|
|
Post by mw0swedeking on Dec 2, 2009 23:19:32 GMT -5
I think LMGs are overpowered. In both MW 1 and 2. With steady aim and stopping power you could/can effectively spray down opponents at smg range, at medium range with a grip dropping people is simple, has great penetration through surfaces and reloads are very infrequent. If I encounter another RPD at close range with my mini-uzi rapid fire stopping power, and watching the killcam see that he simply outsprayed me, I will personally buy a real Uzi and walk into infinity ward and shoot the place up.
Disclaimer: Not really. but that and no scopes are probably two of the most annoying ways to die because you are at a range where your gun should be far better, but it isn't.
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371 
|
Post by mannon on Dec 2, 2009 23:44:56 GMT -5
I don't know about that. LMG's are also made for spraying. You've got fire rate on them though less damage than the 40 dmg ones. Your UZI almost undoubtedly kicks more, at least if they use a grip. Pretty much your main advantage is just mobility. If you go 1 on 1 with an LMG mebbe you just need to avoid a strait up shootout. Use your maneuverability to try and get some cover & try to flank or lead him to an ambush. Depending on range you may also be able to circle strafe
If all else fails cook a 'nade. ;p.
|
|
|
|
Post by mw0swedeking on Dec 3, 2009 0:09:23 GMT -5
My hate of LMGs is probably irrational, so take it with that grain of salt.
But they kill you in two shots and put the bullets out there pretty fast, not a lot of time to circle strafe or get to cover.
But the Mini-Uzi pretty much has zero recoil up to like 5 shots or something, it's awesome.
|
|
sleep
True Bro
Posts: 10,189
|
Post by sleep on Dec 3, 2009 0:36:10 GMT -5
bling AK with ACOG plus any other attachment (eg. ACOG + silencer) incurs sway. bling AK with any other two attachments (eg. holographic + heartbeat sensor) incurs the same sway penalty. so there are precisely two configurations for the AK that have no sway: no attachment and ACOG.
the gun is still usable in any case, though the attachment sway nerf clearly puts it at a slight disadvantage vs. the comparable assault rifles. the sway amount is not huge, and the gun even has a respectably tight bullet spread at full auto including the sway, but consider the following situation. suppose you see an enemy at medium to long range, behind solid cover except for his head peeking out. if you have an AK with a non-ACOG attachment or multiple attachments, you will have a very difficult time aiming at and shooting that head quickly, compared to all the other assault rifles. landing two or three consecutive shots on the head at long range will be extremely difficult indeed, whereas this would a piece of cake with the SCAR-H or any other assault rifle.
anyway, it's still pretty fun to kick around with. i've unlocked all the attachments for it except extended mags, and that's only a few FMJ kills away.
|
|
|
|
Post by dchoi41 on Dec 3, 2009 0:52:20 GMT -5
I like the idea of the FAL being balanced, but most other guns are just overpowered (that's not balanced ).
I used to love the AK iron sights, but those rails on the new one block a lot of vision. I also miss my rattatatta sound.
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Dec 3, 2009 1:07:40 GMT -5
Sounds like FMJ would be a good help then since you could mebbe just shoot through the cover. Of course some people are better at dealing with sway than others. Basically comes down to timing and experience I'd think. Most of the good ones prolly use sniper rifles, though.
I wonder, though... If you tacked on a thermal scope at least you would be able to hold your breath, so that could compensate some, and then you could bling on a non-scope attachment without it being such a penalty.
It is pretty funny IMO that FMJ makes it sway. heh I think that's taking the nerf a bit farther than necessary, but meh.
I still don't get what makes the AK so special that it merits such an odd nerf. It seems to be in the same class as the SCAR-H and TAR-21. It is faster than the SCAR, but slower than the TAR. The recoil seems pretty close to the same as the TAR in the pics on the "MW2 Recoil, shotguns UPDATED", though a bit less vertical. That could just be a fluke, though. I dunno, maybe it does kick less than the TAR and that's the reason to make it sway. That would actually make some sense given that the acog adds recoil.
So it would follow some kind of logic that if the reason for the idle is that it has relatively low recoil for being a high damage AR that's faster than the SCAR then the attachment that particularly negates that advantage doesn't need the sway.
I don't have the gun yet, though. So I have no idea how the kick compares to the TAR.
Then again it could just be IW being funky... There could be literally nothing that would make the AK any better than the TAR in any way without the idle sway for all I know. I hope that's not true, however. I hope they did it for some logical reason, rather than just to nerf one of the coolest guns in the game so we wouldn't all be using it just for funsies.
