|
Post by tsavo213 on Nov 18, 2010 16:02:11 GMT -5
Stat wise it is just flat out worse than the galil
|
|
|
Post by mrboo2501 on Nov 18, 2010 16:06:56 GMT -5
The damage difference is negligible...over the Galil, the only interesting delta is the ADS time. The Enfield ADSes like an SMG. Edit: I should say that I haven't unlocked the Galil yet so I don't know anything about it's iron sights.
|
|
|
Post by themccannman on Nov 18, 2010 16:12:35 GMT -5
i hate both of them, enfield straight up stinks, and the galil is a poopy version of the stoner, almost the same add time ( i don't count reload time since i always double Y or sprint out of reloads) and it's damage doesn't drop over range.
|
|
sleep
True Bro
Posts: 10,189
|
Post by sleep on Nov 18, 2010 16:37:57 GMT -5
huh, i don't really understand the comparison between the galil and stoner, too many things about them are different: movement speed, magazine size, fire rate, recoil, attachments...? honestly the galil is one of my favorite assault rifles along with the commando but i prefer the hk21 over the stoner for lmgs...
anyway yeah, the enfield sucks, i never use it unless i'm out of ammo and it's the only thing i can find.
|
|
|
Post by Ishbane on Nov 18, 2010 16:38:03 GMT -5
What is the point of the Galil?
Stat wise it is just an Enfield with five more rounds, worse ADS and longer raising and reload.
|
|
battleaxerx
True Bro
"You can't take the sky from me."
Posts: 773
|
Post by battleaxerx on Nov 18, 2010 17:06:35 GMT -5
The point of the enfield (and all the other ARs) is to be another gun in treyarch's game. The only thing treyarch was concerned with while adding more guns was making sure they added more guns.
/speculative rant.
|
|
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 18, 2010 18:30:08 GMT -5
the point of the enfield is that you can ditch the M16 for an assault rifle that works well off your own host after one good round of MP5 play every time you reset.
|
|
|
Post by avemcree on Nov 18, 2010 18:38:43 GMT -5
the enfield is beast to me. its recoil is super controllable... its the only AR I use other than the M16
|
|
|
Post by mw0swedeking on Nov 18, 2010 18:39:26 GMT -5
What's the point of the Uzi? Seriously the thing was probably underpowered in CoD4, but then it was at least a hip fire beast. Now it's nothing, and has worse irons than ever. I mean, it's still a hipfire beast, but so is everything else...
|
|
battleaxerx
True Bro
"You can't take the sky from me."
Posts: 773
|
Post by battleaxerx on Nov 18, 2010 23:07:35 GMT -5
Guns are now more of a part of the customization process.
Treyarch treats guns more like emblems.
I guess the point is to pick a gun to express yourself. Not to find the OP one and use it forever.
|
|
|
Post by chip sandwich on Nov 18, 2010 23:19:20 GMT -5
What's the point of any 30-20 SMG? Stat wise they're just flat out worse than the Spectre.
|
|
|
Post by swoopwithnon4m3 on Nov 19, 2010 0:55:15 GMT -5
Guns are now more of a part of the customization process. Treyarch treats guns more like emblems. I guess the point is to pick a gun to express yourself. Not to find the OP one and use it forever. Apparently that's something to complain about...
|
|
sly
True Bro
Posts: 37
|
Post by sly on Nov 19, 2010 2:16:31 GMT -5
Guns are now more of a part of the customization process. Treyarch treats guns more like emblems. I guess the point is to pick a gun to express yourself. Not to find the OP one and use it forever. I wish there was a little more variety, but this doesn't bother me all that much. Hell, I loved the G36 in CoD4 because I liked its looks more than the M4 (and everyone used the M4) despite it being pretty much strictly worse. Although MW2 was mostly balanced (at least there were a large number of viable ARs) with a couple obnoxious exceptions but a lot more personality to the guns.
|
|
|
Post by mw0swedeking on Nov 19, 2010 2:34:47 GMT -5
I'm sorry, the Uzi is basically unusable, between having that horrible iron sight and it's massive recoil, and having no plus side in terms of damage or rate of fire. I used to use the muzi in mw2 for the very reason of being a little different, and I could. It's this game where you can't do that so well (in this case anyway).
