|
Post by thegentleman on Nov 10, 2012 19:00:37 GMT -5
Now with the way that the Pick 10 system works, one of the main questions I'm wondering is when it would EVER be worth it to run a secondary handgun. As I'm looking at it stats-wise, the incentive is practically nil outside of bragging rights. Let's take a look at the two most common options of traditional roles of the sidearm and see why it seems outclassed right out of the gate:
1) As a primary weapon for someone perk-loading. Vahn seems to indicate that if you want to take a secondary only, that's viable. But even with six perks and three wild cards, why would someone put a gun in the secondary slot instead of the primary slot? To use concrete examples, is the Tac-45 really competitive with the FAL? Is the Beretta 3-burst handgun going to pull its own next to the XM8 or Sig 556?
2) As backup weapon paired with a primary. Spending a single point here makes sense in limited cases. For example, running a bullet hose of an SMG and fast-swapping if you get hit with the reload at a bad time. The problem is that a secondary with one attachment is the same point value as the overkill wildcard and another primary. I can't see many cases, if any, where a one-attachment secondary will compete evenly (or surpass) a naked primary.
The absolute worst way to spend 4 points seems to be to trick out a secondary in the hopes of competing with a primary. For example, a B23R with an extended magazine, laser sight, and suppressor seems like it's going to be a really crappy way to compete with an SMG that could do the same thing better with 2 extra points to go around.
Now, if there's nothing that anyone who has the game right now knows that could place offensive secondary weapons in a better niche, I see three possible balancing options.
1) Give handguns a distinct advantage to reward their use as "skill" weapons. This might be excellent damage up close with a sharp drop-off. It seems like this could be the direction that's suggested with the Tac45, but I still don't think that on paper it sounds competitive with an SMR or a FAL, unless there's some kind of unlimited firecap on the Tac45 and similar combined with a generous 2HK range.
I've always liked the idea of a massive headshot multiplier for handguns, making a 1HK possible. With smaller mag sizes and typically crappy sight pictures, the "lucky" headshot everyone fears in these cases seems less likely to me.
I'll note that this seems the hardest of the three options to balance correctly, and will invite the largest amount of disagreement if past topics on multipliers has been any indication, so if you think I'm full of crap for even suggesting it, read on.
2) Handguns get a "free" attachment A quick and easy solution that would give the handgun class some degree of parity in comparison to the primaries. I like the notion of it, and it would seem easy to implement, but the problem is that it affects what one might call the "integrity" of the Pick-10 system and opens things up to the chaos of having people argue in the future that they should get 2 sensor grenades, or perhaps that other lesser-used primaries (such as the abysmal-looking M1216 and Saiga) should get a free attachment, too.
At that point, it would be a "Pick 10 or maybe 11" system that loses its original goal of being entirely comprehensible and consistent from the get-go.
3) Handguns earn more points toward scorestreaks Probably my favorite option. It's always been harder to kill people with handguns. Therefore, to incentivize their use, provide some damn incentives. If a regular kill is 100 points in TDM, give the secondary kill anywhere from a +25 to +50 bonus. If the handguns are anything like they were in MW3, I know for sure that it's at least 50% harder for me to kill someone with a handgun in 3 shots than it is for me to mow them down with a PP90 at close range.
If people want to be mavericks and show how skilled they are, then fine: let them. Incidentally, this might also be in the same vein as doing something crazy like provide increasing bonuses for successive knife kills. A +50 point bonus, followed by a +100, then by a +150, and so on. I like the idea of a flat "Secondary Kill +40" bonus.
The only caveat here is that it would run against the "spirit" that 3arc is trying to build. Handgun only players in this case are rewarded for being daredevils, and the reality is that they're putting their team at risk by dying more often and being a lower risk to the enemy team than they would be with a more powerful primary. Because of that, 3arc might balk at it.
Still, I think this is the best option just for practical reasons: people are going to do goofy stuff anyway like knife-only classes, and even though killwhoring is discouraged, the nature of the player base isn't going to change overnight. You might as well play to the idea that people are going to have fun in ways that don't purely benefit the objective all the time, always.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by imrlybord7 on Nov 10, 2012 19:08:58 GMT -5
Handguns should get Tac Knife for free.
But the knife by itself will apparently give a pretty substantial mobility increase, so as a constant rusher I will probably always go with no secondary and Fast Hands.
|
|
|
Post by thegentleman on Nov 10, 2012 19:19:10 GMT -5
The idea of giving the handguns high mobility instead of the knife makes more sense, as others have mentioned in previous topics. It costs a point to get the mobility increase and would actually give the handguns a niche suggested in my first option.
