banana
True Banana
Zoro > Law
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by banana on Feb 10, 2016 22:53:56 GMT -5
They're faster than every SMG besides the Pharo and Razorwhack
And what is the Gung-Ho time? I though Gung-Ho makes sprint out 0?
|
|
|
|
Post by djangoraw on Feb 10, 2016 23:17:53 GMT -5
Treytard decided the SMGS should ADS the same speed as the AR's for the first time in COD history for some brilliant reason. The weevil sucks so much it didn't get touched. I guess they were tired of fun fast paced gameplay. They're probably too fucking stupid to balance guns so they just destroyed all the SMGS so they wouldn't have to do any work anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by imrlybord7 on Feb 11, 2016 7:36:15 GMT -5
I think Gung-Ho only removes sprint out time if you ADS instead of hip fire.
|
|
|
|
Post by flatulentmonkeys on Feb 11, 2016 10:36:18 GMT -5
#BuffTheWeevil
|
|
lllRL
True Bro
Posts: 101 
|
Post by lllRL on Feb 11, 2016 13:00:08 GMT -5
All SMGs have their sprint out time reduced to 150ms when firing from the hip. That's half of the SO time for the Kuda, VMP and Vesper but not the others which have 275ms (Weevil) or 250ms (Pharo, Razorback) normally, while Fast Hands halves SO time for everything.
Also SO time is 0 when you ADS to interrupt sprint and then fire. Gung Ho is very useful with quickdraw, especially when you consider all guns are getting Fast Hands' main benefit already with the faster regular SO time (50% reduction for Kuda/VMP/Vesper, nearly 50% for everything else) as an extra bonus.
|
|
haoz
True Bro
Posts: 185
|
Post by haoz on Feb 11, 2016 14:25:41 GMT -5
Treytard decided the SMGS should ADS the same speed as the AR's for the first time in COD history for some brilliant reason. The weevil sucks so much it didn't get touched. I guess they were tired of fun fast paced gameplay. They're probably too Foxtroting stupid to balance guns so they just destroyed all the SMGS so they wouldn't have to do any work anymore. I think Treyarch has shown remarkable restraint in gun balancing, from relative weakness of each attachments, to the relatively weak damages done by most guns. But it was clear that the game was becoming SMG-dominant, and it was a reasonable decision to slow down SMGs. |
|
|
|
Post by djangoraw on Feb 11, 2016 15:42:56 GMT -5
Treytard decided the SMGS should ADS the same speed as the AR's for the first time in COD history for some brilliant reason. The weevil sucks so much it didn't get touched. I guess they were tired of fun fast paced gameplay. They're probably too Foxtroting stupid to balance guns so they just destroyed all the SMGS so they wouldn't have to do any work anymore. I think Treyarch has shown remarkable restraint in gun balancing, from relative weakness of each attachments, to the relatively weak damages done by most guns. But it was clear that the game was becoming SMG-dominant, and it was a reasonable decision to slow down SMGs. No reasonable decision would've been to buff the AR's or to reduce the effectiveness of quickdraw SOME, not destroy the main advantage SMG's have over ARs. They could've increased recoil and decreased range on the SMG's, that would've been reasonable. SMG's have ADS'd faster in every single COD game, and most of them were still AR dominant. This game is SMG dominant because they nerfed all the AR's in respect to BO2, nerfing all the SMG's as well isn't the right thing. They're don't know how to balance the weapons, so they're just nerfing them till they're all mediocre. If this doesn't seem like a big deal to you, it's probably because you don't play very fast. This has basically sucked all of the fun out of the game for people who do like to get aggressive and push the enemies. It's like being forced to buy off brand cereal, once you know what the real thing tastes like you can't enjoy imitation. |
|
|
|
Post by -3055- on Feb 11, 2016 16:05:15 GMT -5
I think you're forgetting the vesper is in this game. Vesper wins games.
|
|
asasa
True Bro
fuck
Posts: 4,255
|
Post by asasa on Feb 11, 2016 16:33:10 GMT -5
I think Treyarch has shown remarkable restraint in gun balancing, from relative weakness of each attachments, to the relatively weak damages done by most guns. But it was clear that the game was becoming SMG-dominant, and it was a reasonable decision to slow down SMGs. No reasonable decision would've been to buff the AR's or to reduce the effectiveness of quickdraw SOME, not destroy the main advantage SMG's have over ARs. They could've increased recoil and decreased range on the SMG's, that would've been reasonable. SMG's have ADS'd faster in every single COD game, and most of them were still AR dominant. This game is SMG dominant because they nerfed all the AR's in respect to BO2, nerfing all the SMG's as well isn't the right thing. They're don't know how to balance the weapons, so they're just nerfing them till they're all mediocre. If this doesn't seem like a big deal to you, it's probably because you don't play very fast. This has basically sucked all of the fun out of the game for people who do like to get aggressive and push the enemies. It's like being forced to buy off brand cereal, once you know what the real thing tastes like you can't enjoy imitation. Slower killing weapons increase the skill present in gunfights but reduces the ability to flank. Not a big deal imo. I welcome more strategic play and less sprinting around aimlessly. |
|
|
|
Post by djangoraw on Feb 11, 2016 16:43:05 GMT -5
