saiyaniam
True Bro
360 GT : FOREVERpokemon
Posts: 83
|
Post by saiyaniam on Dec 15, 2011 15:02:38 GMT -5
I don't understand you guy's saying the tar is best, it has nasty recoil. The scar has a much better recoil pattern, also it has the best iron sights in the game. It's only real down side it the clip size, which can be fixed. And a burst gun is not good at close quarters, so you can't say thats the best. The TAR shoots faster and has a larger magazine. The recoil only slows it down in long range fights. Iron sights are preference/opinion. I like the TAR-21 more than the SCAR. Burst guns are great in CQC, but only if you're accurate/lucky. They have high rates of fire, so a one-burst kill is deadly. High risk, high reward. The recoil on the tar can jump of target a lot, the scar does not. The iron sights are not preference/opinion, they are all about visibility. Tar 21 Scar h You can see more with the scar iron sites.
|
|
|
Post by mastermarth on Dec 15, 2011 15:26:05 GMT -5
Need to nerf support streaks a bit first. Stealth Bomber, Advanced UAV, and EMP are far too OP atm. Don't see how SB and EMP are OP, but this is not directly about that. Why do you think that the AUAV, of all killstreaks, is OP? It sweeps, it can be shot down, and it has a popular counter (Assassin)...
|
|
Zero IX
True Bro
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Posts: 1,655
|
Post by Zero IX on Dec 15, 2011 16:57:53 GMT -5
No one can say the SCAR was objectively the best gun in MW2. Just as I (coincidentally) mentioned in another topic, from a statistical standpoint, even after recoil adjustments, it will exhibit a higher average time-to-kill due to its lower rate of fire in close and mid range encounters compared to the SCAR, which has a significant disadvantage in the form of a small (20 round) mag.
The SCAR is essentially forced to use ExMags as its attachment, while the SCAR can run a more beneficial attachment such as a Silencer or Grenade Launcher, both of which lend it an added dimension of functionality.
By contrast, the SCAR's irons, while objectively clearer, are a relatively minor advantage, especially considering the TAR's irons are hardly more obscuring at worst.
I'm not saying the SCAR's not one of the best guns in MW2, just that it's decisively not the hands-down best. MW2's Holy Trinity of ARs was definitely the TAR, SCAR, and ACR.
|
|
saiyaniam
True Bro
360 GT : FOREVERpokemon
Posts: 83
|
Post by saiyaniam on Dec 15, 2011 17:30:11 GMT -5
I still stand by the scar being the best.
The TAR is a pain in the ass at range, even close to mid the recoil can lose you a kill or get you killed.
Where as the scar does not suffer from the jumping recoil that the TAR does. Meaning it's good at close, mid and long range.
The scar is a more reliable gun. Therefor can get you kills more reliably than any other. It's only down size is the small clip size, that can be fixed with either slight of hand or extended mags. It only takes one perk or attachment to fix it's weak point. The ROF is really not a big weak point at all.
You can't fix the FAL's lack of rapid fire, nor can you fix the TAR's jumpy recoil.
>>Overall<< the scar is the best. But thats just my opinion based on the facts I know. I think I've made all the points I can already.
So I'm just gunna say Foxtrot MW3 for being so boring. I really don't give a shit about MW3's gun, as you can tell by this thread. I find MW2's far more interesting.
|
|
wwaa
True Bro
PC / PS4 / X1
Posts: 2,086
|
Post by wwaa on Dec 15, 2011 17:44:29 GMT -5
You both are blind RPD, L86 LSW (in CQC), sniper rifles, UMP45 & Vector & MP5K (hipfire), FAL & FAMAS and some OP secondaries were the best guns in MW2. [TTK, CQC abilities, ammo, 1-2HK abilities, accuracy, ROF] All full auto assault rifles WERE OBSOLETE, the only reason for them to be in the game was the grenade launcher. That's from PC point of view [SCAR] ... The ROF is really not a big weak point at all. Let's be serious. ... Are we talking about the same game ? [of course, TAR21 >>> SCAR-H due to: 1) ROF 2) burst firing so recoil under control 3) clip size]
|
|
spry
True Bro
On PC
Posts: 232
|
Post by spry on Dec 15, 2011 17:59:33 GMT -5
Fine with me if no one talks about rapid fire Vectors and MP7's. I'll keep them to myself.