Instead, I'd vote that the secondary knife should move at the same mobility as the primary.
The alternative to not revising this is to basically see a throwback to the knife-rushing of Counter-Strike and is going to further make handguns even more useless. I'd rather move like a fox in the opening seconds of the match AND have a tricked-out AR than I would like to take a mobility hit for the opportunity to occasionally use a non-competitive secondary.
|
|
asasa
True Bro
fuck
Posts: 4,255
|
Post by asasa on Nov 10, 2012 19:26:29 GMT -5
The idea of giving the handguns high mobility instead of the knife makes more sense, as others have mentioned in previous topics. It costs a point to get the mobility increase and would actually give the handguns a niche suggested in my first option. Instead, I'd vote that the secondary knife should move at the same mobility as the primary. The alternative to not revising this is to basically see a throwback to the knife-rushing of Counter-Strike and is going to further make handguns even more useless. I'd rather move like a fox in the opening seconds of the match AND have a tricked-out AR than I would like to take a mobility hit for the opportunity to occasionally use a non-competitive secondary. I like idea 1. The only use the secondary knife should have is reload cancelling and the likes. Then they could have an upgraded knife for 1pt that has merit.
|
|
|
Post by Megaqwerty on Nov 10, 2012 20:43:46 GMT -5
There is an upgraded knife: the ballistic knife.
|
|
Lexapro
True Bro
PSN: Lexa_pro
Posts: 1,066
|
Post by Lexapro on Nov 10, 2012 20:45:15 GMT -5
I imagine that the handguns have faster ADS , movement speed, and quickswap times. In tight corridors, the handgun can be a better weapon than an AR, LMG, or Sniper Rifle simply due to being able to move faster while aiming. The B23R looks deadly akimbo'd and Tac45 is a 2HK up close so it's not like they're lacking for power. Also consider that knifing is probably harder in this game than any past CoD title and I think spending a single point on a secondary weapon can be viable if it complements your class.
I know my Ballista class will definitely have a Tac45 for those quickswap followup shots, something that a second primary simply can't do.
|
|
Dumien
True Bro
Black Market Trader
No engrams. Only disappointment.
Posts: 3,292
|
Post by Dumien on Nov 10, 2012 21:13:41 GMT -5
Excellent OP.
Here is the main problem...and I voiced it in another thread and you voiced it here under #2.
There is no great reason to run a secondary with an attachment. Here is why: It would be better to run the overkill wildcard and a naked smg/shotgun. Why? its 2 picks vs 2 picks.
The attachment should be free. (another one of your suggestions.
Now, assault shielders are looking into the prospect of executioners with two attachments for fast swap kills, but its comparative swap effectiveness remains to be seen. Also, that is one very very niche role (hampered by the fact that overkill might be better anyways with the assault shield), We are talking about one entire weapons category that has no use for attachments. That is a problem.
|
|
asasa
True Bro
fuck
Posts: 4,255
|
Post by asasa on Nov 10, 2012 21:19:44 GMT -5
There is an upgraded knife: the ballistic knife. I know... lol
|
|
toysrme
True Bro
"Even at normal Health, there's no other choice than the Vector" Den Kirson
Posts: 1,339
|
Post by toysrme on Nov 10, 2012 22:32:41 GMT -5
secondaries are worthless now. it's better to take another perk or attachment on #1. that includes using the b23r or akimno shottpistols as primaries
|
|
asasa
True Bro
fuck
Posts: 4,255
|
Post by asasa on Nov 10, 2012 22:51:42 GMT -5
I get a pretty high percent of secondary kills [>6%]. Am I an outlier here?
I find that to be worth a point. Although if its the difference between a perk... eh...
|
|
|
Post by thegentleman on Nov 10, 2012 23:36:01 GMT -5
So if Toysrme is right and 3arc has little interest trying to get the secondaries to be a viable choice in place of an AR, I'd say that swings the balance back to my third solution: awarding more points for people taken down with a secondary. If they're clearly outclassed, then reward someone for knowingly running out into battle with a gimped setup.
That also solves the problem of putting up to 3 attachments on the secondary weapon and trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear: if you want a handgun to be better-equipped to give you those proposed bonuses towards your scorestreak, you're going to have to give up perks, explosives, etc.
Also, the more I consider the ramifications of pick 10, the more I realize that BO II is going to nerf player abilities and killing potential as a whole. Consider this: In MW3, any given player class effectively had 13 points (A primary with 2 attachments, a secondary with one attachment, 3 perks with 3 pro perks, a tac grenade, and a lethal grenade). If we're considering that we'd need wildcards to get those secondary "pro" perks, that bumps any given MW3 loadout to a massive 16 points in the BO2 create-a-class system.