No reasonable decision would've been to buff the AR's or to reduce the effectiveness of quickdraw SOME, not destroy the main advantage SMG's have over ARs. They could've increased recoil and decreased range on the SMG's, that would've been reasonable. SMG's have ADS'd faster in every single COD game, and most of them were still AR dominant. This game is SMG dominant because they nerfed all the AR's in respect to BO2, nerfing all the SMG's as well isn't the right thing. They're don't know how to balance the weapons, so they're just nerfing them till they're all mediocre. If this doesn't seem like a big deal to you, it's probably because you don't play very fast. This has basically sucked all of the fun out of the game for people who do like to get aggressive and push the enemies. It's like being forced to buy off brand cereal, once you know what the real thing tastes like you can't enjoy imitation. Slower killing weapons increase the skill present in gunfights but reduces the ability to flank. Not a big deal imo. I welcome more strategic play and less sprinting around aimlessly. First this is COD not Halo, killing quickly is one of the main reason why people play this game over others. Being aggressive is not the same as sprinting around aimlessly. Playing aggressive is a strategy whether you like to play that way or not. |
|
|
|
Post by flatulentmonkeys on Feb 11, 2016 17:17:25 GMT -5
They're faster than every SMG besides the Pharo and Razorwhack And what is the Gung-Ho time? I though Gung-Ho makes sprint out 0? So let me get this straight... The Weevil ADS time is .225 w/o QD. The Sprint out time is .275 w/o Gung Ho. Given this post as accurate, I can conclude that with ADS < Sprint Out: If you're sprinting with your Weevil and decide to shoot an enemy, whether your hip fire or ADS, your bullets won't come out of the gun until .275 seconds after you stop sprinting. If you add QD, this will reduce your ADS time to .158, but won't get bullets out of your gun any faster while sprinting. And since SMG users usually sprint... QD doesn't do much. And if you're posted up not sprinting, then you're probably ADSing already. So if you rush (sprint) with an SMG, then I don't see how bullets come out of your gun any faster when using QD. And if you're a slower player and ADS your corners/rush lanes, then you don't really need it anyway. Am I an idiot missing anything? Oh, and to answer the OG question, it looks like Gung Ho reduces sprint-out time on the Weevil (all SMGs actually) to .150 seconds. But then it changes the equation since the Sprint Out Time is less than the ADS time and then the sprint/stop/ADS animation will be limited by the ADS time unless you hip fire first (then you're limited by the faster Sprint Out Time). I just confused myself even more, I think. I need to lie down. |
|
|
|
Post by flatulentmonkeys on Feb 11, 2016 17:20:58 GMT -5
Slower killing weapons increase the skill present in gunfights but reduces the ability to flank. Not a big deal imo. I welcome more strategic play and less sprinting around aimlessly. First this is COD not Halo, killing quickly is one of the main reason why people play this game over others. Being aggressive is not the same as sprinting around aimlessly. Playing aggressive is a strategy whether you like to play that way or not. Okay, you win. Go back to Twitter and argue about trivial things please. |
|
haoz
True Bro
Posts: 185
|
Post by haoz on Feb 11, 2016 18:39:13 GMT -5
I think Treyarch has shown remarkable restraint in gun balancing, from relative weakness of each attachments, to the relatively weak damages done by most guns. But it was clear that the game was becoming SMG-dominant, and it was a reasonable decision to slow down SMGs. No reasonable decision would've been to buff the AR's or to reduce the effectiveness of quickdraw SOME, not destroy the main advantage SMG's have over ARs. They could've increased recoil and decreased range on the SMG's, that would've been reasonable. SMG's have ADS'd faster in every single COD game, and most of them were still AR dominant. This game is SMG dominant because they nerfed all the AR's in respect to BO2, nerfing all the SMG's as well isn't the right thing. They're don't know how to balance the weapons, so they're just nerfing them till they're all mediocre. If this doesn't seem like a big deal to you, it's probably because you don't play very fast. This has basically sucked all of the fun out of the game for people who do like to get aggressive and push the enemies. It's like being forced to buy off brand cereal, once you know what the real thing tastes like you can't enjoy imitation. Because SMGs were dominant, it makes sense to target them, not to somehow buff ARs. LMGs, shotguns, and snipers are all weaker category guns; buffing ARs would have just made it even more of an AR-SMG game. I'm not looking for an even distribution, but right now using an LMG or sniper rifle basically hurts your team. It's not a big deal because in this game, SMGs have better time to kill up close and more mobility. And Gung Ho gives a sprint-out time bonus that ARs don't get. Still very viable. |
|
|
|
Post by noyoucannot on Feb 12, 2016 12:03:09 GMT -5
Isn't the statistic sprint out change from Gung-Ho negligible anyways? If you just use Gung-Ho it's likely to use ADS->shoot to break sprint. Based on the recordings I've seen, when you do that your sprint out is effectively .05 seconds; basically a couple frames.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheHawkNY on Feb 12, 2016 12:19:53 GMT -5
Hmmm, I wonder if the fact that there are only 4 full-auto ARs in the game has anything to do with SMG usage rates.
(Hint: I do. Their attempts to see how little they can put in the game out of the box are disturbing.)
|
|
|
|
Post by djangoraw on Feb 12, 2016 14:34:53 GMT -5
Hmmm, I wonder if the fact that there are only 4 full-auto ARs in the game has anything to do with SMG usage rates. (Hint: I do. Their attempts to see how little they can put in the game out of the box are disturbing.) Maybe, I've seen the reduced effectiveness of stock being most people's biggest complaint. It's mine personally. Also, the Kuda has 50% better 5 shot range than the MSMC if I'm not mistaken, and the AR's are a bit weaker than they were in BO2. I think these factors combined make the Kuda and Razorback more effective in typical AR ranges than SMGs had been in the past. (Plus I think people figured out just how much d*** fun SMGs are) |
|
