|
Post by robesh on Nov 26, 2009 12:14:05 GMT -5
Why do people still like to use the M16/FAMAS? It seems that all of the other assault rifles were upgaded (no sway, less recoil), except for the M16 and it's twin brother the FAMAS.
I just don't see the point, because an M4/ACR both have low recoil, and are effective at long range, and can spray in CQC.
I'm not saying the FAMAS/M16 aren't good, it's just that the others are much better for some situations, and the overuse of the FAMAS/M16 is quite odd just because I think it is unnecessary.
|
|
|
Post by nimrod6134 on Nov 26, 2009 12:27:42 GMT -5
I use it because the iron sights remind me of Call of Duty 4.
|
|
|
Post by imrlybord7 on Nov 26, 2009 15:35:34 GMT -5
Robesh, I totally agree.
|
|
|
Post by slashdolo on Nov 26, 2009 15:46:55 GMT -5
With the way things are going I'm sure IW will see this thread and buff the burst weapons immediately.
I can't wait til the next IW game. Every gun will kill in one bullet and fire at 40000 RPM, have no sway or recoil and the lock on feature from single player will be put in multiplayer.
But seriously, ammo conservation, recoil doesnt affect your shot in the slightest, and both guns still have the quickest ttk if all the bullets connect. I got a one burst kill with a silent FAMAS from across that Invasion map. Ridiculous.
|
|
iKONIG
True Bro
Don't know what to put here, Just something random.
Posts: 220
|
Post by iKONIG on Nov 30, 2009 23:32:16 GMT -5
At the end of the day, they have us all rapped around there little finger. I guarantee that the next Call of Duty installment that is released, we are ALL gonna go out a buy it and that's really all they give a poo about, our money. Just look at WaW, about the 1st month it was release, people have been bitching about the class setups and how they were unbalanced ever since! And even now, they STILL haven't addressed it! The only thing i can remember was that they ditched there perfetic 3rd grade science test spawn system and went back to the old CoD4 one, and toned down the skillcannons in hardcore mode by replacing them with duds? And that took like, what, 7 months!
What Tha FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF!?!?!?!
/smashes head on table
|
|
|
Post by robesh on Dec 1, 2009 23:32:58 GMT -5
I just unlocked the M16 today, and I must say, it is a beastly weapon. The iron sights are much better than they were in CoD4 because they aren't as blurry or obscuring.
I also think that it is much better than the FAMAS. I think it has less delay in between shots and a little less recoil.
|
|
|
Post by individual on Dec 1, 2009 23:51:42 GMT -5
I agree that the burst-rifles of MW2 aren't as powerful as the old M16. However, they're still useful. The time to kill is much shorter at long range, providing that the burst hits fully, and they're more accurate (tighter spread, less recoil) than most of the other assault rifles...
|
|
|
Post by cptmacmillan on Dec 1, 2009 23:53:31 GMT -5
Why? Because they have the quickest ttk of any rifle. 40-30 damage with the quickest rate of fire of any rifle and just a bit more recoil than an ACR.
Why not? Because you suck at aiming. If you can't land the burst don't bother. If you have the skills to keep the mouse pointed at a guy for a second then use it.
|
|
|
Post by robesh on Dec 2, 2009 17:42:30 GMT -5
TTK means nothing if you are getting jumped by UMPs all the time. It also means nothing if you miss, which we all do.
It doesn't matter if you're the "xXxOMG ITz N0 5C0P3 KiiN6!!1! xXx" in terms of aiming, you will be at a severe disadvantage if you have to use a weapon with a slow ROF when you miss in CQB. That's why the Auto shotties are so popular; you can miss your first shot and not worry too much, while with the SPAS, if you miss you're going to be dead 90% of the time. That's also one reason why the M16 owns the FAMAS: Less time between burst makes it closer to having shotgunesque capabilities.
|
|
|
Post by cptmacmillan on Dec 2, 2009 18:24:24 GMT -5
Why does ttk mean nothing? If you have a faster ttk than umps (you do) then you win the fight. I said the reason why not is that you can't aim - you obviously shouldn't use it, because you can't even aim a Spas much less a FAMAS.
