banana
True Banana
Zoro > Law
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by banana on Apr 3, 2014 18:00:40 GMT -5
Why use those guns at all? If you want to use the bizon, use the cbj. If you want to use the K7, use the vepr. If you want to use the vector, use the mtar. pre-patch: If you want to use the [insert any smg], use the mtar.
|
|
|
Post by randyrandy on Apr 3, 2014 18:40:03 GMT -5
Why use those guns at all? If you want to use the bizon, use the cbj. If you want to use the K7, use the vepr. If you want to use the vector, use the mtar. Well, if you're using Deadeye, the Bizon and Vector become a 2hk to the body, while the CBJ does not and the MTAR will only infrequently. We've gone through this before, but the K7 has the best silenced range. If you don't plan on shooting at people > 913u away, the K7 is probably the best choice in core for a silenced SMG. I actually like the Vector the most. I also find the K7 is great for certain situations. I actually find the MTAR to be 3rd or 4th best SMG.
|
|
|
Post by -3055- on Apr 4, 2014 21:31:05 GMT -5
Why use those guns at all? If you want to use the bizon, use the cbj. If you want to use the K7, use the vepr. If you want to use the vector, use the mtar. Well, if you're using Deadeye, the Bizon and Vector become a 2hk to the body, while the CBJ does not and the MTAR will only infrequently. We've gone through this before, but the K7 has the best silenced range. If you don't plan on shooting at people > 913u away, the K7 is probably the best choice in core for a silenced SMG. Yeah but the sprint out time for all three of those guns is a deathtrap among other disadvantages
|
|
|
Post by shudeki on Apr 7, 2014 0:47:46 GMT -5
For those that don't want to wait for Marvel to update, or calculate it themselves, here's a comparison of the ranges before and after the changes, including the Ripper in both modes: Weapon | After 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Before 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | PP-19 Bizon | 664 | 819 | 904 | ∞ | 496 | 604 | 664 | ∞ | CBJ-MS | 504 | 743 | 876 | ∞ | 363 | 488 | 558 | ∞ | Vector | 944 | 1144 | ∞ | | 832 | 940 | ∞ | | Vepr | 537 | 870 | ∞ | | 520 | 700 | ∞ | | K7 | 650 | 913 | 1059 | 1147 | 650 | 792 | 871 | 918 | MTAR-X | 688 | ∞ | | | 688 | ∞ | | | Ripper (SMG) | 384 | 729 | ∞ | | 384 | 729 | ∞ | | Ripper (AR) | 960 | 1824 | ∞ | | 960 | 1824 | ∞ | |
Edit: I've created a temporary version of the spreadsheet denkirson.proboards.com/post/179595/threadIf is not much to ask, I have a question, how do you translate this into meters or some form of distance units? thanks!
|
|
|
Post by kylet357 on Apr 7, 2014 1:12:42 GMT -5
Take the number in units/inches, divide it by 100, then multiply by 2.5 That will convert it to meters.
|
|
|
Post by ChloeB42 (Alexcalibur42) on Apr 7, 2014 2:03:29 GMT -5
For those that don't want to wait for Marvel to update, or calculate it themselves, here's a comparison of the ranges before and after the changes, including the Ripper in both modes: Weapon | After 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Before 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | PP-19 Bizon | 664 | 819 | 904 | ∞ | 496 | 604 | 664 | ∞ | CBJ-MS | 504 | 743 | 876 | ∞ | 363 | 488 | 558 | ∞ | Vector | 944 | 1144 | ∞ | | 832 | 940 | ∞ | | Vepr | 537 | 870 | ∞ | | 520 | 700 | ∞ | | K7 | 650 | 913 | 1059 | 1147 | 650 | 792 | 871 | 918 | MTAR-X | 688 | ∞ | | | 688 | ∞ | | | Ripper (SMG) | 384 | 729 | ∞ | | 384 | 729 | ∞ | | Ripper (AR) | 960 | 1824 | ∞ | | 960 | 1824 | ∞ | |
Edit: I've created a temporary version of the spreadsheet denkirson.proboards.com/post/179595/threadIf is not much to ask, I have a question, how do you translate this into meters or some form of distance units? thanks! One unit = one inch. 39.37 inches = one meter
|
|
|
Post by shudeki on Apr 7, 2014 14:25:38 GMT -5
One unit = one inch. 39.37 inches = one meter thank you so much! that was very helpful!