|
|
wwaa
True Bro
PC / PS4 / X1
Posts: 2,086
|
Post by wwaa on Dec 15, 2011 18:00:43 GMT -5
Fine with me if no one talks about rapid fire Vectors and MP7's. I'll keep them to myself. I mentioned Vector
|
|
Zero IX
True Bro
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Posts: 1,655
|
Post by Zero IX on Dec 15, 2011 18:28:40 GMT -5
Very well, saiyaniam. You are entitled to your opinion; however, notice that you failed to counter any of my points. Your only argument for the SCAR is that it is more accurate than the TAR, which is true; however the TAR's recoil is not nearly jumpy enough to be problematic at close to middle ranges, where the TAR's higher rate of fire and larger mag give it an undeniable advantage versus the SCAR.
I won't repeat myself with regards to restricted attachment choice. Higher recoil in exchange for a significantly higher rate of fire and larger mags is a fair trade.
Again: MW2's top automatic ARs, the TAR, SCAR, and ACR, were well-balanced, and there is little in the way of hard, compelling evidence to claim any one has a significant advantage versus the other two.
wwa, I am a console player and will refrain from commenting on your post, but there's no rhyme, reason, or coherence to your supposed list of "best" guns in MW2. The RPD, "sniper rifles," UMP45, MP5K, and FAL, for example, are all "good" guns, but they obviously can't all be the "best." Perhaps the best within parameters of varying degrees of narrowness, but that's true of most MW2 guns.
While MW3's cast of guns isn't up to par with MW2's in terms of variety or viability, at least the rest of the game isn't as ill-conceived as MW2. My general opinion on MW2 is that it had the most sound foundation of any non-CoD4 Call of Duty, but that was balanced by the most blatant and offensive design flaws of any of the post-CoD4 games, too.
|
|
saiyaniam
True Bro
360 GT : FOREVERpokemon
Posts: 83
|
Post by saiyaniam on Dec 15, 2011 18:28:52 GMT -5
You both are blind RPD, L86 LSW (in CQC), sniper rifles, UMP45 & Vector & MP5K (hipfire), FAL & FAMAS and some OP secondaries were the best guns in MW2. [TTK, CQC abilities, ammo, 1-2HK abilities, accuracy, ROF] All full auto assault rifles WERE OBSOLETE, the only reason for them to be in the game was the grenade launcher. That's from PC point of view [SCAR] ... The ROF is really not a big weak point at all. Let's be serious. ... Are we talking about the same game ? [of course, TAR21 >>> SCAR-H due to: 1) ROF 2) burst firing so recoil under control 3) clip size] Yes, the time to kill is very low for both guns. The extremely small TTK advantage the TAR has over the SCAR is exactly that. Small. It makes very little difference. The accuracy of the SCAR more than makes up for it.
