Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2014 14:34:38 GMT -5
Yo mama's unnecessary, inefficient, and costs way too many passive points.
|
|
|
Post by Manglet on Apr 7, 2014 14:57:32 GMT -5
Am I too late to suggest a switchable shotgun?
You blew your load on twin tubes with the Tac but you could revive the KSG.
Shot does usual shotgun stuff, Switchable slug is like a Marksman Rifle.
|
|
|
Post by theprocitizen on Apr 8, 2014 15:44:32 GMT -5
Am I too late to suggest a switchable shotgun? You blew your load on twin tubes with the Tac but you could revive the KSG. Shot does usual shotgun stuff, Switchable slug is like a Marksman Rifle. So a shotgun that can switch to slugs on the fly? Sounds cool, it could have more reliable/simple body multipliers than current slugs, with a different tube for each ammo type. We'll give it really nice iron sights, something like the SCAR-L had, and smg stalk speeds. That's my thoughts at least.
|
|
|
Post by theprocitizen on Apr 8, 2014 15:44:56 GMT -5
On a separate note, what about introducing chrome lined for marksman rifles? It would increase idle sway and slightly decrease fire caps. As the big magazine high fire cap gun, the MR-28 would get just a slightly bigger head multiplier, and a neck multiplier the same as the head, both of which would still eventually only get a 2 shot. IA-2 will do the same, but add a moderate upper chest multiplier, guaranteeing a one shot to mid range. As the highest base damage marksman, the MK-14 would get the same head/neck treatment, but would get upper and lower chest multipliers. As the longest range option, the SVU will get a one hit kill to the head at any range, with a long 1btk for the neck but a moderate upper chest 1btk range, and no lower chest multiplier.
My current favorite is the IA-2, so I'll post the relevant stats that would change with chrome lined, and I can do others on request, or post the formula.
Head or neck shots will grant a one hit kill to 31.2m Upper chest (pectorals up) shots will grant a one hit kill to 20.8m Hitting upper chest and above will drop you from 3 to 2 hits to kill at long ranges. Fire cap of 495 (effective 450 if at 60fps) Increased idle sway (not sure how much, or how the stats work for that, if you really want to know just ask and I'll do some research) Everything else stays the same.
I think this sounds awesome, and in defense of any cries of op, you get less two hit kill range than muzzle brake, it'll be harder to hit the places that would get you one, and you take those shots slower.
Let me know what you think guys!
|
|
|
Post by -3055- on Apr 8, 2014 17:30:34 GMT -5
Marksman rifles aren't bad because they make for a bad sniper rifle. In fact I personally heavily favor them over sniper rifles since I'm not reliably accurate enough to confidently use bolt actions or even the lynx. They're bad because they make for terrible close/mid range weaponry. If you use armor piercing and silencer on it (stock scope, maintaining no recoil increase) then it's an extremely viable sniper rifle. Red dot and silencer with stalker? Shit. Shit rof, shit recoil, Shit handling speed. It's an alright replacement for those unable to properly snipe with sniper rifles and absolutely terrible as a replacement for assault rifle.
|
|
|
Post by theprocitizen on Apr 9, 2014 10:43:59 GMT -5
Marksman rifles aren't bad because they make for a bad sniper rifle. In fact I personally heavily favor them over sniper rifles since I'm not reliably accurate enough to confidently use bolt actions or even the lynx. They're bad because they make for terrible close/mid range weaponry. If you use armor piercing and silencer on it (stock scope, maintaining no recoil increase) then it's an extremely viable sniper rifle. Red dot and silencer with stalker? Shit. Shit rof, shit recoil, Shit handling speed. It's an alright replacement for those unable to properly snipe with sniper rifles and absolutely terrible as a replacement for assault rifle. I totally agree with the first part, they aren't really supposed to be full on sniper rifles. I also heavily favor mr's over snipers for the same reason, but ONLY inside my 2btk range. What I'm thinking is that back in mw3 we had the spammy snipers (druganov,rsass), with 1 shot potential to only the head, with 2btk all ranges, high fire caps and low-ish recoil. I think that we really don't have anything that fills that role, as marksmans have low fire caps, moderate recoil, and range limited 1 hits, with further range drop off to 3 hits, which is a HUGE step down. I'm not trying to gripe here, I just think that allowing for chrome lined mr's would be an interesting and balanced way to make them a better competitor at mid long range, they will still be way weaker than snipers when cross mapping, but a lot better at the range they seem to be designed for. They are not designed to replace ar's or snipers. Also, you use a silencer on your sniper replacement setup? Doesn't that doom you to 3btk at just past mid-long ranges? Not judging, just wondering. Also as for ar replacement, i mostly agree. IF, I had an awesome trigger finger, which I don't, or a modded controller, which I don't, I think the faster firing two would be all right red dot as ar subsitutes. Also burst fire on the faster 2 makes for an improved msbs, in my humble opinion.