For people who know how to aim (me and anyone else who puts some time in the game) the FAMAS or M16 are the -best- choice of rifle, although it still comes down to preference because mw2 is the same as cod4 in that you can do quite well with any weapon. Personally FAMAS is my second pick, after the FAL.
|
|
|
Post by chyros on Dec 2, 2009 19:52:27 GMT -5
M16 and FAMAS are still the CoD 4 OHK lasers. However I agree that the auto ones overthrow the burst ARs even more now. Why does ttk mean nothing? If you have a faster ttk than umps (you do) then you win the fight. TTK is almost irrelevant now. The only thing that really matters in a direct confrontation is who gets the first shot in. Because the other guy's view gets kicked up now so he can't get in a shot.
|
|
|
Post by dumdumpop on Dec 3, 2009 1:04:20 GMT -5
It's not the gun it's the user... People use FAM16 for the lazeresque qualities and you see more of them at longer ranges than the ACR for a reason: that's what they're MADE for. I'm not even going to go into real life with the M16 to compare but irl that's what burst fire is: medium-long range accuracy. The ACR is made for closER quarter combat than the FAM16, and it does well in where it is used, closER quarters than the FAM16.
I personally use them long ranged 100% of the time I'm not sniping. And I use the ACR in closer quarters. And even closer, screw the UMP, I got models like a bully with no friends.
Off topic: that made me think: do models defeat the purpose of SMGs?
|
|
|
Post by cptmacmillan on Dec 3, 2009 1:23:49 GMT -5
@dumdum: Not at all. 87s take time to switch to, can't be silenced, aren't a primary weapon, don't affect movement speed, and induce whining.
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Dec 4, 2009 6:48:52 GMT -5
I haven either not unlocked or not used the majority of the weapons so far, but I'm a big fan of the FAMAS and think I'll like the M16 even better, but we'll see. They are both 40-30 damage which means 56-42 with SP. My FAMAS class right now has thermal blinged with a silencer and I use it on long range maps as my sniper class being that it easily kills in one burst at any rage. And if I don't manage to land all three shots of the burst it's no biggie since I'm silenced. I find it a lot easier to use than sniper rifles.
As for close range well then it still kills in one burst, or 2/3's of one, really. So there's no real downside. The burst+SP basically nullifies any problems with range. One burst and my problem goes away. Other AR's will usually take an extra round to kill, but I'm already firing 3 rounds at a time so a 3 hit kill is no real problem and as for TTK the time between the second and third shot is very short.
The real disadvantages are probably more to do with crowds or if you screw the pooch and miss your burst in close quarters. Wifh full auto if your first shot is off you can just walk the sights on target while you spray and hope you were fast enough. With the FAMAS you'll have to stand there for about a half a second hoping your enemy's aim was as bad as yours. If you get ambushed by a group you could be well screwed. On the other hand if you see them coming I find it actually easier to take out multiple targets at range with a few quick bursts than with a full auto.
The other disadvantage is with your 30 round mag you get 10 bursts, no ifs ands or buts. And if your enemy is particularly keen they could be counting your bursts too, but then so can you. So I guess it goes both ways. Much easier to keep track of your ammo since you always know how many rounds(bursts) you fired.
The other thing it's good for is popping out to shoot and ducking between bursts. It puts some pretty lethal lead down range compared to how much time you leave yourself exposed. In this case you can easily make that delay an advantage since you spend that time behind cover, though it works better strafing a corner/doorway than actually crouching and standing, (at least on xbox it does, since you gotta take your thumb off the aim stick to crouch unless you swap melee, but pushing the stick I find doesn't work great either).
I don't use it for my CB class, though, because it really shines best at long range and it's just annoying not being able to kill in a single burst. For that I've been using the SCAR-H just because when I tried the TAR the recoil was like WTF to me! ;p I'll give it another go, but then I think it's not for me. I like longer ranges. I think I might like the AUG once I get it, though, but prolly not for CB either.
