I think the weapon mechanics and TTK's should be changed.

[asasa]

Maybe I'm wrong but I definitely believe low spread can be a hindrance as it requires higher levels of accuracy. I have trouble hitting people at point blank ranges and lower spread brings makes it even harder. Beyond those first few feet tighter spread is good, but these are shotguns after all.

Yeah my point about taking longer to aim is kinda bs, because consciously almost no one will do that. But I know I have done it. Then you get blasted with dvk and it's over.

It's not fair to say the shotgun user fires first so it doesn't matter. What if there's another enemy hitting you from a distance as you shoot the target? If your first shot didn't kill them? There's more than one guy?

[banana]

If only the cod devs were taking notes rn

[PSIII]

This is just to the original post.

"Time to kill" is such a cancerous term in CoD these past couple of years. To me, when people say it, it sounds like they're trying hard to make it sound like they're experts of the game's mechanics.

You have to be freaking kidding me if you think the guns kill faster now, when 2HKs were the standard in MW2 and nobody complained. The devs, especially IW with MW3, have done a lot to tweak them to well-balanced numbers with Stopping Power's absence. In fact, MW3 is the perfect blueprint for damage and fire rates and how each gun and weapon class differs from each other (it was the first one to use such a model based on odd numbers instead of the old one based on five and ten). And the later games are following that model too, with their own tweaks.

You lost me at 4HK minimum for full autos. Like what the hell, go play another game if you want the guns to do that little damage. There's nothing wrong with the old 3HK with 3-6HK maximum depending on weapon type and class.

[banana]

4hk isn't that bad. Unless it's at 600 rpm or less

[PSIII]

No, it's awful. Where's the logic in a gun taking four shots to kill someone at point blank range, in a high-action, focused Multiplayer in CoD? Connection is arguably the biggest factor in kill times and who kills who. Why give more of a chance for you to get "out-connectioned" (lol), miss shots, waste bullets, use more of a magazine for one guy than normal, or make encounters with multiple guys harder? The list goes on of the things that can kill you or give you a hard time. People just need to get a grip with the whole damage thing. I miss being able to take out four, five, even six guys with one magazine (no Extended Mag) in the old days.

[asasa]

More shots to kill reduces the effect of connection based advantages...

[mrcongo93]

High action doesn't always have to refer to how quickly the guns kill. Look at Battlefield, the guns take on average one more bullet to kill, but that's hardly the reason why the game is slower paced than COD. COD isn't COD just because of its TTK, it also bears this identity because of the high player mobility, small and cramped maps, and killstreaks, which forced close quarters engagements 90% of the time. The TTK has been radically different across the games. In MW2, the average gun took 2-3 bullets to kill up close, because frankly, unless staying invisible to Killstreaks was really important to you, you were pretty much stupid to not use Stopping Power. In Black Ops 2, there was a 3-4 kill average up close. So yeah, there is a lot of deviation in TTK, but the games always still have similar feels because of way more mechanics than just the TTK.

You say what's the logic in giving automatic weapons a slower TTK? Why is it more logical to have them kill in as few bullets as a Semi Auto weapon? Or in the games where their BTK is higher, their fire rates are high enough to the point that the increased bullet needed is a moot point. I'm trying to say that if these weapons are going to be the easiest to use from a handling perspective and are meant to be consistent because of their full auto capability, then they should take a significant amount of more bullets to kill with than the Semi Auto, Burst, or Single Shot options. If a player is going to take the chance to use a gun or weapon significantly more difficult to use, they should be rewarded with a better TTK for being skilled with a difficult weapon.

You really sound like your judgment is being clouded by nostalgia. Sure MW2 was a fun game. But if you're really gonna try to say that the game wasn't seriously messed from a balance perspective, you really need to get a fresh perspective on it. People will consistently spout that MW2, MW3, and Ghosts had TTK's that were too quick, and though that's partially due to their better hit detection, it's mostly due to the fact that Fully Automatic weapons, which are simultaneously the most used, and easiest to use weapons in the game, were completely OP from a DPS perspective. How is it balanced to have an SMG that can fire 1200 RPM kill in 3 hits up close, a 900 RPM LMG being a 3HK across the whole map, or a weapon with no recoil having a 3-4HK?