|
|
|
Post by -3055- on Apr 9, 2014 12:37:49 GMT -5
The way I initially saw MRs is good at both long and mid range, but objectively outclassed in a single one of those ranges by sniper rifles/assault rifles. As they stand now, they're objective outclassed by the sniper rifles (except for HC where sway is more important than recoil) and they don't even stand a chance against assault rifles when using an AR-like setup. Like mid-long range the R5 destroys all of the MRs on recoil alone. Not to mention it has superior handling and doesn't require an optic to reduce ADS time. I use the SVU and MR-28 only so on the SVU you'd be dumb not to run silencer on it, and for the MR-28 it's the only true hybrid in my eyes since it's almost spammable. I just accept that it's a 3 shot kill and use it accordingly.
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on Apr 9, 2014 12:46:17 GMT -5
Marksman rifles aren't bad because they make for a bad sniper rifle. In fact I personally heavily favor them over sniper rifles since I'm not reliably accurate enough to confidently use bolt actions or even the lynx. They're bad because they make for terrible close/mid range weaponry. If you use armor piercing and silencer on it (stock scope, maintaining no recoil increase) then it's an extremely viable sniper rifle. Red dot and silencer with stalker? Shit. Shit rof, shit recoil, Shit handling speed. It's an alright replacement for those unable to properly snipe with sniper rifles and absolutely terrible as a replacement for assault rifle. Exactly. They would be so much better if they had a hybrid sight that did not increase the recoil. The standard scope puts you at a huge disadvantage if an enemy gets close to you. The thermal hybrid makes the recoil terrible.
|
|
|
Post by ChloeB42 (Alexcalibur42) on Apr 9, 2014 13:28:24 GMT -5
Marksman rifles aren't bad because they make for a bad sniper rifle. In fact I personally heavily favor them over sniper rifles since I'm not reliably accurate enough to confidently use bolt actions or even the lynx. They're bad because they make for terrible close/mid range weaponry. If you use armor piercing and silencer on it (stock scope, maintaining no recoil increase) then it's an extremely viable sniper rifle. Red dot and silencer with stalker? Shit. Shit rof, shit recoil, Shit handling speed. It's an alright replacement for those unable to properly snipe with sniper rifles and absolutely terrible as a replacement for assault rifle. I tend to disagree. With a slightly different play style you can dominate ARs in mid range. At least from the perspective of using the M14. It has a slow rate of fire, but a lower TTK than even the FAD in the 2 HK range, which is greater than even the Remington's 3HK. So long as you keep distance and setup your engagements to your advantage ARs don't stand a chance. It's not for everyone, but I think at least the M14 bridges the gap between AR and SR well. Plus that 1HK headshot potential
|
|
|
Post by theprocitizen on Apr 9, 2014 23:58:32 GMT -5
Marksman rifles aren't bad because they make for a bad sniper rifle. In fact I personally heavily favor them over sniper rifles since I'm not reliably accurate enough to confidently use bolt actions or even the lynx. They're bad because they make for terrible close/mid range weaponry. If you use armor piercing and silencer on it (stock scope, maintaining no recoil increase) then it's an extremely viable sniper rifle. Red dot and silencer with stalker? Shit. Shit rof, shit recoil, Shit handling speed. It's an alright replacement for those unable to properly snipe with sniper rifles and absolutely terrible as a replacement for assault rifle. I tend to disagree. With a slightly different play style you can dominate ARs in mid range. At least from the perspective of using the M14. It has a slow rate of fire, but a lower TTK than even the FAD in the 2 HK range, which is greater than even the Remington's 3HK. So long as you keep distance and setup your engagements to your advantage ARs don't stand a chance. It's not for everyone, but I think at least the M14 bridges the gap between AR and SR well. Plus that 1HK headshot potential Well said. Personally, my favorite setup is IA-2 thermal muzzle brake. I'm pretty sure it has less recoil than mr28 (I'll check on that one) and is semi-spamable even with thermal. If you can land the shots within range, ttk is great. What's your thoughts on having chrome lined available for MR's?