|
|
saiyaniam
True Bro
360 GT : FOREVERpokemon
Posts: 83
|
Post by saiyaniam on Dec 15, 2011 18:36:21 GMT -5
Very well, saiyaniam. You are entitled to your opinion; however, notice that you failed to counter any of my points. Your only argument for the SCAR is that it is more accurate than the TAR, which is true; however the TAR's recoil is not nearly jumpy enough to be problematic at close to middle ranges, where the TAR's higher rate of fire and larger mag give it an undeniable advantage versus the SCAR. I won't repeat myself with regards to restricted attachment choice. Higher recoil in exchange for a significantly higher rate of fire and larger mags is a fair trade. Again: MW2's top automatic ARs, the TAR, SCAR, and ACR, were well-balanced, and there is little in the way of hard, compelling evidence to claim any one has a significant advantage versus the other two. wwa, I am a console player and will refrain from commenting on your post, but there's no rhyme, reason, or coherence to your supposed list of "best" guns in MW2. The RPD, "sniper rifles," UMP45, MP5K, and FAL, for example, are all "good" guns, but they obviously can't all be the "best." Perhaps the best within parameters of varying degrees of narrowness, but that's true of most MW2 guns. While MW3's cast of guns isn't up to par with MW2's in terms of variety or viability, at least the rest of the game isn't as ill-conceived as MW2. My general opinion on MW2 is that it had the most sound foundation of any non-CoD4 Call of Duty, but that was balanced by the most blatant and offensive design flaws of any of the post-CoD4 games, too. I did, the scar is more reliable. I've played with both for a very long time, and the TAR's recoil has lost me a lot of mid/long range kills. The scar has not. A fast rate of fire does not do much if the guns shooting most of it's bullets around the target. Also you confused me a bit, I think sometimes you meant to put TAR instead of SCAR.
|
|
|
Post by shatt3r on Dec 15, 2011 20:43:10 GMT -5
Very well, saiyaniam. You are entitled to your opinion; however, notice that you failed to counter any of my points. Your only argument for the SCAR is that it is more accurate than the TAR, which is true; however the TAR's recoil is not nearly jumpy enough to be problematic at close to middle ranges, where the TAR's higher rate of fire and larger mag give it an undeniable advantage versus the SCAR. I won't repeat myself with regards to restricted attachment choice. Higher recoil in exchange for a significantly higher rate of fire and larger mags is a fair trade. Again: MW2's top automatic ARs, the TAR, SCAR, and ACR, were well-balanced, and there is little in the way of hard, compelling evidence to claim any one has a significant advantage versus the other two. wwa, I am a console player and will refrain from commenting on your post, but there's no rhyme, reason, or coherence to your supposed list of "best" guns in MW2. The RPD, "sniper rifles," UMP45, MP5K, and FAL, for example, are all "good" guns, but they obviously can't all be the "best." Perhaps the best within parameters of varying degrees of narrowness, but that's true of most MW2 guns. While MW3's cast of guns isn't up to par with MW2's in terms of variety or viability, at least the rest of the game isn't as ill-conceived as MW2. My general opinion on MW2 is that it had the most sound foundation of any non-CoD4 Call of Duty, but that was balanced by the most blatant and offensive design flaws of any of the post-CoD4 games, too. I did, the scar is more reliable. I've played with both for a very long time, and the TAR's recoil has lost me a lot of mid/long range kills. The scar has not. A fast rate of fire does not do much if the guns shooting most of it's bullets around the target. Also you confused me a bit, I think sometimes you meant to put TAR instead of SCAR. I did, the TAR is more reliable. I've played with both for a very long time, and the SCARs low ROF has lost me a lot of short/mid range kills. The TAR has not. Accuracy does not do much if the guns shooting so slow the other enemy puts his rounds into you first. I can also improve the accuracy of the TAR because I can compensate for recoil and reduce the number of missed shots, I cannot make the scar fire faster no matter what i do. Recoil for TAR was really easy to compensate for on PC. and with SP it was a 2 shot kill to mid range and 3 at long. Given your first shot is on target the chances of your second on target even at range is almost guranteed. if you'r missing with your TAR at mid range you need to work on your aim. The scar is easier to shoot first and move your gun to the target. The tar if you could aquire your target would kill up to mid range with 2 shots faster. If your equal skill thing holds true a person should kill with the TAR at mid range more cause his first 2 shots will land on target. It would only lose at extremely long distances which you mentioned were rare in the game. Also if we take 2 players equally skilled at compensating for recoil, the SCAR becomes the inferior weapon. Also your logic for skill making up is wrong. Some guns require more skill to use, and makes them better for player who can deal with their down sides. And no it doesn't mean they would do better with the "better weapon(in this case the scar)" I can compensate for recoil in TAR well. as a reward i get faster ROF and a bigger mag. I have learnt to compensate for recoil so the accuracy the SCAR gives me means doo-doo at everything except extremely long range. I get enough accuracy by compensating for my recoil at most of my combats with the TAR to win more fights due to the faster ROF and bigger mag. No matter how good i am i can't make the SCAR shoot faster or have a bigger mag without attachments. I can't make up for the weakness of the SCAR. the TAR is a better weapon for me and I get MORE kills with it than a scar because i can compensate for its weakness. You can't do anything about a slow ROF. your requirement for emag means my TAR can have better sights with a HOLO, or silenced if i prefer or even EMAGS. I only need 3 hits to kill and the firdt 2 are almost always dead on target. compensating to get 1 more shot to hit under the faster ROF is pretty easy to me.