|
|
wings
True Bro
Posts: 3,776
|
Post by wings on Apr 7, 2014 15:01:18 GMT -5
I don't think you need to worry too much about the prospect of an AR being nerfed. The harder to use weapons, by their limitations and gunskill, are always more likely to be nerfed than a weapon than any Tom, Dick and Harry can use. Ummm, what? The harder to use weapons are always more likely to be nerfed? Here's a list of weapon nerfs I remember from the past few games: MSBS and AK-12 (you know, other ARs that were nerfed) Select Fire FAL PDW-57 Striker Akimbo Machine Pistols FAMAS I'd say all of those except the MSBS were really easy to use. I was thinking of weapons in a broader sense. Here goes: Sniper rifles have been nerfed a fair amount in COD either in-game or between games. How is it that faster ADS has been toyed so much with SRs? Quickdraw had a uniform benefit in MW3 as did Sleight of Hand in MW2, in Ghosts Quickdraw shaved only 20% off along with MRs whereas everything else got 33%, and the ADS reduction was non-existent for BO1 and BO2. In Ghosts the SRs had their ADS time increased when they made maps where sniping was actually viable since they got rid of the 'spammy' SRs (RSASS and the Dragunov) from MW3. Those were gimped because you took much longer to ADS for a poor return in body multipliers when the MK14 could be much more productive for a two tap kill weapon. That would make Assassin much better to use. In MW3, Marksman didn't really improve the distance of seeing people's Gamertag/IDs by much (I joined this site to ask about Marksman in MW3 but felt I may have been asking a stupidly dumb question so I never bothered) and Assassin countered Marksman at base level anyway. The increase duration of holding breath wasn't really necessary so the only tier 3 perks a sniper could reasonably benefit from is SitRep Pro. In addition, Ghosts had the suppressor OHK nerfed pretty significantly. While small arm users have had range penalties when using the suppressor, they only need to hold fire the gun a bit longer to make up for the damage dropoff at range. The mini-map directs people to use the suppressor so perhaps that could go. I loved playing MW3 when SitRep got buffed seeing all the Assassin/Dead Silence users run at my red dot on the mini map just to be already aiming for the impending death. Also, ACOG in Ghosts gave a significant amount of needless sway when used on a SR. You use ACOG for shorter sight lines where the default scope is not required and it can help you drag scope due to better vision when aiming. There's no point in giving SRs sway when using the ACOG because that means you might as well use a MR. Also, people moaned about the SVU in BO2 I saw, which is hilarious because of the very poor return for OHK body multipliers. Marksmanship is rewarded by good body multipliers, which usually means spamming them isn't viable because of the recoil. So just use a FAL instead. Shotguns have always been gimped in some way because they require you yo ADS in order to get the tightest hipfire spread, which takes the same time to ADS with SMGs. Not only that, you do not get a speed boost than with shotguns that may force you to use perks and attachments for improved performances because I think in BO2 you only got static hipfire with the Laser Sight attached. Tight hipfire with decent range should be standard. I'm not a shotgunner by 'trade' but I've never seen the fuss over the 'good' shotguns. Oh and the shotguns received less of a benefit for Quickdraw in BO2 than SMGs. Imagine if sniper rifles ADS'd the same time as ARs and got a better reduction in ADS time with Quickdraw than ARs? Also I was disappointed by the relatively short OHK range of the KSG in BO2 considering it uses slug rounds. Pistols are similar because the two best pistols we had was in BO2 with the KAP40s and the B23R. While I thought the KAP40s were a tad overkill at first glance, the user is sacrificing a launcher for the privilege in using them. Who suffers from this the most? Snipers and perhaps heavy gunners due to the attachment unlock system for LMGs. If they are going to be fillers then they should be free because they were competing with primaries under the cost system. Players equipping a pistol in BO2 have anti-air abilities gimped off the bat as the Black Hat PDA is a one use hack. The last COD game you want to be playing without launchers is BO2. There was also no faster lock-on for anti-air like Blind Eye gave in MW3. LMGs have had a fair amount of movement penalties when using them. BO2 made it so that if you used a pistol you could run faster with that in your hands but then that may be an issue as already mentioned. I've never liked them having their infinite 3HK range removed because they're defensive weapons for longer range combat. And it means some ARs could be competing with LMGs for midrange combat for range and damage or even outperforming them, such as the SCAR in BO2. It's the same with the MRs in Ghosts - I think they could have an infinite 2HK range. Also the LMGs from MW3 to Ghosts got their recoil increased and their range reduced. You will have to go a long way to make LMGs OP so that everyone uses them like the ACR and the MP7 in MW3. Why not have faster swap times with weapons and get rid of the distinction between making certain category of weapons as only primary and only secondary? People can scavenge off the floor for a second gun but you're penalised for doing so due to a slower swap time. This makes 'soundwhoring' perhaps more critical than it can be. Slow swap times also means people will just use an AR and strafe. If you think it's too slow to strafe then use Stalker. I am aware of the nerfs you mentioned but if you took it from a more numerical perspective, then you could say SRs got the rough deal in BO2 with the nerfs to the XPR, Ballista and the DSR. None of those were needed. Considering all of this I'd say ARs are the least likely category of weapon to be nerfed.