"10" is a round number that's easier to manage, but it also means we're going to have an average of about 37% less advantages than we're used to running at any given moment... making having to weigh the option for a secondary that much more important.
|
|
|
Post by aidsaidsaids on Nov 11, 2012 2:20:15 GMT -5
That's a line of reasoning that gets posted all the time recently, and it's complete nonsense. Perks having pro effects doesn't make them equivalent to two perks. You're forced to use the pro effect that goes with the perk, whether you want it or not. You have more "abilities," but absolutely not more "killing potential."
The BO2 system gives you the opportunity to drop all the unicorns you aren't using for dinosaurs you will use. So while previous games allowed you to have more vibrators total, BO2 allows you to use more egg rolls you actually want. Would you trade the "see equipment" part of Sitrep and your secondary to gain Quickdraw? Of course you would. The resultant class has fewer things, but it's still better. It still has more "killing potential."
The simple fact is that some portion of your je ne se qua is useless under the old system. Trading the useless abortions and getting back half that amount of good sandwiches is still more good ice cream than you had before, and that's the point.
|
|
|
Post by aidsaidsaids on Nov 11, 2012 2:46:33 GMT -5
too much doo-doo methinks I have no idea what you're talking about.
|
|
|
Post by aidsaidsaids on Nov 11, 2012 2:52:18 GMT -5
I would run into the one mouse on the internet that eats dinosaurs and vibrators
|
|
|
Post by aidsaidsaids on Nov 11, 2012 2:58:36 GMT -5
Shit's weak. I'm working on destroying my circadian rhythm for monday night. I'm aiming to wake up around 8 PM. All the cool kids are doing it
|
|
Den
He's That Guy
Posts: 4,294,967,295
|
Post by Den on Nov 11, 2012 4:20:48 GMT -5
Since Treyarch and Indemnity Ward don't like pistols...
Players get three weapons. Everyone gets a pistol in the Tertiary slot no matter what. If you don't have the pistol out, you melee with the butt of your gun and it takes two hits to kill. The pistol melee is the good old knife so you need to prepare in advance if you want an instant kill, trading off immediate firepower for a stealthy kill.
The other weapons are then separated into the other slots. But instead of limiting one weapon type to either Primary or Secondary, you choose weapons that fit into a total "Slot Size". You have a total of six Slots to fill.
Rocket Launchers, Sniper Rifles, LMGs and a Shield take three slots. Assault Rifles, Shotguns and some other weapons take two slots. SMGs and all equipment/grenades take one slot. Also SMGs would be made to rightly suck at a distance instead of the ridiculous do-all submawinguns that have dominated Treyarch games and MW3. A typical class would be something like Assault - Shotgun - Equipment - Tactical LMG - SMG - Equipment - Tactical
But then you can mix it up with things like Shield - Assault - Equipment - (no Tactical) Sniper - Launcher - (No Equipment or Tactical)
And then there would be a Perk that added an extra Slot or two so you could put together two 2-Slot or 3-Slot weapons and still have an Equipment and Tactical.
Or something. I just made this up as I went along.
Down with two weapon systems!
|
|
|
Post by aidsaidsaids on Nov 11, 2012 4:41:00 GMT -5
I definitely think the only way to make pistols usable is to reduce their opportunity cost. Having a system like yours in which a pistol costs less than an AR (an has nothing to do with perk selection) would help.
BO2 went in the complete opposite direction. Since you can only ever shoot one weapon at a time, giving secondaries (which you can't use with your primary) the same opportunity cost as perks/attachments (which are not so limited) makes them hilariously overcosted. The only way to make them worthwhile in that scheme would be to give secondaries some other benefit on top of being a secondary that would be felt while you were using the primary. Ammo sharing a la CoD4 is an example of this.
|
|
Tyzerra
True Bro
Stay sharp.
