Type 95. I agree it should take all three shots on target to kill, but that's it. Currently it can kill in 2/3 shots in a single burst. One burst has to kill someone to make the gun even viable though. If they make it so it takes two bursts to kill, then make snipers two shot kills anywhere other than the head too. The Type 95 is comparable to quickscoping. It's annoying to die by both, I'm fine with both in the game, both kill in relatively the same amount of time, so both should be treated equally. Sure Type 95 is a tad easier to use than quickscoping, but it also takes a bit longer to kill, so they're equal in my eyes.
CM901. It was glitched so if you used an under barrel attachment the rate of fire would raise from like 666 to 750 or something.
Akimbo FMGs. Thank God. First off, it's a secondary and no way should be close to as powerful as any primary. Second, it takes zero skill. At least quickscoping and the Type 95 you have to aim and be on target. The Akimbo FMGs you can just be in the general area and spray and pray and still win.
Type 95. I agree it should take all three shots on target to kill, but that's it. Currently it can kill in 2/3 shots in a single burst. One burst has to kill someone to make the gun even viable though. If they make it so it takes two bursts to kill, then make snipers two shot kills anywhere other than the head too. The Type 95 is comparable to quickscoping. It's annoying to die by both, I'm fine with both in the game, both kill in relatively the same amount of time, so both should be treated equally. Sure Type 95 is a tad easier to use than quickscoping, but it also takes a bit longer to kill, so they're equal in my eyes.
CM901. It was glitched so if you used an under barrel attachment the rate of fire would raise from like 666 to 750 or something.
Akimbo FMGs. Thank God. First off, it's a secondary and no way should be close to as powerful as any primary. Second, it takes zero skill. At least quickscoping and the Type 95 you have to aim and be on target. The Akimbo FMGs you can just be in the general area and spray and pray and still win.
No. just No.
If you're unfamiliar with the way in which health and damage works, a player has 100 health (in non-Hardcore). the T95 was running with a .53 damage per bullet. a lot of people got upset with it because it appeared so easy to kill someone - take it from someone who uses the type95, its BS. Its far easier to spray and pray with a ump or or SMG than the T95. In my view the T95 is getting nerfed for no reason. The problem that a lot of people seem to be missing (there's a lot of talk of the T95 damage being lowered to .49 so three shots are required) is that a good player will still get single burst kills, repeatedly.
How on EARTH you can find a burst fire AR comparable to quickscoping is completely beyond me. One is the 'l33t' 'skill' of shooting with a sniper rifle without actually scoping, making sniper rifles deadly in CQC as well as at range. Decreasing the damage on a sniper rifle is a ridiculous idea, as that would thoroughly ruin real hardscope sniping, which I do. If torso or stomachs dont render OHKs, then the sniper rifle, as a whole, is useless.
CM901 isn't being nerfed, but being fixed. The gun should have a 666 RoF but you can only achieve this with an underbarrel attaachment (n00b tube, shottie), any thing else and RoF is lower. They're fixing it so that it is 666 all the time. Whch is good, as I really liked this AR before the fix, and never used underbarrel attachments.
the Akimbo FMGs definitely need nerfing though. The whole 'if you cant beat them' arguement seems very true here because everyone is switching to them, they are almost unbeatable. I think the nerf is coming into the draw or lower time, but I cant see that they'll change the damage or RoF. Perhaps decrease hip fire accuracy or something.
I, on the whole, have a problem with nerfing of weapons anyway. Its the same as in BLOPs, once you nerf one weapon, the bitchfaced whining frat boy community that is CoD will find another weapon that is 'over powered' and must be nerfed. People are already crying about the SCAR.
I hate this series with a burning passion. There is absolutely nothing new visually or gameplaywise since MW1. It's like buying a really expensive DLC for MW2.
The Following User Says Thank You to Glaice For This Useful Post:
I personally like the akimbo FMG9 they're awesome yes they kill people really fast at short range and in real life they would do the same, its an automatic machine pistol RoF is what all those are about, and you have to be quick on your feet and be able to aim from the hip really well to use them succefully. I hate people that hate on guns if you don't like the fact that someone is killing you rather quickly with them you have a few options A: stop running towards them you idiot run a different way. B: beat them at their own game get good with them, C: figure another effective alternative to kill them at short range or D: STFU and quit complaining and quit being such a Pu$$Y
The Following User Says Thank You to sethman88 For This Useful Post:
The Akimbo FMGs are secondaries which is the real problem. Sure they're really good for close range, but anyone can agree shotguns should be even better without contest at super close range. That's the problem, FMGs are still better than a shotgun in close quarters.
And I was referring to quickscoping needing two shots to kill if the Type 95 does. Hardscoping is fine with one hit kill, and honestly I'd be fine with a "real" sniper shot killing in one shot anywhere on the body. But it's like 1 out of 50 people that use the sniper properly in the first place.
The patch turns out all it did was make the hip fire of the Type 95 less accurate and the Akimbo FMGs a tad less accurate.
But the game is super easy, not like balancing actually changes much other than a millisecond here or there. Being lucky and catching someone from behind > skill any day in this game.
But the game is super easy, not like balancing actually changes much other than a millisecond here or there. Being lucky and catching someone from behind > skill any day in this game.
I think thats the main beef. With every rendition of the Call Of Duty franchise it becomes more like a romper stomper arcade shooter, run around like a headless chicken and shoot shit - I'm rapidly getting close to taking it out of the xbox and going solely to BF3
I think thats the main beef. With every rendition of the Call Of Duty franchise it becomes more like a romper stomper arcade shooter, run around like a headless chicken and shoot shit - I'm rapidly getting close to taking it out of the xbox and going solely to BF3
although I slightly agree with you in COD people do just run around with their head cut off, I still think that MW3 > BF3 just because even though BF3 has some pretty good graphics its overly realistic I mean its so realistic that you can't acomplish anything and I mean thats all fine and good if you truely want to be in a war and not be able to do anything other then just camp in one building the whole time, but its not and thats why we play video games, true we want some realism and a realistic feel but at the same time I want to be able to run around a bit and survive and thats why MW3 > BF3
To me BF stomps MW. Domination/conquest... You lose an objective, hop in a jeep and cruise there! In mw you have to run and it gets BORING! The campers usually cancel themselves out tbh. It's plenty hard to camp a tank or LAV with planes, choppers, javelins, rpgs, c4, and land mines.... Plenty of motivation to move... Cod is wayyyy to small for my liking and you have barely recoil on your weapons to boot!
Both games are fun, but for different genres of gamers!
but worth it ...