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on Apr 7, 2014 15:48:07 GMT -5
I'm not sure how changes to the entire class from game to game are relevant when discussing the likelihood that any guns will be nerfed in Ghosts post-launch. Historically after a game's release, the most likely weapons to be nerfed are those that are easiest to use, not those that are most difficult.
|
|
|
Post by Voice from the Basement on Apr 8, 2014 14:19:52 GMT -5
Historically after a game's release, the most likely weapons to be nerfed are those that are easiest to use, not those that are most difficult. SR nerf in BOII; SR nerf in Ghosts. Especially on PC (with no Aim Assist available for bad players, I mean).
|
|
wings
True Bro
Posts: 3,776
|
Post by wings on Apr 10, 2014 10:47:17 GMT -5
I'm not sure how changes to the entire class from game to game are relevant when discussing the likelihood that any guns will be nerfed in Ghosts post-launch. Historically after a game's release, the most likely weapons to be nerfed are those that are easiest to use, not those that are most difficult. No. Sniper rifles in BO2 and Ghosts were nerfed during the life span of their games and they were the hardest primaries to use. All you need are some SMG/AR merchants to cry over being railgund taking to Twitter tweeting Teenah until they get their wish. Why do you think Heavy Duty was made as a playlist? Because people got fed up with sniper rifles and IEDs. Rather than not risk being in a likely area where snipers are overlooking and equipped SitRep, it's much easier to carry on as normal and whinge about being killed by snipers and IEDs and take it to Twitter to demand nerfs. Why do you think the ADS time was lengthened in Ghosts and the suppressor nerf came into effect when the changes came very close to a DLC drop? The game is "balanced" to appease many players who don't up their game. It's probably why the streaks are bad in Ghosts because people refuse to adapt in MW3.
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on Apr 10, 2014 11:43:50 GMT -5
I'm not sure how changes to the entire class from game to game are relevant when discussing the likelihood that any guns will be nerfed in Ghosts post-launch. Historically after a game's release, the most likely weapons to be nerfed are those that are easiest to use, not those that are most difficult. No. Sniper rifles in BO2 and Ghosts were nerfed during the life span of their games and they were the hardest primaries to use. All you need are some SMG/AR merchants to cry over being railgund taking to Twitter tweeting Teenah until they get their wish. Why do you think Heavy Duty was made as a playlist? Because people got fed up with sniper rifles and IEDs. Rather than not risk being in a likely area where snipers are overlooking and equipped SitRep, it's much easier to carry on as normal and whinge about being killed by snipers and IEDs and take it to Twitter to demand nerfs. Why do you think the ADS time was lengthened in Ghosts and the suppressor nerf came into effect when the changes came very close to a DLC drop? The game is "balanced" to appease many players who don't up their game. It's probably why the streaks are bad in Ghosts because people refuse to adapt in MW3. In BO2, I'm assuming that you're referring to the hipfire nerf, where they nerfed the easy to use part. In Ghosts, even pre-nerf, a skilled player would generally find sniper rifles more difficult to use than other weapon classes. On the other hand, I think they were likely easy to use for unskilled players. There are a lot of maps where an unskilled player can go prone and pick people off with more success than had they run around with an AR. As for the rest of your post, it is ridiculous for you to criticize them for making changes that make the game more fun for the overwhelming majority of players.