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on Apr 10, 2014 10:52:38 GMT -5
Chrome line addresses a problem that doesn't exist. The damage isn't the problem. Adding multipliers and increasing sway just makes them more arbitrary.
The problem is the sights and the recoil. When you use the default sights, they absolutely shred the competition when near the end of their 2 hit range, and are generally still viable past that. Unfortunately, because they have a long ADS time, enormous zoom and low firerates, they are very very bad against close range enemies. When you use a different set of sights, the recoil increases enough that it makes them all pretty uncompetitive at all ranges, at least in my experience. With a close range sight, the recoil is still too much to be competitive with ARs. With the hybrid sights, the recoil is such that you would be better off with the M27 with the same sight at every single range than with any of the marksman rifles.
I suspect that marksman rifles generally go unused not just because they're not very good, but also because people don't know why they're not very good. Most people tried one out with an optic and thought, "this stinks", without knowing that putting on an optic increases the recoil. I suspect that at this point, they could change that without issue. If anything, I would recommend that they make the recoil the same as the standard scope for all optics except the Tracker and Thermal. I'd exclude those two not because they would be overpowered, but simply that most people find them annoying.
As for adding attachments, if anything, it should not be Chrome Lined, it should be optics. I have no idea why the marksman rifles do not have VMR. They could also stand to have Variable Zoom, as having the ability to get a little less zoom without adding recoil would be nice. Or even just a hybrid sight to toggle between the default scope and the irons would be really nice.
|
|
|
Post by ChloeB42 (Alexcalibur42) on Apr 10, 2014 14:07:20 GMT -5
I tend to disagree. With a slightly different play style you can dominate ARs in mid range. At least from the perspective of using the M14. It has a slow rate of fire, but a lower TTK than even the FAD in the 2 HK range, which is greater than even the Remington's 3HK. So long as you keep distance and setup your engagements to your advantage ARs don't stand a chance. It's not for everyone, but I think at least the M14 bridges the gap between AR and SR well. Plus that 1HK headshot potential Well said. Personally, my favorite setup is IA-2 thermal muzzle brake. I'm pretty sure it has less recoil than mr28 (I'll check on that one) and is semi-spamable even with thermal. If you can land the shots within range, ttk is great. What's your thoughts on having chrome lined available for MR's? About as pointless as CL on SRs. Idle sway is my enemy, and the damage is fine as is. I personally have no problem with the DMRs because the M14 works wonders for me, so I'm content. I think Hawk's post on optics and recoil is pretty spot on, but even then the M14s recoil with or without an optic is fine. Grip, there we go, have it so DMRs can have grip.
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on Apr 10, 2014 14:41:53 GMT -5
Ah yes, I forgot to mention, Grip would also be a nice possibility, although I'm not sure that Grip+Default Scope would not be too powerful at mid-long range.
