the above, reduce the FMG9's RoF to around 850, AND give the Skorpion its 50-20 damage like from COD4 and BO, and 40 damage while akimbo'd like BO, but lower its RoF to 750(like BO). Handguns -Make the MP412, magnums and desert eagles 2 hit kills at close range--if they aren't already. -Increase the minimum range of all handguns. Increase Magnum, MP412 and Desert eagle's minimum range to 35 and 30. Rest of handguns minimum range should be increased to 20.
Thoughts?
« Last Edit: Nov 12, 2011, 1:33am by arcanine2009 »
Re: MW3 guns need balancing. Here's how I'd do it. « Reply #1 on Nov 12, 2011, 1:33am »
Infinity Ward don't want a balanced game, that was never their MO. It was Treyarch that balanced the Foxtrot out of everything until you could literally use any gun in the game and it didn't make a difference.
What IW have given us are some drastically different guns, some are pretty crap, some are fantastic. I'm ok with that. It's more interesting.
Besides, chunks of this list have already been proven false/
Infinity Ward don't want a balanced game, that was never their MO. It was Treyarch that balanced the Foxtrot out of everything until you could literally use any gun in the game and it didn't make a difference.
What IW have given us are some drastically different guns, some are pretty crap, some are fantastic. I'm ok with that. It's more interesting.
I'm not.
I hate having guns outclassed literally in every way by a superior gun in the same class. I want the lower tier guns to at least have their own niche to use. THAT would make it more interesting. If not, take out the useless guns like Drag(favorite sniper rifle) and AS50, and maybe nerf some of the best guns--to make the current middle tier class guns better to use.
You can't deny how bad LMGs are now by taking out their infinite range and replacing it with rapid fire. >_>
« Last Edit: Nov 12, 2011, 1:39am by arcanine2009 »
You can't deny how bad LMGs are now by taking out their infinite range and replacing it with rapid fire. >_>
I've gotten almost to level 40 on the MG36 alone. The LMG's are not bad, they just have their niche. You can't use them like an AR, you use them like an LMG.
Joined: Jan 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 363 Location: North Carolina
Re: MW3 guns need balancing. Here's how I'd do it. « Reply #4 on Nov 12, 2011, 2:46am »
Problem with this game is that the maps aren't conductive to LMG use, unless you're using QuickDraw - unfortunately, Assassin is almost necessary to play without getting shot in the back every other second. That's simply the nature of the BLOPS/MW3 swiss-cheese maze style maps, annoying as it is.
You can't deny how bad LMGs are now by taking out their infinite range and replacing it with rapid fire. >_>
I've gotten almost to level 40 on the MG36 alone. The LMG's are not bad, they just have their niche. You can't use them like an AR, you use them like an LMG.
And how is it that? Don't they have AR like range now?
Besides, chunks of this list have already been proven false/
Like what?
I pretty much agree with the OP's ideas except he didn't mention the terrible shotguns except for the striker.
Yeah, I haven't even touched on them. /=
« Last Edit: Nov 12, 2011, 3:22am by arcanine2009 »
Re: MW3 guns need balancing. Here's how I'd do it. « Reply #7 on Nov 12, 2011, 3:21am »
The guns of MW3 are more balanced than you give them credit for.
For example, the M16A1 takes one more bullet to kill up close and one less bullet to kill at a distance in comparison to the Type-95. Typical engagement range and the Type-95's higher rate of fire favor the Type, but the M16 isn't completely useless in comparison. It's almost the same gun, after all.
MW2's Holy AR Trinity was the TAR-21, SCAR-H, and ACR, which were all variations of the same full-auto low recoil AR concept. MW3's Holy AR Trinity is going to be Type-95, MK14, and the FAD... now, that's variety. Those guns are about as different from one another as ARs get.
LMGs have certainly been hurt by the lack of a flat damage profile, but they are not ruined by taking one more bullet to kill at range. The two-shot-no-recoil RPD/AUG days are gone, but thanks to the increased variety of options in terms of perks, proficiency, and attachments, LMGs are still more than viable. Their greatest enemies are the gosh darn golly gee whiz maps.
SMGs could probably do with some tweaks, as the P90/MP7 are poised to that a doo-doo on the rest, and it's almost all thanks to capacity. However, we really need a Den flash chart; I've heard a strategy guide claims that the UMP45 has higher penetration than the other SMGs, for example, but can't test it to verify since I only have one controller. :s
The handguns are the only group that's kind of messed up and there are some oddities like the Drag +Silencer not being an OHKO to the head, but on the whole, this is very promising batch that while maybe not as varied as MW2 will at least be fun.
Infinity Ward don't want a balanced game, that was never their MO. It was Treyarch that balanced the Foxtrot out of everything until you could literally use any gun in the game and it didn't make a difference.
What IW have given us are some drastically different guns, some are pretty crap, some are fantastic. I'm ok with that. It's more interesting.
I'm not.
I hate having guns outclassed literally in every way by a superior gun in the same class. I want the lower tier guns to at least have their own niche to use. THAT would make it more interesting. If not, take out the useless guns like Drag(favorite sniper rifle) and AS50, and maybe nerf some of the best guns--to make the current middle tier class guns better to use.
You can't deny how bad LMGs are now by taking out their infinite range and replacing it with rapid fire. >_>
Go play something else then, guns aren't meant to be balanced, because some guns are just better, just like in real life.
Re: MW3 guns need balancing. Here's how I'd do it. « Reply #9 on Nov 12, 2011, 3:43am »
OK, going to make myself more clear, every type of gun needs to be useful, but balancing within a a type or even a sub type like OP has suggested is simply a waste of time, why don't you just use type 95 if it's so much better than M16?