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on Apr 11, 2014 9:19:24 GMT -5
Well, if you're using Deadeye, the Bizon and Vector become a 2hk to the body, while the CBJ does not and the MTAR will only infrequently. We've gone through this before, but the K7 has the best silenced range. If you don't plan on shooting at people > 913u away, the K7 is probably the best choice in core for a silenced SMG. Yeah but the sprint out time for all three of those guns is a deathtrap among other disadvantages If you're using Ready Up, the sprint out for the MTAR-X is 0.12, the others are 0.18. That's a difference of getting to hipfire an extra bullet. I'll take a 2-shot kill with a Deadeye Bizon or Vector over a 3-shot kill with the MTAR-X, despite the extra hipfired bullet the MTAR-X gets to fire.
|
|
|
Post by ChloeB42 (Alexcalibur42) on Apr 11, 2014 9:54:36 GMT -5
No. Sniper rifles in BO2 and Ghosts were nerfed during the life span of their games and they were the hardest primaries to use. All you need are some SMG/AR merchants to cry over being railgund taking to Twitter tweeting Teenah until they get their wish. Why do you think Heavy Duty was made as a playlist? Because people got fed up with sniper rifles and IEDs. Rather than not risk being in a likely area where snipers are overlooking and equipped SitRep, it's much easier to carry on as normal and whinge about being killed by snipers and IEDs and take it to Twitter to demand nerfs. Why do you think the ADS time was lengthened in Ghosts and the suppressor nerf came into effect when the changes came very close to a DLC drop? The game is "balanced" to appease many players who don't up their game. It's probably why the streaks are bad in Ghosts because people refuse to adapt in MW3. In BO2, I'm assuming that you're referring to the hipfire nerf, where they nerfed the easy to use part. In Ghosts, even pre-nerf, a skilled player would generally find sniper rifles more difficult to use than other weapon classes. On the other hand, I think they were likely easy to use for unskilled players. There are a lot of maps where an unskilled player can go prone and pick people off with more success than had they run around with an AR. As for the rest of your post, it is ridiculous for you to criticize them for making changes that make the game more fun for the overwhelming majority of players. Getting a kill with a sniper takes little skill. Doing well with a sniper takes quite a bit. You have to have situational awareness to do well with a sniper. Not sound whoring, but actual awareness. Keeping track of teammates, spawns, objectives, high traffic areas, counter sniping spots etc... Using a sniper rifle is easy, sniping is an art. It's about controlling the flow of the action and many times can devolve an enemy team into a game of "Kill the Sniper".
|
|
|
Post by UrbaneVirtuoso on Apr 11, 2014 10:18:47 GMT -5
I have to share the sentiment that even with Dead Eye the use of the Vector/Bizon goes way unrecommended. To get the optimal load out, one has to use Focus, Dead Silence, Amplify and then finally Dead Eye. That's 11 points right off the bat, so to compensate you pretty much have to use the Vepr, what with its' Sprint Out of 0.12.
Believe me, that deficiency hits those aforementioned weapons hard. The 0.30 Spring Out time is murder in a game where TTK is so damn lenient as is. It really just boils down to whoever gets the first hit in.
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on Apr 11, 2014 12:21:27 GMT -5
I have to share the sentiment that even with Dead Eye the use of the Vector/Bizon goes way unrecommended. To get the optimal load out, one has to use Focus, Dead Silence, Amplify and then finally Dead Eye. That's 11 points right off the bat, so to compensate you pretty much have to use the Vepr, what with its' Sprint Out of 0.12.