I'm still pretty much unable to make SMG's or Pistols kill for shyte. I just never seem to be able to get close enough for SMG's and something about pistols has just never worked for me. Mebbe it's the whole semi auto and needing 2-3 hits to kill thing. Any tips there?
|
|
|
Post by chyros on Dec 4, 2009 14:28:03 GMT -5
I haven either not unlocked or not used the majority of the weapons so far, but I'm a big fan of the FAMAS and think I'll like the M16 even better, but we'll see. They are both 40-30 damage which means 56-42 with SP. My FAMAS class right now has thermal blinged with a silencer and I use it on long range maps as my sniper class being that it easily kills in one burst at any rage. And if I don't manage to land all three shots of the burst it's no biggie since I'm silenced. I find it a lot easier to use than sniper rifles. Good point. This is one of the reasons skill is not a point in this game: assault rifles are better sniper rifles than sniper rifles themselves. If I had my way you'd have to make at least one headshot at long range with an M16/FAMAS to one-burst-kill - no biggie since sniper rifles have to, too, so this would be completely reasonable IMO.
|
|
|
Post by ssog on Dec 4, 2009 18:07:27 GMT -5
Good point. This is one of the reasons skill is not a point in this game: assault rifles are better sniper rifles than sniper rifles themselves. If I had my way you'd have to make at least one headshot at long range with an M16/FAMAS to one-burst-kill - no biggie since sniper rifles have to, too, so this would be completely reasonable IMO. A MW2 syllogism, courtesy of chyros Major Premise: Sniper Rifles are supposed to be the best weapons at long range. Minor Premise: Assault Rifles are the best weapons at long range. Conclusion: Modern Warfare 2 requires to skill. Every day when I check the boards, I can hardly wait to see what new and zany reasons chyros has come up with to explain why Modern Warfare 2 requires no skill. Thanks for never letting me down!
|
|
toysrme
True Bro
"Even at normal Health, there's no other choice than the Vector" Den Kirson
Posts: 1,339
|
Post by toysrme on Dec 4, 2009 18:40:01 GMT -5
M16 > Famas famas is slightly more accurate but its absolutely irrelevent when the M16 is so close M16 shoots faster overall.
I am THE biggest M16 RDS cod4 whore you can find and the biggest M4 is a shitty console weapon (outside of HC).
with you understanding that, understand that the ACR walks all over the pair of 3B. The accuracy is so absolutely rediculous, its the only weapon youll find where you just naturally shoot for head/neck shots every kill you get instead of shooting for body-center-mass.
ACR > all
|
|
|
Post by chyros on Dec 4, 2009 20:19:16 GMT -5
Good point. This is one of the reasons skill is not a point in this game: assault rifles are better sniper rifles than sniper rifles themselves. If I had my way you'd have to make at least one headshot at long range with an M16/FAMAS to one-burst-kill - no biggie since sniper rifles have to, too, so this would be completely reasonable IMO. A MW2 syllogism, courtesy of chyros Major Premise: Sniper Rifles are supposed to be the best weapons at long range. Minor Premise: Assault Rifles are the best weapons at long range. Conclusion: Modern Warfare 2 requires to skill. Every day when I check the boards, I can hardly wait to see what new and zany reasons chyros has come up with to explain why Modern Warfare 2 requires no skill. Thanks for never letting me down! I'm actually starting to wonder if you have played either game ever at all. Sniping requires breath management (or sway management, or quickscoping skills), good timing, good aiming for the upper body parts, especially the head, as well as good position management - you can't be out in the open all the time because your weapon sucks and you rely on your secondary for close-up protection, but you can't camp either because this will get you killed extremely quickly - as well as a stealthy approach because as soon an an opponent becomes aware of your presence, you chances of actually scoring a kill a greatly diminished. Assault rifling just requires you to keep the button depressed and keep your cursor over the enemy for as long as possible. Doesn't matter very much where you hit them, you can run around like a total moron, you can even hop like a lunatic bunny, and stealth is a good asset but definitely not critical. Timing is hardly relevant either. You also have a weapon with ridiculous close-combat potential so you don't ever have to even think of your secondary (it's quite terrifying to get the accolade for "most weapons used" just because you switch to your secondary once). Tl;dr version: assault rifles require no skill of any kind because they are grossly overpowered, have no weaknesses and do not require a second brain cell to operate. Generally speaking.
