The only way snipers won't dominate CQB is if there is something superior to use in CQB. As long as shotguns have shorter range than a warlock melee, Snipers can still rule cqb encounters beyond melee range. As much as people hated the shotgun meta in HoW, they NEED to restore shotguns to their former glory so that they become the dominant CQB weapon. And to counter shotguns at those kind of ranges, fusion rifles also need to be restored so they can OHK outside of maximum shotgun range.

You're missing my objection with quick scoping. Now that people have caught on to how effective it can actually be, there's not much counter to it once you're proficient at it.. Unless something with quick scoping is changed, more and more will catch on and begin using it, I'm seeing it more almost daily. And it's only going to get worse.

But it still takes a lot of skill to be proficient at it. People wouldn't work at it if there was an easier weapon to use in CQB. Currently shotguns kill range puts you inside warlock melee, meaning if a sunsinger has melee energy, you just gave him an overshield before you could get a kill shot. So he will take twice as many shots to kill, and most shotgunners use shotguns that are supposed to be OHK so they fire slowly. And people who truly love to snipe will not be deterred from trying to quickscope no matter what. It's a necessary skill if you want to survive as a sniper on some maps, and there are still plenty of good options to engage these snipers from close to moderate range. Weapons with HCR (Mida, Fang of ir Yut), high rof autos with HCR, super long range scout rifles, moderate ROF pulse rifles allow you to spray and sway. The only weapon where it could be difficult to counter a sniper within its intended range is a HC. The difficulty of the problem is that weapons are effective in intended range slots, and because snipers are long-range weapons, they function well as One shot/2 shot kills whether you are point blank or out at 1000 yards. There is simply not much you can really do to make them still kill over long ranges, but be completely ineffective in short ranges. You can try to change the handling properties, but then that erodes their effectiveness in PVE. I would love to see anyone try to do the Golgoroth fight with something other than a sniper, or try to snipe at that close range with taken thrall causing you to descope all the time in the last rounds. This is a classic scenario where its PVE function vs PVP player desire. IMO, they need to favor PVE this time, as there is really no other great weapons to use in PVE anymore. Snipers hit the hardest, let you carry the most ammo, and they do the most DPS. Without them in our arsenal, we have nothing but spitwads. Chainguns take time to do the same DPS a sniper can do in just 4 shots. As snipers have remained relatively unchanged since launch, I think it is safe to say that the issue is not snipers themselves, but rather the other nerfs that have effected our arsenals to the point that snipers and scout rifles are simply the options that give you the most competitive edge. This should not be addressed with nerfs, but rather, buffs to our weaponry.

This is the whole point of my post. I want all secondaries to be balanced without hurting pve. To do this, I have made it so quickscoping takes longer, meaning that you generally fire when the cone is thinning rather than when the scope is fully in or you die. This makes it so that a fusion can challenge at medium range, and a shotgun can challenge at close, while still allowing the sniper to be effective in pve, as they have that extra time to scope all the way in as I am only talking a scope in time of .5-1 second depending on perks and scopes. As for flinch, I would say it shouldn't be as high in pve as in pvp to compensate for the nerf in pvp.