|
|
niteshadex
True Bro
Xbox GT: The Beastly 117
Posts: 688
|
Post by niteshadex on Dec 15, 2011 23:11:49 GMT -5
Alright bros this is some pretty super cool and/or otherwise great discussion. But this thread's plenty off topic. I feel bad for spurring it in that direction. Den you should probly come down with Odin's Fury and cleave this thread in twain.
Back on topic. I think a lot of the FMGs hidden strength comes from lag compensation. Its no secret that the person doing the rushing has an advantage over those waiting around the corner. Often when I get FMG'ed its someone running through a doorway or around a corner at me guns blazing. "Usually" gunfights don't last long enough for anyone to switch weapons, unless its a pistol. Because of this, and their spray n pray nature, the FMGs will role over most weapons when you round a corner to see an enemy at 5-20ft range. I lose battles as Striker vs FMGs because of this. Especially on maps like Abrakadabra (Or whatever).
|
|
asasa
True Bro
fuck
Posts: 4,255
|
Post by asasa on Dec 15, 2011 23:13:10 GMT -5
So... this is the nerf? I just abused the crap about of them today.
The recoil seemed the same if not lower.
|
|
niteshadex
True Bro
Xbox GT: The Beastly 117
Posts: 688
|
Post by niteshadex on Dec 15, 2011 23:17:44 GMT -5
Need to nerf support streaks a bit first. Stealth Bomber, Advanced UAV, and EMP are far too OP atm. Don't see how SB and EMP are OP, but this is not directly about that. Why do you think that the AUAV, of all killstreaks, is OP? It sweeps, it can be shot down, and it has a popular counter (Assassin)... UAV is too easy to gain as a support streak. This UAV spam has led to the overuse of Assassin. Because 1 in 30 players actually uses rocket to shoot UAVs down. Its easier to pick assassin and play selfishly. Overuse of UAVs leads to overuse of Assassin. Mostly, its the fact the values that same. 3 kills is very little, but three kills you must get in 1 life, vs total gameplay length. Its really problematic in SnD, if you dont have the counters. I think UAV needs to be a 6 or 7 ks in support, because of the ease with which you can get it. I mostly play Dom, and again, stealth bomber appears frequently. Its hard NOT to earn the necessary kills, and players can call in at least two of these beasts per match if it drags on. I havent seen a SB get less than 3 kills yet. I see no reason for this to be support anyways. It needs to be a 9-10 offensive KS. Finally, for EMP, they stack. Good teams can literally keep permanent EMP on their enemy. This invalidates the enemies minimap and all ks'es. It also makes more users flock to Assassin because of Pro countering emp minnimap.
|
|
farmerjim
True Bro
XBL GT: LeGiONxMuffin
Posts: 48
|
Post by farmerjim on Dec 16, 2011 0:00:31 GMT -5
Are you Bros serious? For one, this thread has been derailed beyond belief since about 3 and a half pages ago, and we're arguing about a game that isn't even relevant anymore! This message board has to be one of the worst for thread hijacking, it almost always ends up being an off topic argument with no conclusion. At least have something to add to the OP thread.