Believe me, that deficiency hits those aforementioned weapons hard. The 0.30 Spring Out time is murder in a game where TTK is so damn lenient as is. It really just boils down to whoever gets the first hit in. I agree, Deadeye costs too many points to be part of a good loadout, at least for my usage. However, it is great as a Specialist streak. You can just do Deadeye>[Empty]>[Empty]>Bonus. The change to streaks is really beneficial to this - in KC, you can now unlock Deadeye in roughly 4 kills, rather than 6. You can generally get your specialist bonus at 5 or 6 kills, meaning you can leave Scavenger in the bonus. Obviously the MTAR is generally preferable to the Bizon/Vector if you're not using Deadeye/Specialist. But if you're using specialist, you're far, far better off with a Deadeye Vector or Bizon than the MTAR once you get that bonus.
|
|
|
Post by argentetoile on Apr 11, 2014 13:04:42 GMT -5
I have to share the sentiment that even with Dead Eye the use of the Vector/Bizon goes way unrecommended. To get the optimal load out, one has to use Focus, Dead Silence, Amplify and then finally Dead Eye. That's 11 points right off the bat, so to compensate you pretty much have to use the Vepr, what with its' Sprint Out of 0.12.
Believe me, that deficiency hits those aforementioned weapons hard. The 0.30 Spring Out time is murder in a game where TTK is so damn lenient as is. It really just boils down to whoever gets the first hit in. I agree, Deadeye costs too many points to be part of a good loadout, at least for my usage. However, it is great as a Specialist streak. You can just do Deadeye>[Empty]>[Empty]>Bonus. The change to streaks is really beneficial to this - in KC, you can now unlock Deadeye in roughly 4 kills, rather than 6. You can generally get your specialist bonus at 5 or 6 kills, meaning you can leave Scavenger in the bonus. Obviously the MTAR is generally preferable to the Bizon/Vector if you're not using Deadeye/Specialist. But if you're using specialist, you're far, far better off with a Deadeye Vector or Bizon than the MTAR once you get that bonus. Due to Deadeye improving with each kill you get, wouldn't it be more beneficial with Specialist to just start out with it, then unlock the sacrificed perks with the first two specialist perks (Ready Up, Agility, whatever)? Since like you say it's easier to build up the streak now in Kill-confirmed, why not get an earlier start with your Deadeye streak and then regain your sacrificed perks pretty much right away?
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on Apr 11, 2014 13:17:36 GMT -5
No, because like Urbane mentioned, the cost of putting it in your initial setup is so high. If you're going to be relying on picking up tags, you'll want Marathon + Ready Up. That's 8 points already, and you don't have any of the sound perks or Focus or whatever other perks you might want. That makes it really hard to get those kills to unlock the perks. Also, if you were to switch 3 perks from your class to specialist, it would take an additional two kills to unlock all of them as compared to Deadeye. You're much better off playing normally and enjoying the Stopping Power bonus rather than have to change your whole class and playstyle to accommodate Deadeye until you get to specialist bonus.
|
|
|
Post by argentetoile on Apr 11, 2014 13:25:10 GMT -5
No, because like Urbane mentioned, the cost of putting it in your initial setup is so high. If you're going to be relying on picking up tags, you'll want Marathon + Ready Up. That's 8 points already, and you don't have any of the sound perks or Focus or whatever other perks you might want. That makes it really hard to get those kills to unlock the perks. Also, if you were to switch 3 perks from your class to specialist, it would take an additional two kills to unlock all of them as compared to Deadeye. You're much better off playing normally and enjoying the Stopping Power bonus rather than have to change your whole class and playstyle to accommodate Deadeye until you get to specialist bonus. I was thinking something like Deadeye, Focus, Dead Silence, your choice of agility/marathon, and then unlock agility/marathon and ready up as your first two perks. I don't really use Deadeye either way, just brainstorming here.
|
|
|
Post by MastaQ on Apr 11, 2014 17:34:41 GMT -5
I've had some success using Deadeye in cranked. I think that's probably the only game mode where you really get away with using it. About 1/2 my cranked classes have Deadeye.
|
|
|
Post by thegentleman on Apr 11, 2014 17:43:16 GMT -5
I actually like the deadeye vector just a bit more than the deadeye Remington.
First, it has to be used as part of a specialist streak. My base loadout is Amplify, Dead Silence, Focus, and deadeye. I run the Vector usually with silencer and grip. The specialist streaks are ready up (after 2 kills, it's cheap and gives you pretty much everything you need to compete), off the grid at 6 kills, no third pick, and the final bonus of scav, agility, SoH, and either Blind Eye or Ping, depending on my mood as to which is a better option. Lately, I hate hate hate the idea of getting lit up by late-game oracles.