Posts: 10,989
|
Post by Tyzerra on Nov 11, 2012 6:36:43 GMT -5
I think we can all agree that the most logical solution is to lower the cost of pistols below that of primaries since they're effectively downgraded primaries (which makes sense really). However, that leaves the tricky task of how to implement this into the Pick 10 system... Since reducing the cost of pistols seems extremely challenging, I really REALLY like the extra score bonus for pistol kills. I think a straight up ~40% score bonus for pistol kills is a brilliant idea. Even if the guy lands 2 out of 3 hits with an AR and then switches out to the pistol for the final shot, it's hardly game-breaking that he gets a few extra points for whipping it out at the last second. I think the flat-out ~40% score bonus for pistol kills is definitely the way to go. IMO it's a brilliant idea! Oh, and as for this point about pistol-only players wrecking their team's chances of winning: The only caveat here is that it would run against the "spirit" that 3arc is trying to build. Handgun only players in this case are rewarded for being daredevils, and the reality is that they're putting their team at risk by dying more often and being a lower risk to the enemy team than they would be with a more powerful primary. Because of that, 3arc might balk at it. I agree with encouraging players to play the objective, but I think for a majority-vote it's fair to say that most players most of the time want to play for fun, without worrying about objectives, KD, score, etc. As much as winning should be important, it shouldn't always be about winning. Using myself as an example, if it was always about winning, I wouldn't play COD half as much as I do simply because I just want to have fun - which in my case is getting lots of kills and little deaths. My point is if players want to slightly jeopardise their team's chances of winning, let them. Besides, I imagine it will be mostly above-average players who go pistol-only anyway - so I don't think too much harm will be dealt anyway.
|
|
|
Post by aidsaidsaids on Nov 11, 2012 10:50:39 GMT -5
I'm not sure. I was going to ask you, but I figured you were going to sleep. Must have been the not-alcohol.
|
|
natalie
True Bro
Yes I'm a guy.
Posts: 27
|
Post by natalie on Nov 11, 2012 13:56:12 GMT -5
I would use the tac 45 just how it is now. They cost the same as primaries because pistols dont have to compete with them: the purpose of them is to act like backups (empty mag, no ammo) and they have an advantage over primaries in terms of draw times and they will be used in every sniper class which already gives them a reason to exist.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled Jigglypuff on Nov 11, 2012 14:04:50 GMT -5
I would use the tac 45 just how it is now. They cost the same as primaries because pistols dont have to compete with them: the purpose of them is to act like backups (empty mag, no ammo) and they have an advantage over primaries in terms of draw times and they will be used in every sniper class which already gives them a reason to exist. I'll never waste a point on a pistol in my Sniper Rifle class.
|
|
natalie
True Bro
Yes I'm a guy.
Posts: 27
|
Post by natalie on Nov 11, 2012 15:50:22 GMT -5
I'll never waste a point on a pistol in my Sniper Rifle class. qs or hs ? when u hit a qs and get a hitmarker wouldn't u liek to switch to a secondary? thats my sniper class:
|
|
|
Post by UrbaneVirtuoso on Nov 11, 2012 15:59:49 GMT -5
Needs moar anti-air -- something already leagues better than conventional pistols at that.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled Jigglypuff on Nov 11, 2012 16:14:13 GMT -5
I'll never waste a point on a pistol in my Sniper Rifle class. qs or hs ? when u hit a qs and get a hitmarker wouldn't u liek to switch to a secondary? Both, if I get a hitmarker, aim better. Or QS the guy again. I run RPGs and Stingers on my SR classes.
|
|
|
Post by thegentleman on Nov 11, 2012 16:22:41 GMT -5
To aidsaidsaids:
I agree with you that there's a lot of "noise" in terms of the MW3 classes giving you a lot of stuff you don't necessarily need, but I can think of plenty of classes that I've designed around using as much as possible. If I have QD on a class, for example, I'm far more likely to pack semtex or C4, and I'm much more likely to bring along a trophy system or tac insert to take advantage of the pro pairing. If you aren't using every feature to your advantage, you're building ineffective classes. Most of us here probably have some fairly competitive setups and build around the "waste not, want not" system. So from that vantage, I don't think that the extra 6 points in the MW3 system will automatically go to BS goodies I don't even use.
Mantling over obstacles faster? Holding my breath longer for a gun I'm not using? Sure, I could give those up because they're comparatively worthless pro perks. But there aren't that many of those in the game, and even "lesser used" perks paired with the one we REALLY want save my butt passively. Sitrep has protected me from quite a few claymores and pointed out some PR campers when I'm just using it for the pro version, Assassin pro is a default switch-to class when the game gets EMP heavy, and BE pro is the reason why I pack stingers almost never when my LMG can do the same job on UAVs and choppers.
That said, I'm glad I'm trading the extra stuff for more flexibility, just because it makes things more interesting. I also know that I'm not going to be the only one who's less powerful than everyone else. It'll be nice to kill people in the middle of reloads again. I was starting to miss that in MW3.
To Natalie:
You outline just about the only time that a pistol might be useful in the game. However, could you justify putting an attachment on your Tac45 when overkill and another primary has the same point value? This is what Dumien, myself, and others are getting at.