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Dec 3, 2009 1:09:23 GMT -5
Wait, what's wrong with the FAL with a scope?
|
|
|
|
Post by dchoi41 on Dec 3, 2009 1:18:57 GMT -5
Too much kick. Takes too long to recenter.
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Dec 3, 2009 1:31:33 GMT -5
Are you saying it adds kick to scope it, or just the acog, which seems to always add kick? What about RDS/Holo?
|
|
|
|
Post by dchoi41 on Dec 3, 2009 1:40:02 GMT -5
It's an increase to the recenter time with the ACOG, in addition to the idling. Thermal, I think, does the same and makes it harder to use at shorter range. Those are scopes.
Red dot and holo are reflex sights and are fine with the FAL.
|
|
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 3, 2009 2:06:08 GMT -5
ahhhhhh kay.
*ak47 tosses the TAR's salad. TAR > AK by a country mile
*LMG's FFFFing suck in a straight up fight. Their movement is too low AND they NEVER win an equal encouter beyond raw luck. Fact of the matter is, is that their ADS time is too high and you just aint going to luck into hf/SA kills when the other person is doing the same and has 1/2 the ADS time and 1/2 the HF spread before we even get into less kick for most of the other weapons.
*RPD's FFFFing suck now. The range that the majority of the other weapons can engage at has surpassed the RPD's ability to keep it's sight pointed at the target
The TAR fires faster, reloads faster & is more accurate while shooting. Waiting on the first person to give 1 legit reason how the AK is as good as any of the other automatic AR's minus the F2k. 'cause it just aint! Can it kill? Yes, Is it as good? Not at all!
|
|
|
|
Post by chyros on Dec 3, 2009 3:45:25 GMT -5
You are heavily downplaying the ViewKick of weapons in MW2 in an attempt to boost your argument. You are making these comments when it appears that you've yet to use the weapon of discussion. No, I'd used it a lot by the second post. You are even putting words in my mouth. The average encounter in MW2 takes place at distances further than those in COD4. Up close, kick doesn't matter. Any further than the distance of the tunnel in Skidrow, kick will cause misses even after the first shot without disciplined shooting. I'm still killing people in full-auto in half a mag of the SCAR all across the map, but I guess you're right in that I was being kind of a dickwad xD . Apologies. |
|
|
|
Post by kcpwnsgman on Dec 3, 2009 4:28:35 GMT -5
The TAR is 40-30 with fairly low recoil and a pretty high ROF, FYI. Fairly low recoil? Compared to what, the DEagle? The TAR has the highest recoil of any non-LMG, non-sniper in the game. And even several of the LMGs have less recoil than the TAR. Actually, I think all of the LMGs have lower recoil than the TAR if you pack a grip. are you sure? the F2000 has a lot of recoil... |
|
|
|
Post by yetispaghetti on Dec 3, 2009 4:37:18 GMT -5
DEN, MAKE LOVE TO ME
|
|
|
|
Post by ssog on Dec 3, 2009 5:07:06 GMT -5
are you sure? the F2000 has a lot of recoil... You're right, of course. I always forget that that gun even exists because it's such a failure of weaponry. I'd call it the R700 of MW2, if the Intervention hadn't already laid claim to that title. I'll rephrase my original premise to "the TAR has one of the highest recoil values of any gun actually worth using". |
|
sleep
True Bro
Posts: 10,189
|
Post by sleep on Dec 3, 2009 10:48:13 GMT -5
I still don't get what makes the AK so special that it merits such an odd nerf. It seems to be in the same class as the SCAR-H and TAR-21. It is faster than the SCAR, but slower than the TAR. The recoil seems pretty close to the same as the TAR in the pics on the "MW2 Recoil, shotguns UPDATED", though a bit less vertical. That could just be a fluke, though. I dunno, maybe it does kick less than the TAR and that's the reason to make it sway. That would actually make some sense given that the acog adds recoil. it kicks less than the TAR but it also fires slower. it would be balanced with the SCAR and TAR without the nerf imo. Then again it could just be IW being funky... There could be literally nothing that would make the AK any better than the TAR in any way without the idle sway for all I know. I hope that's not true, however. I hope they did it for some logical reason, rather than just to nerf one of the coolest guns in the game so we wouldn't all be using it just for funsies. my guess was that IW wanted to be absolutely sure nobody would complain that people at lvl 70 had some big advantage because of their exclusive gun. (of course people at lvl 67+ do have a pretty big advantage on the shotgun side with the 1887s, but that's another story). iirc they did a similar thing in cod4- the last assault rifle unlocked was the mp44, which was comparable to the AK in that game but with more kick and no attachments available. |
|
|
|
Post by dchoi41 on Dec 3, 2009 12:10:55 GMT -5
Maybe they wanted to make it effectively have no attachments available, since they couldn't actually block attachments because they put those huge rails on it.