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Dec 4, 2009 22:03:29 GMT -5
AR's may be the most versatile weapons in the game, but they are a jack of all trades weapon that is outdone in every individual category by some other weapon. For long range the LMG's can 2HK instead of 3 with SP. For short range the SMG's have a higher rate of fire and more mobility while shotguns have more stopping power for a quicker TTK.
Sniper rifles require a lot of skill to use because if they didn't they would completely rule the game. Sniping is only fun for the guy doing the sniping, not so much the target, thus they put stronger limitations on sniper rifles. Having said that put me with my FAMAS against a Sniper in a strait up 1 on 1 fight at his range and I'm pretty well screwed. (Hence my silencer...)
With SP the sniper rifles OHK practically anywhere. (Barret and intervention get better multipliers to some parts.) Higher damage also means better penetration damage.
Idle sway isn't the evilest thing in the world either. Practiced snipers can actually snipe without holding their breath and still do well. I think the hardest part is not letting the gun lull you into being stupid and tactical loitering without watching your back or thinking people won't find you.
Personally I have a very hard time sniping in CoD games. The mechanics are just too different from what I'm used to, hence I use AR's instead, and mebbe an LMG once I get the AUG. We shall see. Good snipers probably lawl at the idea.
AR's may be the most noob friendly (read least skill) weapons, but they pay for it. Personally what I'm having a hard time with is the SMG's. The engagement ranges are usually so much longer that I can't seem to make the SMG's particularly usable for a primary weapon and there aren't any secondary's really good for long range.
|
|
|
Post by ssog on Dec 5, 2009 3:53:21 GMT -5
I'm actually starting to wonder if you have played either game ever at all. Sniping requires breath management (or sway management, or quickscoping skills), good timing, good aiming for the upper body parts, especially the head, as well as good position management - you can't be out in the open all the time because your weapon sucks and you rely on your secondary for close-up protection, but you can't camp either because this will get you killed extremely quickly - as well as a stealthy approach because as soon an an opponent becomes aware of your presence, you chances of actually scoring a kill a greatly diminished. Assault rifling just requires you to keep the button depressed and keep your cursor over the enemy for as long as possible. Doesn't matter very much where you hit them, you can run around like a total moron, you can even hop like a lunatic bunny, and stealth is a good asset but definitely not critical. Timing is hardly relevant either. You also have a weapon with ridiculous close-combat potential so you don't ever have to even think of your secondary (it's quite terrifying to get the accolade for "most weapons used" just because you switch to your secondary once). Tl;dr version: assault rifles require no skill of any kind because they are grossly overpowered, have no weaknesses and do not require a second brain cell to operate. Generally speaking. So you're saying that Assault Rifles are better at long range than Snipers. I don't necessarily disagree with you (although the AUG is better than either). Where I disagree with you is when you somehow put this forward as evidence that MW2 requires no skill. Give an assault rifle to a good player, and the same assault rifle to a bad player. The good player will win every time. Why? Because HE'S MORE SKILLED. Heck, give a sniper to the good player and an AR to the bad player, and the good player will still win far more than he loses, despite rocking an "inferior" gun. Why? Because MW2 requires skill. The people on my friends list who had the worst k/d in MW1 and WaW have the worst k/d in MW2. The people on my friends list who had the best k/d in MW1 and WaW have the best k/d in MW2. How on earth do you explain that without acknowledging that, despite your repeated assertions to the contrary, MW2 does in fact take skill?
|
|
|
Post by slashdolo on Dec 5, 2009 4:06:49 GMT -5
Give that good player a 3 bar connection. Give the bad player host. Give them both noob tubes with Danger Close. Bad player wins.
skill.equalized.