Easy solution to the temporary problem of this class: before you get those first two kills, don't sprint. Not sprinting saves lives. Some might also question the silencer, but I feel that and off the grid lets you run the class more like a stealth shotgun than you would an AR. Hug corners while ADS'd and you'll have a decisive advantage almost always.
Deadeye has a lot of utility on the Bizon, too, mainly because it has so many chances to work at mid range on outwards. I think I still like the Vector better, but it's been a fun mess around option for 2 hit kills.
Anyway, I actually think Deadeye's a little easier to work with on the Vector than the Remington or AK because you don't have to run stalker as a mandatory thing. That alone makes me have to give up either focus, amplify, or dead silence in the starting loadout, and in my opinion they're all absolutely necessary for me to play at my best. Consequently, whenever I leave one behind, I feel like I've made the wrong choice.
|
|
wings
True Bro
Posts: 3,776
|
Post by wings on Apr 13, 2014 18:13:22 GMT -5
No. Sniper rifles in BO2 and Ghosts were nerfed during the life span of their games and they were the hardest primaries to use. All you need are some SMG/AR merchants to cry over being railgund taking to Twitter tweeting Teenah until they get their wish. Why do you think Heavy Duty was made as a playlist? Because people got fed up with sniper rifles and IEDs. Rather than not risk being in a likely area where snipers are overlooking and equipped SitRep, it's much easier to carry on as normal and whinge about being killed by snipers and IEDs and take it to Twitter to demand nerfs. Why do you think the ADS time was lengthened in Ghosts and the suppressor nerf came into effect when the changes came very close to a DLC drop? The game is "balanced" to appease many players who don't up their game. It's probably why the streaks are bad in Ghosts because people refuse to adapt in MW3. In BO2, I'm assuming that you're referring to the hipfire nerf, where they nerfed the easy to use part. In Ghosts, even pre-nerf, a skilled player would generally find sniper rifles more difficult to use than other weapon classes. On the other hand, I think they were likely easy to use for unskilled players. There are a lot of maps where an unskilled player can go prone and pick people off with more success than had they run around with an AR. As for the rest of your post, it is ridiculous for you to criticize them for making changes that make the game more fun for the overwhelming majority of players. It's only not fun to a lot of players because they hate being outplayed by a better player. That's it. That's why the game is plagued with rage quitters/dashboarders to protecting their precious KD ratios and probably why players of other shooters label COD as being a low skill game. There are plenty of changes in the game made where enough COD players have moaned about that has resulted in a changes, yes. Knifing immediately springs to mind. So much hate for Commando when Ninja was the best tier 3 perk and labelled as a panic function when COD is a twitch shooter anyway, which is why you can dropshot in all but one game (I think) whilst maintaining ADS accuracy. Other games do not allow this. I was actually referring to the rate of fire nerf. A game that heavily favours running and gunning by map and perk design and they make one of the slowest using guns slower. The actual handling of sniper rifles is easy but it's the whole sniping gameplay, which alexcalibur42 was referring to, was what I was referencing to.
|
|
exxtrooper
True Bro
Who the fuck is Mousey
Posts: 398
|
Post by exxtrooper on Apr 14, 2014 14:28:50 GMT -5
I just wish the game looked a lot prettier, you pick up a golden weapon in ghosts and then look at some of the gold weapons in BO2 the difference is rather... sad :c
|
|
wings
True Bro
Posts: 3,776
|
Post by wings on May 5, 2014 10:15:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on May 5, 2014 10:56:51 GMT -5
What makes you think that they lack the assertiveness to say "no"? What makes you think they didn't look at the data and see that they had made the gun too powerful?
|
|
wings
True Bro
Posts: 3,776
|
Post by wings on May 5, 2014 11:02:22 GMT -5
What makes you think that they lack the assertiveness to say "no"? What makes you think they didn't look at the data and see that they had made the gun too powerful? What data? Is this publicly available on their site or is this or is this something they just made up?