|
|
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 3, 2009 12:46:31 GMT -5
meh, im getting pretty tired of the akimbo 1887's. the rangers i can handle, but the 1887's are abit imba as its just not feasible with all the cover in the new maps to catch them outside their range.
when you're doing well & good going 2:1+ VS everyone but some hoe running around with that shit, that couldn't do good otherwise, It gets abit annoying.
Im not moaning about the akimbo 1887 guys doing well with them going 2:1+. Im saying im tired of there being so many 1:1 or below newbs ending my sprees that otherwise would be complete cannon fodder with any other loadout.
MW2 is such a newb friendly game LoL
|
|
|
|
Post by legacy on Dec 3, 2009 12:49:32 GMT -5
You're right, of course. I always forget that that gun even exists because it's such a failure of weaponry. I'd call it the R700 of MW2, if the Intervention hadn't already laid claim to that title. I'll rephrase my original premise to "the TAR has one of the highest recoil values of any gun actually worth using". why do you think the intervention is such a bad gun, I'm able able to get a lot of kills and a great score using it, as are other players I see (just need to know how to use it). Now if I pulled out the f2000 I would lose almost every fire fight at medium to long range. |
|
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 3, 2009 12:50:30 GMT -5
I'll rephrase my original premise to "the TAR has one of the highest recoil values of any gun actually worth using". Exactly. People are splitting hairs, but the TAR's recoil = enough to be manageable OR can be stated as VERY LITTLE recoil for a 40-30 damage gun shooting 700rpm+ that has a 30 round clip. Point being that it's obviously not an ACR, or M4, nor is it a Vector or RPD. It's found a happy, balanced medium. (ya, i said something was balanced in MW2 lawlz) It's got just enough recoil to make you think about trying to shoot at someone far away who you know has a more accurate weapon. THAT is a perfect amount of recoil! |
|
|
|
Post by ssog on Dec 3, 2009 16:39:22 GMT -5
why do you think the intervention is such a bad gun, I'm able able to get a lot of kills and a great score using it, as are other players I see (just need to know how to use it). Now if I pulled out the f2000 I would lose almost every fire fight at medium to long range. The Intervention is outclassed by the Barrett. Sure, you can have good games with it. I had some good games with the MP44 in MW1. I knew some people who did very well with the R700. Doesn't change the fact that it's statistically inferior. |
|
|
|
Post by BigShay on Dec 4, 2009 16:51:19 GMT -5
The Intervention is outclassed by the Barrett. Sure, you can have good games with it. I had some good games with the MP44 in MW1. I knew some people who did very well with the R700. Doesn't change the fact that it's statistically inferior. Pardon me, but I fail to see how the Barrett is statistically superior. I'm going to assume your primary argument would be fire rate(?). The second shot from a Barrett takes longer to line up than the sights may make you believe. If you want to guarantee the second shot will line up with the sights, then you have to wait almost as long as if you were firing a bolt action. Hence, the fire rate is meaningless. --- Oh, and to the people who think the TAR has lower recoil/kick than the AK, you are right. However, remember the AK's recoil/kick is mostly vertical and easier to manage. I can fire one bullet into an enemy's stomach area and the second shot will hit his head/chest/neck and I don't have to manage any left or right recoil randomness that one could encounter with the TAR's recoil. This can be a huge advantage in mid-to-long range fights where the left and right kick of the TAR aims you off of your target within one bullet. If all you see is an enemy's head sticking out from behind cover, then it's a tossup between the TAR and the AK in my opinion. The AK could be at a disadvantage here because the kick of the gun could blind you to the fact that the enemy has strafed ever so slightly and still has a bead on your a$$.  |
|
|
|
Post by slashdolo on Dec 4, 2009 17:25:19 GMT -5
Intervention has more sway than the Barrett. Its a re-skinned R700 basically. I wonder if IW gave the Intervention some secret advantage that we don't know about yet or if they really are that stupid to screw up twice.
|
|
|
|
Post by BigShay on Dec 4, 2009 17:40:12 GMT -5
<sorry to get off-topic somewhat>
Okay, well I might have to eat my own words...if the "less sway" is true. I actually didn't notice, but I am more of a mobile sniper and I move a lot instead of sit and wait. I'll go in and out of zoom a lot to keep an eye on my surroundings and radar.