ON TOPIC!!!!!!!!!!!!: IMO FMG's have not been nerf'd enough, but oh well it's not like they are actually logical about they're decisions. I still see people using dual FMG's as their primaries the whole game.
|
|
|
Post by drakealdan on Dec 16, 2011 0:43:55 GMT -5
I don't feel that Akimbo FMGs give you a huge advantage anymore. Up close sure, mid-range, post-patch that's arguable.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled Jigglypuff on Dec 16, 2011 0:51:59 GMT -5
Are you Bros serious? For one, this thread has been derailed beyond belief since about 3 and a half pages ago, and we're arguing about a game that isn't even relevant anymore! This message board has to be one of the worst for thread hijacking, it almost always ends up being an off topic argument with no conclusion. At least have something to add to the OP thread. At least the conversation is productive... But, on topic. Here are some proposed nerfs I have: -Make hip spread horrendous, -drop RPM to 900 -Drop damage to 25-17
|
|
wwaa
True Bro
PC / PS4 / X1
Posts: 2,086
|
Post by wwaa on Dec 16, 2011 3:45:53 GMT -5
I begin to think that FMG patch was fine. I’m still being killed by those bloody akimbos, but not so often and by players who could kill me with less OP weapons as well. I never wanted FMGs to be completely useless…
Are there any technical info about the recoil parameters? Googled but nothing found …
|
|
|
Post by dshunter on Dec 16, 2011 4:31:04 GMT -5
I assume their fire rate when dual-wielded hasn't been normalized yet? That's definitely step 1 in bringing these monsters in line with what secondary weapons should be like. And then, a slight increase in hip spread should do all that's needed. Go from 5 to 6.5 or 7, and suddenly, they're not laser guns at medium range any more. And they could potentially lose a close-quarters gunfights for a change every now and then due to unlucky spread patterns.
|
|
saiyaniam
True Bro
360 GT : FOREVERpokemon
Posts: 83
|
Post by saiyaniam on Dec 16, 2011 10:27:31 GMT -5
One last thing and I'll shut up.
Then you are clearly not taking the extreme shots that I am. I can compensate for the recoil too. But when you are playing at a high level if your gun is bouncing around randomly then you can't make the skillfull shots that a normal player would miss.
I'm not going to comment on the rest of your post because it's all bullshit that only applys when you have an enemy standing right infront of you. Easy shots.
Sorry for hijacking the topic. I'm done.
|
|
|
Post by crocs on Dec 16, 2011 15:23:00 GMT -5
I like the off-topic topic, so I'm going to contribute to it.
I never understood why people would trade a slight accuracy advantage (SCAR) for clip and ROF (TAR). The TAR wins hands down at short- and medium-range because of the crazy ROF disparity, and at long range accuracy doesn't actually mean anything unless you're a newb who full autos all the time. Assuming you know when to burst fire, whoever lands the first shot is going to win (flinch, yo).
As for SCAR vs. FAL, I'd come down on the side of the FAL (holo), but I think which is better depends entirely on how good you are at COD. FAL was the first weapon I got Fall camo for because I played like a headshot machine. If you make a serious conscious effort to change where you aim by default, it's not really that hard. I'd get 10+ OSOKs in a match with the thing. But if you don't have the best aim and rely on strafing to adjust your shot, sure, almost any full auto will be better for you than a FAL.
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on Dec 16, 2011 16:15:38 GMT -5
Finally, for EMP, they stack. Good teams can literally keep permanent EMP on their enemy. This invalidates the enemies minimap and all ks'es. It also makes more users flock to Assassin because of Pro countering emp minnimap. When you say they stack, do you mean that if I call one in while one is already in effect, an additional 60 seconds is added on to the effect (rather than 60 seconds from when I call it in)? If so, do you have anything confirming this? I thought that was not the case.
|
|