For fusion rifles to compete at midrange, they are going to need a buff anyways. So before we even touch snipers, I would prefer that they be left untouched and they work on a buff for fusion rifles instead. Lets make some tweaks to Fusion Rifles and see how those tweaks work out before we make adjustments to snipers. Ditto with shotguns IMO. I understand your premise, but I honestly think sniper rifles don't need changes. Instead, other weapons need to be buffed around them. I do, however think there needs to be some differentiation between high impact and low impact snipers, as there is literally ZERO reason to use a low impact sniper over a high impact sniper, in PVP or PVE. Some changes to differentiate high impact vs low impact snipers: High impact: Handling is slower due to greater weight of rounds and and bulkiness of the weapon Longest range due to kinetic energy carried by the bigger rounds. Carry less ammo than a low impact sniper (ammo capacity will stay as is, ammo capacity for mod and low impact snipers increased) High impact snipers always have 3 round magazines, regardless, unflinching is less effective on a high impact sniper; due to weight of the gun, any flinching caused by absorbing damage makes it more difficult to re-center on target. Essentially, this will stay as it is now, but it will be slightly improved for the other classes of sniper rifles. Moderate impact sniper handling is slower, but not as slow as high impact snipers range is moderate (between high and low impact snipers) Carry more ammo than high impact snipers, but not as much as lowest impact snipers Always has 4 round magazines (exotics can have 5) Since they are lighter weapons, re-centering on target is easier than it would be with a high impact sniper. Low impact sniper: Handling is the fastest of all sniper classes. The only class of sniper rifle that will allow quick scopes. Shortest range of all sniper rifles due to lower grain bullets. Ammo capacity is the highest of all snipers (~ 32-36 rounds when maxed) Standard 5 round magazine, increased to 6 with the right perk. Due to the good handling properties of this weapon, re-centering on target upon deflection will be easiest with this class of weapon. With unflinching, low impact snipers should handle similar to a scout rifle when you are under fire. The goal is to differentiate the three classes of sniper rifles through handling properties, ammo capacity, and effective range. High impact snipers will still be able to res-snipe, but will have much lower ammo capacity than a high ROF sniper. It also handles less well under fire, so you have to make choices with regards to what style of sniper rifle you want to use. Basically, the ethos should be that high impact sniper rifles should be super long range combat and force you to be reserved and conservative with your ammo use, shot placement, etc. whereas a low impact sniper will be more forgiving for the kind of player who likes to run around and quick scope. They won't be able to res snipe with the low impact sniper, and the weapon will have stiff competition from long range scout rifles and pulse rifles. If they did this, there would actually be a reason to use something like the Tao Yuan Hao sniper from the Crucible Quartermaster or the Weyloran's March over a 1k stare, even in Trials.

I disagree, you can quick scope much faster that a fusion can charge, and pretty much the same for a shotty.. Sniper effective currently at ALL ranges, that's a broken mechanic, lot due to quick scoping, this being mainly outside its intended ranges.

You can quick scope but if someone has a long range shotty and are GOOD at their craft (getting up close and personal) you wouldn't approach a sniper in a manner that would just let him turn and quickscope you. If you run at a sniper in a straight line, you deserve to get sniped, regardless of what weapon your using. With regards to snipers vs. Fusion rifles, I would be fine with snipers being able to snipe someone before the fusion rifle charged up. The fusion rifle should be a mid-range counter to the shotgun; it should not necessarily be intended to counter the long range of a sniper. It should be viable in midrange combat against the sniper, but if your on a map with long hallways like Pantheon, I'm not sure why you would just run out there charging your fusion rifle in the first place, get to cover, let it charge up, and peak out right before it discharges. It takes practice, but that is the nature of fusion rifles. And while we are on the topic, why are people running straight on into snipers anyways? I haven't really noticed a significant problem with getting quick scoped in the first place. Full disclosure, I'm a long range combatant anyways, but on those instances I get up close and personal with a sniper, I try to use a grenade or something to force them to turn and move so I can close in. I really don't see that quickscoping is an epidemic. Also, its part of any shooter, from Activision's COD to now 343's Halo ("Snap shotting" they call it). It's not the easiest thing to do.

You know, you made a good, point, a shotgunner who is good at their craft would avoid those sightlines if possible, so let's look at the secondaries as to their best possible outcomes. Shotguns: The best shotgunners use the map to their advantage. They avoid long sight lines to truly dominate at close range, with the best of the best being able to clear a room at short range. Fusion Rifles: the best friflers dominate the mid-range, using cover to their advantage and radar awareness to get that perfect shot. They can challenge at mid-long and mid-short, with the very best being able to stop charging shotgunners and sidearms as long as the frifler is passive. Sidearms: The best sidearm user understands the purpose of synergy. A sidearm is best used to deal burst damage on an already weakened oponnent. The very best sidearm users can use radar awareness and maneuverability to burst down a shotgun or fusion rifle user at mid to close range, and this sidearm user knows when to push and be aggressive. Sniper Rifles: The best sniper rifle user knows how to leverage the advantages of a sniper at a moment's notice. They understand long sight lines and when to peek and when to move on. They are masters of the long range engagement. At medium range to close range, they understand the value of a low zoom scope and have master the quick scope and the drag scope. The best of the best can engage any weapon at any range, even point blank. Do you see the issue? I agree snipers take skill, but if you look at each secondary in the hands of the penultimate player, every other secondary has a limit where they are good. Sniper rifles do not.