I often wait to zoom-in through the scope until I've spotted my target and then I just aim and shoot. I use Sleight of Hand Pro to give me a quicker ADS. I guess I don't spend that much time scoped in (and waiting to find someone) to have noticed. If I am scoped in, usually I am just waiting for someone to pop their head out in which case I am holding my breath ( with Steady Aim Pro ).
I'll have to check this out for myself tonight.
|
|
iKONIG
True Bro
Don't know what to put here, Just something random.
Posts: 220
|
Post by iKONIG on Dec 4, 2009 19:32:16 GMT -5
I wonder if IW gave the Intervention some secret advantage that we don't know about yet or if they really are that stupid to screw up twice. Dont be silly, this is IW were talking about, it would be a world class miracle if they can do something without FFFFing up! |
|
|
|
Post by chyros on Dec 4, 2009 19:57:24 GMT -5
Pardon me, but I fail to see how the Barrett is statistically superior. I'm going to assume your primary argument would be fire rate(?). Compared to the CoD 4 M40, the Barrett doesn't have that much higher of a fire rate, but the Intervention has such a retardedly long scope animation which takes a lot longer to fully recover than might seem apparent at first. For aiming I find the Intervention all but unusable. Even if there would be a secret, it would be a mighty irrelevant secret because the results I'm getting with the Intervention are quite awful. I could put this down to simple bad sniping but then again, I'm getting quite good results with the Barrett, so I'm not too inclined to believe that. Besides, the R700 didn't have a secret advantage either - it had the same power as a Barrett but easily the worst recoil and most sway of all sniper rifles, as well as being a 4-shot bolt-action. |
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Dec 4, 2009 21:40:23 GMT -5
As near as I can tell given the kick on the Barret and the time it takes to come back on target it's practical ROF while sniping feels slightly faster, but still comparable to the Intervention. The main difference with the kick seems to be that it kicks further but returns on target faster. For me I find that more controllable even though it puts the target out of sight for a moment.
I think some may prefer one style over the other. With the intervention you can keep looking down the scope a little better after you fire, but lining up that second shot feels harder fighting the sway instead of just zipping back from the kick. (For me.) For others it may be just fine.
The ADS for the scope is the same on both. It felt different to me at first, mebbe due to the animation or something, but it's the same.
I think the real differences between the two have nothing to do with how well they actually snipe, though. Basically the ability of the Barret to spam bullets means you can crouch and tack on Steady Aim for those OH S@#T moments instead of switching to a secondary. Where the Intervention is better for snipers that don't want to wait to reload since you load individual shells instead of a whole clip. If you're reloading the Barret after every shot or two then you're spending a lot more time in reload than you would with the Intervention.
In other words for sniping they are practically the same weapon just with different styles, which surprises me, but seems to be true. Just use whichever one works best for you and don't worry about the Intervention vs Barret debate. Unless you're a noscoping god, then go Barret for the ROF. HIghest damage guns in the game + decent ROF (Barret) + great multipliers + 100% movement speed is pretty dangerous except for that huge hipfire spread and massive recoil. Good luck with that, but then, I've seen people do it in CoD4 and W@W. Don't think I'll attempt it, myself. Quicker to just switch to a mag or MP.
|
|
|
|
Post by shanded on Dec 4, 2009 22:48:55 GMT -5
Well the best Sniper without Stopping Power is neither Barret nor Intervention.
It's the W2000 with any attachment but silencer and the M21 WITH silencer (2-shot kills with M21).
The W2000 doesn't even profit from SP but kills to the head, neck and upper torso.
SP just adds the stomach area OHK to Barret and Intervention, but I find as a sniper, Cold-Blooded pro is a MUST.
Since the supposed weakness of the W2000 is its small clip, and SoH is so good for quickscoping, it's just great.
|
|
|
|
Post by slashdolo on Dec 5, 2009 4:08:49 GMT -5
W2000 is the best Sniper to use SP on IF its silenced though. Same OHK zones, but much lower recoil than then Fiddy/Intervention.
|
|
|
|
Post by joe8998 on Dec 7, 2009 10:49:16 GMT -5
Sorry if this question is noobish or what have you, but what is "sway"? And how does it affect using the weapons? Are they more inaccurate, etc.?
|
|