|
|
|
Post by chyros on Dec 5, 2009 7:10:23 GMT -5
Give that good player a 3 bar connection. Give the bad player host. Give them both Skill Cannons with Danger Close. Bad player wins. skill.equalized. True, but to be fair ssog does have a point, so let me elaborate/rephrase. My point is that all weapon classes have certain requirements for good use. If you don't abide by these, you will fail most of the time by definition, because you are trying to engage a target in a way not suited to your weapon. Extreme examples would be CQC with a sniper or sniping with a shotgun. These could generally be said to include the following: - submachine guns: move from cover to cover to try and minimise long-range contact and maximise short-range contact, avoid long-range engagements and fire in short bursts when you do or your recoil will make sure you won't hit anywhere near the target; hipfiring is usable at ranges up to, say, 5 meters maximum before iron sights trump them. - light machine guns: all engagements are good engagements, though at any range you need the ironsights. At long range many machineguns have too much recoil so shorter bursts may be necessary; as such, move carefully or you'll still be killed at long range by an assault rifle or killed with a fast CQC weapon up close; put a grip on your LMG to reduce recoil to a quite low state to mitigate these problems. - sniper rifles: your weapon is good at long ranges but pathetic short of that so never engage enemies that you can't follow too well with the scope, with your rifle: use your secondary a lot; use plenty of cover to fire from to make sure you not only retain the element of surprise, but also so that the enemy can't counterattack: if the opponent sees you, he can hit you, and you'll likely never get off a shot that hits him because of the screen deviation on a hit; use camouflage and stealthy movement to avoid detection and use cold-blooded and the like to not attract attention with all sorts of things like UAV & thermal; once you've given away your position on either the killcam or the opponent has spotted you, relocate immediately and/or set up an ambush for the guy you just killed since he will most certainly get back to your position; never give away your position by firing without knowing you can make the shot. shotguns: (I'm including them here because they're kind of incomparable to the other classes and they were primaries in CoD 4): never engage enemies from where you can't hit or even kill them; don't give away your position to anyone; NEVER alert someone to your mere presence (use ninja); avoid engaging anyone from the front unless they are already in your range; take advantage of not having to aim down your sights at any range, move from cover to cover to avoid exposure to opponents at long range and maximise short-range contact; engage any target are that is well known for or that you believe is currently held by a camper; when you can't close the distance because the target is moving too fast for you, use a different weapon instead. - assault rifles: don't use your hipfire from distances greater than three meters max, any target is a valid target, burst-firing is not necessary. I hope this kind of conveys why I consider assault rifles to be "easier" to use. You don't have to think or consider as much as the other weapon classes since your performance is good at any range. And I don't mind that per se, I'm fine with assault rifles being jacks-of-all-trades. What I DON'T like is that the easiest-to-use weapons (AR's and also some LMG's) are ALSO the most powerful: the disadvantages you put forward are in practice very small and AR's perform almost as well as the classes that are supposed to beat them at their specialist range. This means that when you pick a more specialised weapon such as an SMG/shotgun or sniper rifle over an assault rifle, you discard massive capability at many ranges, while gaining very little in one range. This means that specialist weapons, which can't just be used whenever you feel like it, so some weapons are in practice a lot more powerful than others. This means that these weapons are overpowered, and that the game and classes are imbalanced.
|
|
|
Post by slashdolo on Dec 5, 2009 18:39:36 GMT -5
^Excellent analysis.
I remember I could use every weapon class in COD4 and do well by simply modifying my play style to suit the range of my weapon. The Assault Rifles in this game are so good, and the sidearms providing you so much range coverage, every other weapon class that aren't assault rifles are severely gimped.
|
|
|
Post by ssog on Dec 5, 2009 18:55:38 GMT -5
I hope this kind of conveys why I consider assault rifles to be "easier" to use. You don't have to think or consider as much as the other weapon classes since your performance is good at any range. And I don't mind that per se, I'm fine with assault rifles being jacks-of-all-trades. What I DON'T like is that the easiest-to-use weapons (AR's and also some LMG's) are ALSO the most powerful: the disadvantages you put forward are in practice very small and AR's perform almost as well as the classes that are supposed to beat them at their specialist range. This means that when you pick a more specialised weapon such as an SMG/shotgun or sniper rifle over an assault rifle, you discard massive capability at many ranges, while gaining very little in one range. This means that specialist weapons, which can't just be used whenever you feel like it, so some weapons are in practice a lot more powerful than others. This means that these weapons are overpowered, and that the game and classes are imbalanced. Your last word says it all. It's not a skill issue, it's a balance issue. With that said, every weapon class has its niche. ARs might have a larger niche than the other classes, but that doesn't mean you can't still use the other classes to great success if your playstyle happens to fall within the other classes' narrower niches. Think of it this way: imagine that every type of player is a number between 1 and 100. If you're a 1-5, snipers fit your playstyle best. If you're a 6-15, SMGs do. If you're a 16-35, LMGs do. If you're a 36-100, ARs do. Since ARs are a better fit for more people, does that make them unbalanced? Or does the fact that a 13 will do better with an SMG than an AR indicate that SMGs and ARs are both balanced, it's just that ARs fit a more common playstyle?
|
|
|
Post by cptmacmillan on Dec 5, 2009 19:41:58 GMT -5
I disagree with ARs being overpowered. They can do everything, but they're the worst in each category, which balances them out. The exception to this is the FAMAS/M16 but those require skill that many people seem to lack.