|
|
|
Post by theprocitizen on Apr 10, 2014 15:07:14 GMT -5
Chrome line addresses a problem that doesn't exist. The damage isn't the problem. Adding multipliers and increasing sway just makes them more arbitrary. The problem is the sights and the recoil. When you use the default sights, they absolutely shred the competition when near the end of their 2 hit range, and are generally still viable past that. Unfortunately, because they have a long ADS time, enormous zoom and low firerates, they are very very bad against close range enemies. When you use a different set of sights, the recoil increases enough that it makes them all pretty uncompetitive at all ranges, at least in my experience. With a close range sight, the recoil is still too much to be competitive with ARs. With the hybrid sights, the recoil is such that you would be better off with the M27 with the same sight at every single range than with any of the marksman rifles. I suspect that marksman rifles generally go unused not just because they're not very good, but also because people don't know why they're not very good. Most people tried one out with an optic and thought, "this stinks", without knowing that putting on an optic increases the recoil. I suspect that at this point, they could change that without issue. If anything, I would recommend that they make the recoil the same as the standard scope for all optics except the Tracker and Thermal. I'd exclude those two not because they would be overpowered, but simply that most people find them annoying. As for adding attachments, if anything, it should not be Chrome Lined, it should be optics. I have no idea why the marksman rifles do not have VMR. They could also stand to have Variable Zoom, as having the ability to get a little less zoom without adding recoil would be nice. Or even just a hybrid sight to toggle between the default scope and the irons would be really nice. I see what you're getting at, but marksman rifles aren't supposed to work particularly well at mid/short range! As you say, they dominate for a window within their 2btk, and are viable after that with default optics. Personally, I find the IA-2 to still be pretty tame even with thermal, but perhaps the others are significantly worse. Anyways, I'm not really proposing chrome lined to solve a problem, I just think it would be cool / fun / interesting. I agree on the optics, I would kill to have variable zoom. I would say that a reduction to the recoil penalty for optics would be nice, but definitely not a full elimination. If you land the first two shots, the MR-28 and IA-2 have VERY fast ttks, a red dot mr28 with no additional recoil would be really strong, and borderline op in the hands of a skilled player. The other thing is, while you get more actual recoil, the lower magnification scales things down. For me, IA-2 with the holo portion of thermal has about the same recoil as default. On the actual topic of CL for marksmans, what do you mean by, " Adding multipliers and increasing sway just makes them more arbitrary. " ? Unless I am misunderstanding you, I don't see that adding body multipliers makes them any more arbitrary, In fact, they aren't arbitrary at all now, nor would they be, they were deliberately designed, and are very deliberate weapons. Could you clarify? Alexcalibur, I also don't particularly need CL on snipers, but I think the difference is more significant here. The vks at maximum range is still pretty useable, but I think it would be pretty rough if it was headshots only. Basically, snipers don't improve all to much with CL because they already have big 1btk areas, and a moderately skilled player can hit that area, thus favoring sway over 1 shot area, but, even with minimal sway, consistent headshots are difficult for moderately skilled players, whereas moderate sway (marksman's don't seem to have much to start with) with a moderate 1 shot area, pecs up, is far more doable. Basically I want to have the option of max range vks 1 hit kill potential available for MR's at medium and short ranges, at the cost of an attachment. On the subject of grip, i think it would be a far better solution for short range than getting rid of the optics penalty. Other than maybe just a little bit on the M14 and IA-2, I don't see it being op with defaults either, so i'm down.
|
|
|
Post by -3055- on Apr 10, 2014 15:55:34 GMT -5
The marksman rifle's niche over sniper rifles is higher BTK but easier handling, yes? Less recoil, less sway. If we gave them CL and had worse sway in exchange for a CHEST MULTIPLIER than that makes them in direct competition with sniper rifles. Depending on range this makes CL SVU immediately better than the LYNX and especially the VKS. If the sway is worse on the SVU, use the LYNX. If the sway is better on the SVU, use the SVU.
They're already acceptable at long range. Make them acceptable at mid range. They're designed to be battle rifles. They shouldn't have a niche, they SHOULD have a wide range of mild capabilities.
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on Apr 10, 2014 16:48:41 GMT -5
I see what you're getting at, but marksman rifles aren't supposed to work particularly well at mid/short range! Why do you say that? In past COD games, there have consistently been semi-auto and burst fire assault rifles that are capable at mid-long range, that aren't only slightly more useful than snipers at close range. No guns with similar functionality exist in Ghosts, including both the DMRs and Assault Rifles with fire-mode attachments. On the actual topic of CL for marksmans, what do you mean by, " Adding multipliers and increasing sway just makes them more arbitrary. " ? Unless I am misunderstanding you, I don't see that adding body multipliers makes them any more arbitrary, In fact, they aren't arbitrary at all now, nor would they be, they were deliberately designed, and are very deliberate weapons. Could you clarify? An overwhelming amount of which body part of shots fired hit is luck. Think about all of the times you die to a headshot. What percentage of those do you think were headshots because your opponent aimed for your head, and what percentage do you think were luck? Think about players using Chrome Lined on Sniper Rifles - how many of them do you think actually aim differently when using Chrome Lined than they do using different weapons, and how many of them do you think aim the exact same way and experience a lower percentage of non-lethal hitmarkers? For the overwhelming majority of players, adding more multipliers will just make it so instead of having their shots to kill lowered by, say, 10% due to headshots, it will now be 20% or 30%. Not due to a change in how they use the weapon, or due to their skill, just arbitrary. Adding sway only makes it even more random.