I hate having guns outclassed literally in every way by a superior gun in the same class. I want the lower tier guns to at least have their own niche to use. THAT would make it more interesting. If not, take out the useless guns like Drag(favorite sniper rifle) and AS50, and maybe nerf some of the best guns--to make the current middle tier class guns better to use.
You can't deny how bad LMGs are now by taking out their infinite range and replacing it with rapid fire. >_>
Go play something else then, guns aren't meant to be balanced, because some guns are just better, just like in real life.
OK, going to make myself more clear, every type of gun needs to be useful, but balancing within a a type or even a sub type like OP has suggested is simply a waste of time, why don't you just use type 95 if it's so much better than M16?
OK, going to make myself more clear, every type of gun needs to be useful, but balancing within a a type or even a sub type like OP has suggested is simply a waste of time, why don't you just use type 95 if it's so much better than M16?
Because variety is the spice of life.
That's my point, every type of gun needs to be good, but tell what's this variety you get between M16 and Type 95? They are two closest gun in game, how is making them more identical going to help make this a better game?
Infinity Ward don't want a balanced game, that was never their MO. It was Treyarch that balanced the Foxtrot out of everything until you could literally use any gun in the game and it didn't make a difference.
What IW have given us are some drastically different guns, some are pretty crap, some are fantastic. I'm ok with that. It's more interesting.
I'm not.
I hate having guns outclassed literally in every way by a superior gun in the same class. I want the lower tier guns to at least have their own niche to use. THAT would make it more interesting. If not, take out the useless guns like Drag(favorite sniper rifle) and AS50, and maybe nerf some of the best guns--to make the current middle tier class guns better to use.
You can't deny how bad LMGs are now by taking out their infinite range and replacing it with rapid fire. >_>
Go play something else then, guns aren't meant to be balanced, because some guns are just better, just like in real life.
Realism makes for crappy games.
You've clearly never played Project Reality, this is exceptionally false. In fact some of the best times I've ever had gaming have been in marathon sessions of PR.
Re: MW3 guns need balancing. Here's how I'd do it. « Reply #17 on Nov 12, 2011, 12:06pm »
People are completely misinterpreting what I"m trying to say here...I'm not trying to make guns similar. It's not really just about "balance", its more to give niche to guns that are outclassed in nearly EVERY WAY by stronger guns--so said outclassed weapons can get more use in certain situations.
.
« Last Edit: Nov 12, 2011, 12:08pm by arcanine2009 »
That's my point, every type of gun needs to be good, but tell what's this variety you get between M16 and Type 95? They are two closest gun in game, how is making them more identical going to help make this a better game?
They are completely different in game. Speed of burst and effective range due to recoil are completely different. Added to more minor differences like reload and drop time. M16 desperately needs a recoil/burst speed boost.
People are completely misinterpreting what I"m trying to say here...I'm not trying to make guns similar. It's not really just about "balance", its more to give niche to guns that are outclassed in nearly EVERY WAY by stronger guns--so said outclassed weapons can get more use in certain situations.
.
I get what you're saying. There's a way to do it without guns having the exact same boring stats as eachother. Do you agree that MW2 did a pretty good job of this?
Re: MW3 guns need balancing. Here's how I'd do it. « Reply #25 on Nov 13, 2011, 2:09am »
All of the shotguns need improvement, but it's a slippery slope with the damage proficiency.
It's just bad design to put a stopping power proficiency so near to the end of the weapon level. I think they realized this too late and nerfed the base damage, when they should've just removed the proficiency.
Re: MW3 guns need balancing. Here's how I'd do it. « Reply #26 on Nov 13, 2011, 2:27am »
They probably should have just removed all other proficiencies for shotguns except for Damage and Range and put them as low level unlocks. Could have thrown in the Speed proficiency too since the lack of Lightweight and Marathon are glaring weaknesses for a shotgun class.
Joined: Jul 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 551 Location: Illinois, USA
Re: MW3 guns need balancing. Here's how I'd do it. « Reply #27 on Nov 13, 2011, 3:40am »
On the topic of the Type 95 and M16, your suggestions go against what IW/Sledgehammer wanted. The M16 was supposed to be the stronger one at range while the Type 95 would be better up close. The only problem is the M16 doesn't really have less kick like intended (see: Elite). A simple change to the recoil on the M16 and/or Type 95 is all that is really needed to fix them.
Re: MW3 guns need balancing. Here's how I'd do it. « Reply #29 on Nov 13, 2011, 6:11am »
Well I think the OP Type 95 is the only balancing issue with the game. When should an assault rifle EVER be a two hit kill? Answer: SEMI-AUTO ONLy. First off, the time between shots is so low it looks like a one hit kill from your perspective, which sucks when you die while already having put a few bullets in them. Secondly, the low recoil allows for consistent death beams within effective 2-3 hit kill range. Let's not forget to mention how many times I've been sprayed by a guy hip-firing from 20 yards away. The fact that it takes 5 hits to kill at range doesn't balance it with the M16 whatsoever. The Type 95 has a higher rate of fire and lower recoil than the M16, allowing it to fire bursts faster with tighter spreads. Half of the assault rifles already take 5 shots at range anyway.
I could go on but if you don't see how it completely outclasses the M16 then you clearly haven't played the game long enough
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
Author
![[image]](http://i1112.photobucket.com/albums/k487/dcbrady12/MW3WeaponStats-2.jpg "[image]")
Logged![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
![[avatar]](http://fi.somethingawful.com/safs/titles/82/e7/00167728.0001.gif "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://i.imgur.com/C4SPH.png "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://i.imgur.com/4JBBZ08.gif "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v337/Krin-Kalaster/gasmaskgirl.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://i.imgur.com/gwmSdmt.png "[avatar]")