Yes, ARs can kill at every range. However, they will always lose to SMGs at close range. They will always lose to sniper rifles at long range. They'll always lose to LMGs at medium and long ranges. Of course, the part that makes them good is that they will always beat SMGs at medium and long ranges, will typically beat a sniper at close and medium ranges, and are more mobile than an LMG, which also helps them in closer ranges.
The exception to all of this is the burst-firing rifles. They combine high damage, little recoil, and über RoF all into one neat package that apparently requires a lot of skill to use...
|
|
|
Post by bambooozler on Dec 5, 2009 21:12:03 GMT -5
in COD4, i looked at the M16 as a training tool. tracking (and hitting) a moving opponent while aiming down sights (especially at distance) took a little getting used to. in my opinion, the M16 made me a better player by teaching me not to be as quick to squeeze the trigger and lose track of what i was shooting at. To a lesser extent, the FAMAS and M16 this time around teach the same discretion. I say lesser extent because to me it seems that every gun can kill very fast, thus encouraging bullet spam. A point could be made that EVERY gun could teach the same lesson, but for me "feeling" the controlled burst of the FAMAS and M16 applies to what a controlled burst of a TAR or SCAR feels like.
|
|
|
Post by chyros on Dec 5, 2009 22:27:40 GMT -5
I hope this kind of conveys why I consider assault rifles to be "easier" to use. You don't have to think or consider as much as the other weapon classes since your performance is good at any range. And I don't mind that per se, I'm fine with assault rifles being jacks-of-all-trades. What I DON'T like is that the easiest-to-use weapons (AR's and also some LMG's) are ALSO the most powerful: the disadvantages you put forward are in practice very small and AR's perform almost as well as the classes that are supposed to beat them at their specialist range. This means that when you pick a more specialised weapon such as an SMG/shotgun or sniper rifle over an assault rifle, you discard massive capability at many ranges, while gaining very little in one range. This means that specialist weapons, which can't just be used whenever you feel like it, so some weapons are in practice a lot more powerful than others. This means that these weapons are overpowered, and that the game and classes are imbalanced. Your last word says it all. It's not a skill issue, it's a balance issue. It's a balance issue, but this CAUSES a skill issue, because only the easy weapons are worth using. If snipers would be overpowered, the game would be too hard instead of too easy, since the threshold of getting a kill in would be a lot higher. I think we're somewhat trying to say the same thing though. This is where I really don't understand how you could possibly think this. An SMG beat an AR all the time in close quarters? Sorry, but this is just not the case. ARs are extremely competent in close quarters and can easily beat an SMG, especially a good AR versus a bad SMG (conversely, there is no such thing as a bad AR in close quarters - even the FAL can make a OHK making it quite competent). The hipspread advantage of SMGs is massively overstated most of the time because hipfiring is just not that good, and even IF you'd be hipfiring the ARs have a spread tight enough to hardly notice a difference with an SMG. I'm not saying an AR has an advantage over an SMG up close, but they do hardly have a disadvantage. Even more so, in practice, combat that would favour SMG's (<5 meters) is a lot rarer than combat that would favour AR's (>5 meters). Also, AR's are extremely competent against sniper rifles in all circumstances that do not involve Wasteland-esque engagements from across both sides of the map. If an AR user manages to spot a sniper, the AR user comes out victorious really really often. And again, even the situations where snipers actually do have a bit of an advantage (>, what shall we say, 250 meters or something?) are a LOT rarer than those that favour the assault rifles (anything short of that). Sniper rifles aren't even good, they just have a big zoom. If an AR's reddot had the same zoom factor without added recoil, I wouldn't be surprised if AR's would utterly trounce sniper rifles.
|
|
|
Post by cptmacmillan on Dec 5, 2009 23:20:20 GMT -5
SMGs typically DO have a close-range advantage. First, the obvious combat advantages. They have good max damages and/or RoFs, which is generally offset by bad min damages and big recoil at larger distances. The other obvious combat advantage is they ADS faster and they hipfire better. Then they have non-combat factors that contribute, such as full speed stealth ADS, better mobility, etc.