|
|
|
Post by theprocitizen on Apr 10, 2014 16:55:23 GMT -5
The marksman rifle's niche over sniper rifles is higher BTK but easier handling, yes? Less recoil, less sway. If we gave them CL and had worse sway in exchange for a CHEST MULTIPLIER than that makes them in direct competition with sniper rifles. Depending on range this makes CL SVU immediately better than the LYNX and especially the VKS. If the sway is worse on the SVU, use the LYNX. If the sway is better on the SVU, use the SVU. They're already acceptable at long range. Make them acceptable at mid range. They're designed to be battle rifles. They shouldn't have a niche, they SHOULD have a wide range of mild capabilities. I don't think you read my first post on CL for marksman rifles, these multipliers only work within a rather limited range, so you will have LESS one hit chest range than current one hit headshot range. More importantly ONLY to the upper chest, pectorals up, so it will have WAY LESS one hit potential than lynx or vks, and only within 15-30m, Depending on which MR you use. Basically, the one shot kill area from the MINIMUM damage of the vks will be available for CL Marksman's inside a limited range. Idle sway will be increased, but still a bit lower than snipers (I'll check on that).
|
|
|
Post by theprocitizen on Apr 10, 2014 22:00:55 GMT -5
I see what you're getting at, but marksman rifles aren't supposed to work particularly well at mid/short range! Why do you say that? In past COD games, there have consistently been semi-auto and burst fire assault rifles that are capable at mid-long range, that aren't only slightly more useful than snipers at close range. No guns with similar functionality exist in Ghosts, including both the DMRs and Assault Rifles with fire-mode attachments. Hmm, I find the IA-2 and M14 to work in this role, though thats just my preference, other than that, msbs and semi-auto R5 RGP. On the actual topic of CL for marksmans, what do you mean by, " Adding multipliers and increasing sway just makes them more arbitrary. " ? Unless I am misunderstanding you, I don't see that adding body multipliers makes them any more arbitrary, In fact, they aren't arbitrary at all now, nor would they be, they were deliberately designed, and are very deliberate weapons. Could you clarify? An overwhelming amount of which body part of shots fired hit is luck. Think about all of the times you die to a headshot. What percentage of those do you think were headshots because your opponent aimed for your head, and what percentage do you think were luck? Think about players using Chrome Lined on Sniper Rifles - how many of them do you think actually aim differently when using Chrome Lined than they do using different weapons, and how many of them do you think aim the exact same way and experience a lower percentage of non-lethal hitmarkers? For the overwhelming majority of players, adding more multipliers will just make it so instead of having their shots to kill lowered by, say, 10% due to headshots, it will now be 20% or 30%. Not due to a change in how they use the weapon, or due to their skill, just arbitrary. Adding sway only makes it even more random. Thanks for clearing that up, it makes much more sense now. To answer you, question 1- probably 15% / 85% question 2- none / all However, when I watch kill cams from long range vks shots (my prime example) I consistantly see them readjust their aim to the appropriate area for a one hit kill. Also, I think it is a poor choice of comparison to take sniper aiming strategy versus that of marksman's. Whereas snipers were getting one shot kills before, and CL just makes things slightly easier, as far as I can see, marksmen aren't really getting hardly ANY one hits. CL for marksman's will allow for a change from not aiming for headshots at all and getting a few one shots randomly (for most players) to aiming for chest and head regularly and getting a fair bit of one shots, far more deliberately.
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on Apr 11, 2014 13:56:07 GMT -5
So, the problem is that people really dislike being killed by a 1 hit kill gun, and people absolutely despise getting killed by a semi-automatic 1 hit kill gun. What you're proposing would be a difficult, if not impossible, situation to balance. I know I would rage every time I shot a guy first and viewkicked him into a one shot kill.