I see your point, but ultimately I think this could be addressed with simple tweaks to range and damage drop off. For instance, if one wants to run around using a scope that will allow them to quickscope, they sacrifice long range damage and accuracy and vice versa. The problem, as I see it, is that people can use the ambush lens without suffering penalty to long range combat. Perhaps range penalties need to be more severe when using an ambush scope. But I certainly wouldn't propose having something more extreme than that. I don't think quickscoping is really the problem so much as you are not making any tradeoffs by using an ambush scope. If you want to quickscope that is fine, but you should ultimately suffer a detriment to hit a long range target with consistency and full force of impact.

The issue there is still that the sniper would cover all ranges that other special weapons cover. A sniper should never dominate close range, no matter the perks. Perks that make it easier are OK, but right now they dominate.

Its not really all ranges though. When a person chooses to take an ambush lens, they are choosing to use that weapon to focus on CQB rather than long range kills. Yes, it will compete, and in good hands, dominate, against other special weapons, but that doesn't mean that all options are closed off for engaging the sniper. Rather than charging in to use a shotgun/fusion rifle, stay out of range and pick him off with a scout rifle or long range pulse rifle instead. Use cover to your advantage and get within shotgun range and blast him, or hit him with a HC/Auto with HCR instead of using a fusion/sidearm. These are the variables of combat. Right now, ambush scopes give snipers the best of both worlds, and I'm willing to concede that point, but I see no reason why what I have suggested is not a workable solution when you have other good options for taking the sniper on outside of using your secondary. In a game where you are offered two types of weapons you can use regularly (primary/special) the mix of skills/ranges covered are endless and by no means is it realistic to look at combat as only special vs. special combat. By forcing people to focus on short range vs. long range sniping, they are opening themselves up to attacks from different kinds of weapons, which should be the goal. If you encounter a player like this, in a world where my suggestions were implemented, the solution would be to counter with a weapon that can kill the short range sniper OUTSIDE of its optimal range.

Also, what weapon can counter a short range sniper outside its optimal range? The answer is a sniper. The meta does not need to be sniper only. If I had a shotgun that shot cross map but wasn't quite as effective close up, let's say if the Chaperone had infinite range, you would say to just use a short-range shotgun to counter, you would say that shotgun was overpowered.

[quote]Also, what weapon can counter a short range sniper outside its optimal range? [/quote] If they implemented long range damage and accuracy penalties for snipers using ambush lenses, then the effective counter would be a long range sniper OR any weapon with longer effective range. I.E., scout rifles with long range, pulse rifles with long range + range finder, possibly high impact, long range HC's, depending on what the range of a sniper is set at. My point is that if they changed the way ambush lenses worked so that they performed poorly over ranged combat, then that would resolve the issue by allowing you to effectively engage the sniper at longer ranges. Will they still be able to kill you? Yes, its PVP after all. Nothing is guaranteed, but it would give you a much better fighting chance than what you have now, which is all anyone can ask for.

Except that no other special offers this. A sniper can be made effective at any range, and most maps are close range anyways. I can't make my shotgun or frifle into a long range killing machine, so if there is a weapon class that can be made for all ranges, why would I use anything else? It is not ok for any sniper to be a short range god for the same reason my shotgun or handcannon can't snipe. It upsets the balance and leaves one choice, because even with the ambush scope, I can still push the range on a sniper, and making it not work at long range would just mean that a sniper is a better fusion rifle/shotgun.

[quote]I can still push the range on a sniper, and making it not work at long range would just mean that a sniper is a better fusion rifle/shotgun.[/quote] Unless they buffed both fusion rifles in general and shotgun range back to what it was during HoW, as I previously suggested as well. Are you not listening?