Snipers have an instant kill and at long ranges are easier to fire off accurately than ARs because they have a significant zoom. If a sniper manages to spot an AR user, there is literally no reason he shouldn't come out victorious barring a close range where aiming quickly is more difficult.
|
|
|
Post by ssog on Dec 6, 2009 0:13:30 GMT -5
It's a balance issue, but this CAUSES a skill issue, because only the easy weapons are worth using. If snipers would be overpowered, the game would be too hard instead of too easy, since the threshold of getting a kill in would be a lot higher. I think we're somewhat trying to say the same thing though. It doesn't cause a skill issue in the slightest. Imagine if IW added an entire class of primary weapons called "BB Guns", which all dealt 2-1 damage. Those guns would absolutely, positively blow, and wouldn't be close to balanced with the rest of the game. Would that somehow reduce the level of skill required? If I were a terrible player, would I suddenly be able to compete with good players because these terrible guns existed that no one used? If anything, having unbalanced guns really tilts the game in favor of more skilled players. "Good" players are more likely to use the powerguns, whereas bad players and recreational gamers will just use whatever they think is most fun. The radius of the hip-fire crosshairs is similar between an SMG and an AR, but you have to remember that hip fire is a circle, and the area of two circles isn't directly proportional to the radius of the two circles, it's actually directly proportional to the SQUARE of the radius of the two circles. If an AR's crosshairs are 33% further apart than an SMG's, it doesn't mean that an AR is 75% as likely to hit someone when firing from the hip, it means that the AR is a mere 57% as likely to hit someone when firing from the hip. That is a MASSIVE, MASSIVE hip-firing edge to the SMG. It's really the same as a 77% increase in Rate of Fire in CQC. And since the SMGs fire as fast (or faster) than ARs and deal the same (or more) damage in CQ to begin with, a hip-fired SMG will DEVASTATE a hip-fired AR. And even if you think hip-firing is bad, when surprised you can always just pull both triggers simultaneously and fire off a few hip-fired shots while you're transitioning down the sights. In addition, the SMG gets the movement boost, AND it gets full movement while ADS (which means an SMG user doesn't need to take time to aim down the sights, which gives it another advantage in heads up close quarters situations if the user is smart enough to keep the sights up while rounding a corner). SMGs murder the crap out of ARs in close quarters combat. If my auntie had balls, she'd be my uncle. The red dot DOESN'T have 2x zoom. The ACOG doesn't even have 2x zoom. And even if they did have 2x zoom, there ISN'T an AR scope that increases zoom without increasing recoil. And even if there was, snipers still have ghillies and the ability to hold their breath. And snipers are still a 1-hit kill, which is faster than a 1-burst kill (provided all three shots even hit in the first place, which they won't at very long ranges). The only AR that can come anywhere close to a sniper at extremely long ranges is the ACR, and the Sniper will trump it in ability to acquire distant targets *AND* TTK *AND* stealthiness. So, yeah... if ARs had the hip-fire of an SMG and no movement penalties and full movement speed while ADS and a 2x zoom scope like a sniper that didn't add idle or recoil, then they would totally outclass snipers and SMGs even in their native arenas. And, like I said, if my auntie had balls, she'd be my uncle.
|
|
|
Post by mw0swedeking on Dec 6, 2009 1:22:56 GMT -5
Another disadvantage the FAM16 has vs. some guns is a reliance on stopping power. It benefits these burst rifles far more than guns that are full auto (or deal 55 dmg FAL). Which means either they don't have Cold blooded, etc. or they kill in two bursts, so if you come across a bunch of FAM16ers, try and get as many people as you can to make UAV one of their killstreaks. Or danger close noob tubes. Or use an smg or shotgun and lock down a building.
|
|