Handguns as a class should have higher and more tempting attributes than being a compliment for a class of weapons that (in my experience) tends to get some of the least use in the series. If they're ONLY high mobility, quickswap weapons, that MIGHT be enough to justify their use. I'd still like to see something exciting that would make me amped to use them and try my best with them. We all saw how much the raise / drop times really mattered in MW3, so unless there's a MAJOR distinction between getting that secondary out (I'm talking SoH pro + quickswap fast) and pulling an SMG, I think people are just going to run overkill and a CQB gun.
To Tyzerra:
I agree with you: most people DO play the objective most of the time. I only mentioned the maverick angle as a possible objection to why 3arc might be leery of it, even if I don't believe it myself all that much.
To Den:
I'd actually love the idea of an 80-damage gun butt. Panic-knifing on a guy with full health who's trying to shoot you? You'll die every time. However, it still lets the gun smash work as a finisher if you've landed at least one shot in virtually all gunfights. Meanwhile, pistol users are better-equipped to stab people, giving them a skill that they alone have within that class.
I see the chances of that being implemented as effectively nil, though. CoD players seem to love the Reflex Blade.
|
|
natalie
True Bro
Yes I'm a guy.
Posts: 27
|
Post by natalie on Nov 11, 2012 17:04:01 GMT -5
To Natalie:
You outline just about the only time that a pistol might be useful in the game. However, could you justify putting an attachment on your Tac45 when overkill and another primary has the same point value? This is what Dumien, myself, and others are getting at. Handguns as a class should have higher and more tempting attributes than being a compliment for a class of weapons that (in my experience) tends to get some of the least use in the series. If they're ONLY high mobility, quickswap weapons, that MIGHT be enough to justify their use. I'd still like to see something exciting that would make me amped to use them and try my best with them. We all saw how much the raise / drop times really mattered in MW3, so unless there's a MAJOR distinction between getting that secondary out (I'm talking SoH pro + quickswap fast) and pulling an SMG, I think people are just going to run overkill and a CQB gun. pistol + attachment is a waste you're right, but a pistol without an attachment at the cost of 1 point still has a faster drawtime then a smg at the cost of 2 points. We all know the mp9 (silencer) was the best mp in MW3 in terms of dmg and accuracy, but I always used the g18 in snd which is probably the worst of them in that terms, because it had a pistol like drawtime making it my favourite among all mp's. It could be that I am just a weirdo and played to much cs and therefore still thinking that pistols are powerfull, but I use them since cod 4 and I do kill with them when my ammo is empty. I hardly use any launchers at all.
|
|
Tyzerra
True Bro
Stay sharp.
Posts: 10,989
|
Post by Tyzerra on Nov 11, 2012 17:12:21 GMT -5
You guys are bringing up good points here with the fast swap times and all. After reconsideration, I'm thinking that maybe a quick-swap to a naked pistol is actually worth 1 of 10 points... It'll probably save my butt more than I realise. But who knows, I still need to wait until tomorrow before I get my copy
|
|
|
Post by thegentleman on Nov 11, 2012 17:18:20 GMT -5
The problem there is that it's too easy to say, "Quickswap and BAM, they're balanced" when MW3 showed that between the minor differences in swap time, primaries that swapped quite fast (G36c), and SoH pro (returning here as fast hands), that small niche pistols occupy could be eradicated quite fast.
I still put my final vote in the idea of the +40 bonus (or something between +15 and +50) to pistol kills. Incidentally, that also solves the attachment problem, because while those guns still don't compete with primaries, you make them progressively better equipped to become bonus point producers at the expense of further perk, weapon, and equipment choices. Basically it'd be the equivalent of running Ultra hardline.
|
|
|
Post by Wonder Showzen on Nov 11, 2012 17:30:46 GMT -5
I think pistols already fulfill some rolls that no other weapons can, per reasons already mentioned above. A major role they fill: Near maximum movement-speed(18 out of 20 maximum mobility) + ranged-killing-power. Add Lightweight and you might reach maximum mobility the game offers(20), and still have ranged-killing-power. You can have a Blops2 rebirth of the MW3 Akimbo FMGs extreme damage, with maximum mobility:
|
|
|
Post by rubixx on Nov 11, 2012 17:37:00 GMT -5
The dual wield B23R would be a much better pistol imo for Shield users. I would also swap P1 greed for P2 greed and add fast hands. Lose the 2nd attachment on the gun and add another perk or use tac insert +c4/ throwing knife. You should have equipment b/c without it you are losing arguably the best part of scavenger.
|
|