In other words, scout rifles would need to two shot, high impact scouts being left in the dust. Handcannons would need to two shot, high impact ones being left in the dust. Pulse rifles would need to two shot, high impact ones being left in the dust, and auto rifles would need to melt as fast as a year one last word, cutting TTK in half. D you understand what that would do to the meta? Whoever sees the other first wins. There is no dodging, and snipers are pointless because a scout can do just as much. Bringing everything to the level of the sniper only works if there are only a couple weapons in the meta like back with thorn/TLW, and we all know how dull that was.

I am. That would leave primaries in the dust, as they now are an effective counter to both shotguns and frifles. This means we would need to push their TTK back up to .52 seconds, which means every primary would need a buff to do so, then we would need to rebalance them all, taking another year. At the moment, there is ONE outlier. Why would you trust Bungie on a complete overhaul, when a single fix to one type of weapon would leave them all balanced?

That is simply overkill to the current problem. All TTK's do not need to be even in order for us to have "balance." Each weapon just needs to perform well in their intended rolls. Sure, a Pulse rifle can hit at scout rifle range, even an Auto can do that, but it is not the most optimum weapon for the job at that range. Snipers are only a problem because they are intended to be long range weapons. You can fix this using common sense by allowing for the short range scopes, which will cause detriment to the sniper's long range combat, OR they can choose long range scopes, which are much more difficult to use in CQC. Is it perfect? No. People will still kill you in close quarters with snipers on occasion. But that's how PVP is. You fight, you die. Nobody ever escapes crucible without dying. That is why 1.5kdr+ is considered good. Now I enjoy a good debate, but what I'm starting to hear is someone who won't be satisfied unless snipers are stripped of all function outside of hardscoping and waiting for targets at super long ranges. This is simply not realistic. Sniper combat happens over a variety of ranges, including close quarters, and yes, so long as you are able to pull the trigger on a sniper in close quarters, you will have a chance to die. I have offered what I think are great common sense solutions and you are refusing to accept any of them, so this is where the debate must end.

Except I agree with you that snipers should not fill all rolls. Where we disagree is when you say that they should stop filling all roles, while simultaneously filling all roles. Check my first edit. I put in a plug for different ways to allow multiple roles while still implementing these changes. I respect your desire for sniper diversity and I agree. Where we disagree is that I think snipers diversity should end when it is at a detriment to all other weapons.

[quote]Where we disagree is that I think snipers diversity should end when it is at a detriment to all other weapons.[/quote] I don't see that it would ever be a detriment to other weapons. Fusion rifles/shotguns will still have their uses. Clever shotgun users will still kill quickscope snipers (more often than they can now if they would just return shotguns to HoW era). Fusion rifles? I would love if they would return them to how they were when the game first launched but in their current state, fusion rifles can barely kill whats directly in front of them. They will need a significant buff to make them the midrange threat they need to be. But having a quick scope sniper does not act as a detriment to those other weapons if they function as they should (ie, if they were returned to pre-nerf status). Fusion rifles will still do well against shotguns and sidearms in midrange, shotguns will dominate CQB. And if fusion rifles returned to their former glory, they would most certainly do well against quick scopers, although they would have to adjust their tactics to do so. It will be VERY difficult to dominate CQB with a quick-scope sniper for all except the elite players, and even then, they would be sacrificing long range utility. So IMO, that kind of a system would be as close to well-rounded as we can get. Perfect? No, but close enough.

I can respect your opinion. I disagree, mainly for reasons of not trusting Bungie to balance all the primaries back up, but I respect your opinion. Trust me when I say I would be way more open to this if I had any faith in Bungie's ability to buff that many weapons appropriately.

[quote] I disagree, mainly for reasons of not trusting Bungie to balance all the primaries back up[/quote] LOL THIS ^ THIS we can both drink to! Unfortunately, we are in the position where we just have to trust Bungie to do whatever balancing changes need to be made because no other company is responsible for this game, and Bungie is simply not going to let another company tinker with their baby. So whether its implementing the changes I suggested, rebuffing other weapons, etc., it's all on Bungie's plate and its all their responsibility. So whether we like it or not, we kind of HAVE to trust them. Or not, but either way, they are the ones making the changes and nothing we can say or do will change that fact. I would rather them at least implement user feedback in an attempt to restore some semblance of balance than I would see them leaving the sandbox balancing in the hands of Merrill Sage and John Wisniewski.