Your suggestion is a buff that makes them more similar to Sniper Rifles. But no one really wants to see Sniper Rifles that are easier to use and more forgiving in the game. There is, however, room for a set of guns which somewhat bridge the gap between Assault Rifles and Sniper Rifles. This is what Marksman Rifles were designed to do. What has worked best in the past in terms of being good, balanced weapons are semi-auto and burst fire assault rifles, but those do not really exist in the same manner in Ghosts. Simple changes can be made to the recoil of the weapons to make them function like MW3's MK14, or the BO1 M16+ACOG, or any other of the weapons from previous titles.
|
|
|
Post by theprocitizen on Apr 11, 2014 23:10:35 GMT -5
So, the problem is that people really dislike being killed by a 1 hit kill gun, and people absolutely despise getting killed by a semi-automatic 1 hit kill gun. What you're proposing would be a difficult, if not impossible, situation to balance. I know I would rage every time I shot a guy first and viewkicked him into a one shot kill. Your suggestion is a buff that makes them more similar to Sniper Rifles. But no one really wants to see Sniper Rifles that are easier to use and more forgiving in the game. There is, however, room for a set of guns which somewhat bridge the gap between Assault Rifles and Sniper Rifles. This is what Marksman Rifles were designed to do. What has worked best in the past in terms of being good, balanced weapons are semi-auto and burst fire assault rifles, but those do not really exist in the same manner in Ghosts. Simple changes can be made to the recoil of the weapons to make them function like MW3's MK14, or the BO1 M16+ACOG, or any other of the weapons from previous titles. Sigh. . . Perhaps I'll give up on this one, I could argue my case but I'm not in the mood and I'm not really seeing any support for this idea. What about a pure buff, not an attachment, that would make pectorals up a 2btk at any range, so weapons other than the druganov can actually 2 hit at range?
|
|
markopolo
True Bro
Once a LMG Camper, Then a Voidlock, Now a Lexington 25-8-366 Runner
Posts: 5,567
|
Post by markopolo on Apr 17, 2014 10:26:01 GMT -5
Apologies, as I haven't read much of the thread, but:
IMHO.... because of the underbarrel shotgun/masterkey/whatever it's called....
The chances of there being a DLC shottie are remote
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on Apr 17, 2014 10:54:09 GMT -5
So, the problem is that people really dislike being killed by a 1 hit kill gun, and people absolutely despise getting killed by a semi-automatic 1 hit kill gun. What you're proposing would be a difficult, if not impossible, situation to balance. I know I would rage every time I shot a guy first and viewkicked him into a one shot kill. Your suggestion is a buff that makes them more similar to Sniper Rifles. But no one really wants to see Sniper Rifles that are easier to use and more forgiving in the game. There is, however, room for a set of guns which somewhat bridge the gap between Assault Rifles and Sniper Rifles. This is what Marksman Rifles were designed to do. What has worked best in the past in terms of being good, balanced weapons are semi-auto and burst fire assault rifles, but those do not really exist in the same manner in Ghosts. Simple changes can be made to the recoil of the weapons to make them function like MW3's MK14, or the BO1 M16+ACOG, or any other of the weapons from previous titles. Sigh. . . Perhaps I'll give up on this one, I could argue my case but I'm not in the mood and I'm not really seeing any support for this idea. What about a pure buff, not an attachment, that would make pectorals up a 2btk at any range, so weapons other than the druganov can actually 2 hit at range? Not sure if you mean both bullets hitting pectorals up, but with the recoil they have, I don't think aiming for pectorals up would be a feasible strategy at 3hk range for any of them except for maybe the MR-28. Also, the MK14 and IA-2 are both already a 2hk at all ranges if one shot is a headshot. It would likely result in a small, unnoticable, arbitrary increase in 2hk's at range. Another easy buff they could do is to the burst fire attachment - it doesn't need to lower the centerspeed.
|
|
|
Post by theprocitizen on Apr 17, 2014 14:50:28 GMT -5
Apologies, as I haven't read much of the thread, but: IMHO.... because of the underbarrel shotgun/masterkey/whatever it's called.... The chances of there being a DLC shottie are remote Interesting, I assume you mean that since it is actually good this time there is little reason to use a shotgun over an AR with under barrel shotty?