|
|
|
Post by zuluzuluzulu on Nov 19, 2010 3:05:28 GMT -5
Guns are now more of a part of the customization process. Treyarch treats guns more like emblems. I guess the point is to pick a gun to express yourself. Not to find the OP one and use it forever. I wish there was a little more variety, but this doesn't bother me all that much. Hell, I loved the G36 in CoD4 because I liked its looks more than the M4 (and everyone used the M4) despite it being pretty much strictly worse. Although MW2 was mostly balanced (at least there were a large number of viable ARs) with a couple obnoxious exceptions but a lot more personality to the guns. Well, no the G36 wasn't strictly worse than the M4, and no, MW2 wasn't "mostly balanced." What games were you playing?! The G36, I think, was SUPER DUPER, PRETTY SWELL, A REALLY COOL GUY, AND/OR AWESOME. It idled less than the M4, and benefitted from stance changes. (My 5 kits in CoD4 were 4 G36 variants and an M21.) MW2 wasn't by any means balanced: Tar-21 in the same category as the F2000. That's pretty much the opposite of balanced, the F2000 did less damage at a barely higher fire rate but had immensely more kick. ACR had the same damage as the F2000 with a slightly slower fire rate and barely any kick. Balanced my bum. The guns in BO on the other hand are quite balanced, with only a few tweaks here and there within each category, with nothing standing out as "the best" of any set of weapons. There is some variety in each category, but nothing to suggest that one weapon is outrageously bad, or good.
|
|
battleaxerx
True Bro
"You can't take the sky from me."
Posts: 773
|
Post by battleaxerx on Nov 19, 2010 7:00:31 GMT -5
"SUPER DUPER, PRETTY SWELL, A REALLY COOL GUY, AND/OR AWESOME."
Lol, is that a filter effect? What did you say? Ov3rpowered?
...overpowered.
|
|
|
Post by SheWolf on Nov 19, 2010 8:28:52 GMT -5
it's not a filter effect, it just IS ^^
in al seriousnes though: that might be true on console, but on pc, where iddle is almost meaningless, the m4 was just plain better.
that does not mean however that a more skilled player with g36c could not completely curbstomp a slightly worse player with m4. it wasn't really that much of a difference.
|
|
|
Post by natsuterran on Nov 19, 2010 8:49:23 GMT -5
MW2 was fairly balanced compared to this game. you are looking at one of the worst weapons and comparing it to one of the best. It's not perfectly balanced by any means. But in the AR category you could use the M4, ACR, Tar21, AK47, and Scar-H just fine. Each gun had its own unique strengths and weaknesses. The SMG category as well was pretty well balanced. People complain about Ump's but I really think it is the worst sub by far. My favorite being the Mp5k. People only think the ump is good because they think SP is a must for other guns.
So there's the choice of 5 different subs and 5 assault rifles in MW2. In BO you can use a super-fast AR, the Aug or Famas. You can use any other AR which all have identical stats. And you can use the AkS74u or a spectre for subs. That's only 2 in each category of unique guns. Obviously I'm only counting automatics in this example, but MW2 has more balance in every other category of weapon as well. As terrible as MW2 is to me, it actually was fairly deep in its gun choice.
|
|
|
Post by avemcree on Nov 19, 2010 12:00:07 GMT -5
this thread is Over POWERED!
|
|
|
Post by mw0swedeking on Nov 19, 2010 16:44:11 GMT -5
I've crunched the numbers and come to the conclusion that... this thread is Over POWERED! Fixed
|
|
|
Post by vulgar on Nov 20, 2010 1:19:28 GMT -5
Guns are now more of a part of the customization process. Treyarch treats guns more like emblems. I guess the point is to pick a gun to express yourself. Not to find the OP one and use it forever. I wish there was a little more variety, but this doesn't bother me all that much. Hell, I loved the G36 in CoD4 because I liked its looks more than the M4 (and everyone used the M4) despite it being pretty much strictly worse. Although MW2 was mostly balanced (at least there were a large number of viable ARs) with a couple obnoxious exceptions but a lot more personality to the guns. Bingo. The OP/unbalanced argument makes no sense; people exaggerate the "lack of balance" of the guns in MW2. You had high TTK spray guns (tar), precision TTK (Fam16), precision (ACR), and challenge guns (F2000). I've heard people call nearly every one of those overpowered. Could it be they're just venting their frustration for something entirely different? Now we have guns that vary only in small, subtle ways, and it's pretty boring. The fact people are complaining about the Famas/Aug shows just how ridiculous it is.
|
|
|
Post by avemcree on Nov 20, 2010 17:12:21 GMT -5
I've crunched the numbers and come to the conclusion that... this thread is Over POWERED! Fixed *TEARS OF LAUGHTER* I needed that
|
|
battleaxerx
True Bro
"You can't take the sky from me."
Posts: 773
|
Post by battleaxerx on Nov 21, 2010 2:49:07 GMT -5
Now we have guns that vary only in small, subtle ways, and it's pretty boring. The fact people are complaining about the Famas/Aug shows just how ridiculous it is.
It kind of is in a way... but here's what I used most in MW2 in no order: UMP Ak47 SCAR M21EBR TAR21 AUG FAL
Recently however, I've used the AK47 the most. The point I'm trying to make is that, I can make due with 1 gun in MW2, but it gets boring. 1 or 2 actually, UMP and AK47 is all I need. It's actually a little similar to this game.
But I agree, the guns are all kinda similar, and the lack of a mid range SMG is kinda... blech.
|
|