Barebone Playlists added 6/21/10

[niteshadex]

Jun 22, 2010 21:23:30 GMT -5 scorp said:

If they disable perks they would have to disable attachments, which they CAN'T do. It sucks...

Ok obviously no perks overpowers Hearbeat and thermals, but why cant they specifically disable those two? Is it a metaphorical thing like "they cant because it will ruin the gameplay" or a physical thing like "they cant because of the way the weapons are coded.?"

[scorp]

It's a physical "they literally cannot do it due to coding".

[vardinator]

Jun 28, 2010 2:50:54 GMT -5 qupie said:

you keep saying that argument
but that is what the game already does...
why cant I aim steady, and be verry silent? there is nothing there that should exclude each other. or why cant I run longer and reload faster? there is nothing there that excludes eachother. in other words: these choises are made because of balance, and then, letting somebody not run faster/reload faster or have more ammo in any way, can be a pretty nice balance!. why would perk one ONLY have ordinance in order for it to be fair? right now, you also choose between more then 2 tubes/one claymore (scav/OMA) or faster reload/longer running. and it is balanced now. MW2 has way les obvious balance, but the perks are more or less balanced. and there is something that should be dont against OMA tubers.
removing the 2nd perk would be way to bad.
removing the 3th perk, would make no sence because it solves nothing.
removing the 1st perk would make absolute sence, because that is the perk that influences your combat effectiveness in a pretty much secondairy way. it makes you more versitile. Now, wouldnt it be perfect sence to get rid of that versitility (is that a word ^_^) in order to get other versitility? (a tube!)
and if you want to look at it at a different angle: you cant use marathon with scavenger, why nog you might ask? well the only logical reason is: because you carry to much ammo. when you use a tube, you are carryíng two pretty heave grenades.... That is where your point gets lost, because there is no obvious balance any more like it was in COD 4/5

... No, removing Perk 1 just because they used to do so to add a tube makes no sense. Again, I shouldn't have my running inhibited because I'm equipping a tube. Running infinitely makes no sense at all, so don't try to say running infinitely with two 40x46mm grenades makes even less sense. Further more, I can run as fast with a M82 .50 caliber sniper rifle that weighs about 30 pounds, as I can with a Vector, weighing in at 5.5 pounds. Weight is irrelevant. I'm not saying the tube should take up a perk at all now, because it makes no sense for it to do so anymore. It would make more sense if the tube took up your equipment slot and/or prohibited the use of launchers as a secondary weapon.

All perks augment combat secondarily. Primarily, you're shooting a gun. Stopping Power augments that gun, therefore Stopping Power is secondary. Commando alone won't kill a man, because you need to use your knife for it to work. Marathon does nothing unless I sprint or climb something.

Go back and think of the tube as, simply, Perk 1. It gives you two extra pieces of equipment. 3 Frag and 3 specials gave you 2 extra pieces of equipment each. RPGs gave you 2 extra explosives. C4, Claymores, two extra explosives. That makes sense. Two explosives, plus forcing me to sprint for 4 seconds instead of 9, makes no sense. Running doesn't directly affect the tube. All it might do is get me to a pre-nade spot sooner.

[qupie]

I know it is not the same balance as it was in cod 4, but still, it would make great balance (in an other way) again like i said: perk 1 gives you balance, Skill Cannon gives you balance ---> balance + balance = overpowered --> hmm lets take one balance away and it is more balanced again. next to that, two of the blue perks are equipment perks (scav and OMA). next to that it would get rid of major noob spamming.
I agree removing perk 1 would make it a bit to weak, but I couldn't care less... Skill Cannons are anoying since cod 4, and finaly they deserve to be an underdog. another idea what I had, which might be pretty nice is only enable the GL attachment when using bling.
this way, you'll get another nice attachment for your gun when you use a GL, but your first perk will be gone anyway. other then that, what is not bling about a GL (H)

the problem is, that the perk balance between COD4,5 and COD MW2 is nowhere near comparable, and it is just completely different. removing perk 1 is not intended as doing the same as in MW1 (because you cant, as you explained in your last paragraph) but it is a nice balance in a whole other way. I think it would make nice balance, even without thinking about scav and OMA

[vardinator]

One Man Army wasn't intended to be a 6-second resupply. I think One Man Army is even faster than taking someone else's airdrop package. It was intended so you could, say, switch to Cold-Blooded if there was air-support in the air or to Danger Close Pro if you got air support yourself. They might have even thought of it as being useful for using Stopping Power up until 3 kills, then switching to Hardline so you could get the Predator Missile. If they could exclude rifle grenades and Thumper ammo from Scavenger, and somehow figure out how to exchange ammunition between two classes (Example, 5 Intervention rounds = 30 AK-47 rounds; two 40mm grenades = 4 Masterkey shells) I think that'd be okay. But they probably can't because of either programming difficulty or complaints from everyone who uses the tube.

Having a launcher take up two equipment slots absolutely defeats the purpose of Bling in my opinion. Some people, even Denizens, don't like the ACR's iron sights. Why should having an alternative sight inhibit them from using two tubes? The name of Bling suggests that previously in Call of Duty 4, money was a constraint, and you could only afford something nice for your gun, and maybe a nice little silencer for your back-up pistol. It doesn't make much sense when you think about it; I'm pretty sure a red-dot, a Masterkey and a suppressor don't total up the the same as a thermal sight and a sensor that magically triangulates enemy positions using their heart beat, but I can ignore that oversight.

I guess my preference of perks keeps me from seeing how removing Perk 1 would make any difference to the game balance. If I planned on running indefinitely, I'd surely give up a grenade launcher for that (Pretty sweet deal in real life, if you ask me. Launchers are overrated when you can just sprint around and set up tons of strategic C4. =D)

I really do think that they should have done things the same way they did in Modern Warfare 2. I could probably set it up perfectly in 15 minutes, and might actually do so later on.

[qupie]

I didnt say it takes both your equipment slots... You are forced to take bling in order to be able to equip the greande launcher. so the grenade launcher can only be the secondairy attachment... I hope it is more clear now what I meant
it is something in between removing perk 1 and having no penalty at all.. and it makes sence, because a GL IS bling . (it makes your weapon two weapons)

[ParaGoombaSlayer]

It'll be nice not getting fucked over by UAVs every time I'm on the enemies' flank. Too bad I hate every single god damned MW2 map.

[mdnl]

Just got barebones on the PS3 and I must admit it's good, not having to run CB makes the game feel easy mode with SP on every class!

Should have been there from COD4, especially as anti air measures where not so good in COD4.