|
|
|
Post by theprocitizen on Apr 17, 2014 15:12:14 GMT -5
Sigh. . . Perhaps I'll give up on this one, I could argue my case but I'm not in the mood and I'm not really seeing any support for this idea. What about a pure buff, not an attachment, that would make pectorals up a 2btk at any range, so weapons other than the druganov can actually 2 hit at range? Not sure if you mean both bullets hitting pectorals up, but with the recoil they have, I don't think aiming for pectorals up would be a feasible strategy at 3hk range for any of them except for maybe the MR-28. Also, the MK14 and IA-2 are both already a 2hk at all ranges if one shot is a headshot. It would likely result in a small, unnoticable, arbitrary increase in 2hk's at range. Another easy buff they could do is to the burst fire attachment - it doesn't need to lower the centerspeed. I meant that hitting one shot pecs up, and then another shot anywhere, would kill someone. So you're saying any increase in 2hk area will be meaningless and arbitrary? I disagree, If we made everything waist up 2hk there would be a huge difference, and doing less than that (say, pectorals up) will scale back linearly. I don't really have much opinion on burst fire, but a decrease in centerspeed only makes sense to me with the rof buff, which I believe was removed in one of the patches, so I agree with you there.
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on Apr 17, 2014 15:43:59 GMT -5
Increasing the multipliers will be arbitrary. It's hard to change the multipliers and retain balance, there's a really fine line between bad weapon and amazing weapon.
Making everything a 2hk if one shot hits waist up would make the marksman rifles insanely powerful. Without having to adjust aim, that would account for the overwhelming majority of kills. In turn, that would mean there is very little cost to the suppressor, and really no advantage to the other marksman rifles over the MR-28.
|
|
|
Post by theprocitizen on Apr 18, 2014 13:26:04 GMT -5
Increasing the multipliers will be arbitrary. It's hard to change the multipliers and retain balance, there's a really fine line between bad weapon and amazing weapon. Making everything a 2hk if one shot hits waist up would make the marksman rifles insanely powerful. Without having to adjust aim, that would account for the overwhelming majority of kills. In turn, that would mean there is very little cost to the suppressor, and really no advantage to the other marksman rifles over the MR-28. Slight misunderstanding- I was NOT advocating for waist up 2 hits, I was pointing out how powerful that would be, which you seem to agree with, and proposing that a much smaller multiplier area, pectorals up, would be powerful, but not greatly.
|
|
|
Post by msfr1412 on Apr 22, 2014 6:28:24 GMT -5
Can we make it like the M1 Garand? Where you have to have to empty the magazine before you can reload? And give it that nice ping sound?
|
|
|
Post by msfr1412 on Apr 22, 2014 6:32:54 GMT -5
Not sure if this is at me or not, but I'm addressing it: I'm all for respectable hipfire spread for shotguns, but the idea here is a big blast that sends pellets EveryWhere so that with the burst delay you can still take out 2 guys with one burst, instead of blasting one and getting hosed by the other, with the delay preventing it from becoming op. Basically hipfire should actually be MORE effective versus small groups or when very close, with ads improving your power against a single target at range. Also, I often end up in very close range fights where I fire a shot at a guy who is jumping or sliding past me or something and my spread is too tight, and only one or two pellets clip them, wheras 12 pellets with a large spread should (hopefully) fill up the room and kill said slider/jumper. Perhaps I should add a 3btk range for such senarios, but I digress. I don't even know where to start with this one. If you go up against two enemies, you should probably lose. And while maybe you would see yourself as having tactically chosen the weapon because you anticipate encountering multiple enemies at once, the player on the other end would see you as a completely unskilled player without any aim using the cheapest gun in the game.
|
|
markopolo
True Bro
Once a LMG Camper, Then a Voidlock, Now a Lexington 25-8-366 Runner
Posts: 5,567
|
Post by markopolo on Apr 22, 2014 11:30:02 GMT -5
Apologies, as I haven't read much of the thread, but: IMHO.... because of the underbarrel shotgun/masterkey/whatever it's called.... The chances of there being a DLC shottie are remote Interesting, I assume you mean that since it is actually good this time there is little reason to use a shotgun over an AR with under barrel shotty? That and because I don't think shotguns are popular enough to warrant their own weapon, when any AR can be made into a shotgun. But whatever.... it'd be cool I guess... but I'd prefer an LMG DLC weapon first
|
|
|
Post by theprocitizen on May 6, 2014 12:58:18 GMT -5
I'm totally on board for a dlc lmg, and I'll post my idea for that in a bit You're right though, shottys are not very popular in ghosts : (
|
|