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on May 5, 2014 11:18:42 GMT -5
What makes you think that they lack the assertiveness to say "no"? What makes you think they didn't look at the data and see that they had made the gun too powerful? What data? Is this publicly available on their site or is this or is this something they just made up? Are you implying that there are only two sets of data, one that is publicly available and one that is fictional? You really think that they do not have any real data that you as a member of the general public do not have access to?
|
|
wings
True Bro
Posts: 3,776
|
Post by wings on May 5, 2014 12:23:36 GMT -5
What data? Is this publicly available on their site or is this or is this something they just made up? Are you implying that there are only two sets of data, one that is publicly available and one that is fictional? You really think that they do not have any real data that you as a member of the general public do not have access to? Unless I have missed it I am not aware that they give detailed explanations over what is overpowered or not. If they do, send me a link. You don't think developers cater for those who cry the loudest? I think it would be a bit disengenous to think otherwise because that is where the money is. If money wasn't that much of a thing with COD it wouldn't be released on an annual basis.
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on May 5, 2014 14:01:34 GMT -5
Are you implying that there are only two sets of data, one that is publicly available and one that is fictional? You really think that they do not have any real data that you as a member of the general public do not have access to? Unless I have missed it I am not aware that they give detailed explanations over what is overpowered or not. If they do, send me a link. You don't think developers cater for those who cry the loudest? I think it would be a bit disengenous to think otherwise because that is where the money is. If money wasn't that much of a thing with COD it wouldn't be released on an annual basis. Just because they don't give a detailed explanation of why they made the change doesn't mean they don't look at data. From their perspective - whether they nerf the Bizon because people complained, because they looked at data and found it was too powerful, or a combination of the two - it makes the most sense to say "thanks for your feedback, we're making a change!" That's just one of the basic things that anyone involved with speaking to customers on behalf of a company doesn't even need to be taught. As for developers catering for those who cry the loudest because that's where the money is, that's just...completely incorrect. No company with an industry leading product is going to change their product for the group of users that cry the loudest. The reasoning behind that is that those customers represent a small, difficult to satisfy minority, which in many cases are unlikely to switch anyway. Do you really think that small group of people involved with MLG that were complaining about the Bizon being too powerful are where the money is? What percentage of the 21 million units the game sold do you think people that complained about the Bizon are? And do you think that if they had not made this change, those people complaining wouldn't have bought the next COD title?
|
|
wings
True Bro
Posts: 3,776
|
Post by wings on May 5, 2014 14:38:00 GMT -5
Unless I have missed it I am not aware that they give detailed explanations over what is overpowered or not. If they do, send me a link. You don't think developers cater for those who cry the loudest? I think it would be a bit disengenous to think otherwise because that is where the money is. If money wasn't that much of a thing with COD it wouldn't be released on an annual basis. Just because they don't give a detailed explanation of why they made the change doesn't mean they don't look at data. From their perspective - whether they nerf the Bizon because people complained, because they looked at data and found it was too powerful, or a combination of the two - it makes the most sense to say "thanks for your feedback, we're making a change!" That's just one of the basic things that anyone involved with speaking to customers on behalf of a company doesn't even need to be taught. As for developers catering for those who cry the loudest because that's where the money is, that's just...completely incorrect. No company with an industry leading product is going to change their product for the group of users that cry the loudest. The reasoning behind that is that those customers represent a small, difficult to satisfy minority, which in many cases are unlikely to switch anyway. Do you really think that small group of people involved with MLG that were complaining about the Bizon being too powerful are where the money is? What percentage of the 21 million units the game sold do you think people that complained about the Bizon are? And do you think that if they had not made this change, those people complaining wouldn't have bought the next COD title? I have a sandwich that cures cancer. Proof not required. You are deluded if you think all of the game balances are made on an empirical basis otherwise we wouldn't see a vast change in how some weapons operate across subsequent instalments, e.g. Sniper rifles immediately spring to mind. What is a balanced sniper rifle in COD then? What ADS time would it be? Should QuickDraw be exempt from sniper rifles but be permitted on all other guns? Why the discrepancy? MLG complained about the Bizon, they also complained about the PDW and the KAP40. Why do you think the B23R pistol and the MSMC didn't get as a heavy nerf? I think you misunderstand the perceived potential of the competitive scene with COD. It will soon only be the game for them and that's why plenty of regulars are jumping ship. Didn't Activision put by $1m for the tournaments instead of advertising their product?
|
|