You're definitely exaggerating how much this would "break" the game if implemented. The only things that increasing Full Auto BTK by an average of one bullet will do is bring the other classes to the forefront by making them more competitive, and cause the players to be more accurate to land that extra bullet. Sure, it may not be to "your" tastes, but the positives can far outweigh the negatives if implemented properly, and the dozens of other mechanics that COD is known for will prevent it from losing its "identity".

[mrcongo93]

Oct 2, 2015 9:23:06 GMT -5 asasa said:

More shots to kill reduces the effect of connection based advantages...

And this so much, it gives the players a bigger chance to fight back as well, and can reduce the "instant kills" the players can experience.

[mrcongo93]

A few of those I'm perfectly fine with

-More emphasis on tracking: Good, let them do more than just aim in the general direction and spray.
-Recoil is a bigger factor: Again, fine with that, I like how it was balanced in BO2, where the lowest recoil weapon had a significant deficit in its TTK to the other weapons, and the fastest killing weapon (Scorpion EVO) had the highest recoil. It restricts weapons to specific ranges that their niche lies in unless their recoil can be tamed.
-More people getting involved in firefights: It sorta cuts down on lone wolf-ing, flanks and stealth players withstanding, it encourages players to stick with others, so I'm fine with this.
-Instakills become more valuable: Increasing the usefulness and viability of Snipers and Shotguns can never be a bad thing.

The other two I'm kinda indifferent on, but I agree with you that SMGs and ARs need to be weaker, at least the full auto options.

[banana]

The only thing that's bad is more people being involved in a gun fight but the other points make up for it imo

[PSIII]

CoD being a jerk-fest for assault rifles, and to a lesser extent, submachine guns, has always been a problem. There's nothing to fix that. And when a weapon different from the norm gets used lot and ate more of a competition to them, people complain. Did you know that some circles were stupid enough to call the MW3 Mk. 14 overpowered back in the day? Even at a capped fire rate, the place would be rife if it got higher or equal use to the fully automatics due to people reading the damages.

And how does more bullets weaken connection's grip on a gunfight's outcome. Maybe it did if you're an average or below average player, I guess. Since I've gotten back online for the past couple, I've been playing MW3 a lot again. Everyone knows connection is basically the overlord there. You either get a good host or someone's ping is better than yours or some dickless three/two-bar somehow can shoot faster than you. Weaker guns don't help me at all in this case because I need every millisecond I can get to be able to kill certain people in the lobby. Already with strong guns, sometimes it seems dudes are taking more damage than they should be and the game gives them enough time/health to kill you.

[ChloeB42 (Alexcalibur42)]

I think 4 HK for the really fast firing guns is fine, 3 HK but lower range for the guns in-between, 3 HK with long range for the slower guns, 2 HK for semiautomatic.
And of course use recoil to balance out the few kinks. That's why,in the post Stopping Power era, I thought BO2 had the best weapon balance, prior to some nerfs at least.

[JustABitAgroed]

Reading through this thread has been kind of annoying for me so if I may: the only entry since MW2 in which the hit registration actually worked relatively properly outside of LAN (Ghosts), the majority of the community complained that the TTK was far too fast, even though the average AR and SMG TTK was only slightly faster (disparity of 43ms at most). If we once again have a game that has proper bullet registration (probably not a Treyarch entry so, a different system might be needed for them) then the TTKs need to be lengthened.

[banana]

Ghosts did have a lot of long range 3hk 720 rpm guns though (especially the Vector which has SMG characteristics plus AR range). Plus a couple of 3hk 900s. Amazing hit detection but they shouldn't have had that. Would long range 3hk 600 guns have made a difference? Maybe but it's worth a shot