{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
12/15/2016 5:41:23 PM
1
When did I say matador should be punished? I actually said it's fine because it's not game breaking. I really feel like you aren't reading.
English
-
No , you aren't reading. You said that i should be punished because i was using a special as a primary, that it should only be used in special situations. Matador is a special? used for special situations ? Then the people using matador all over the map should be punished too.
-
No, I said you should be punished because snipers were nearly game breaking. Matador, not so much. The weapon can only be used in specific situation. That is in contrast to snipers that out performed every primary at just about every range with a simple scope change. People that are using a shotgun as a primary are not going to be very successful at anything longer than just outside melee range.
-
That's not true actually. Snipers are effective out of shotgun range and shotguns are effective too close for snipers to be effective , unless you get a quick scope but that's just pure luck. so snipers out play clever dragon? mida? grasp? distant star? i don't think so
-
[quote]so snipers out play clever dragon? mida? grasp? distant star? i don't think so [/quote] Yea, not now, thanks to flinch. Thank God. OK. Think about this. What is a snipers kill zone. What is a shotguns kill zone. Yea, I think that's a bit different
-
It is how it should be, sniper has a larger area to cover because it is a long range weapon. Shotguns cover a smaller area because they are close combat weapons. I don't see where you are going with this. Are you saying that snipers and shotguns should have the same size of killzone ? that's ridiculous
-
No I'm saying the sniper has the potential to cause a greater impact on the game and thus it's even more important to keep in check. As you said it has a much wider area. A shotgunner is going to do what, control a doorway. A sniper is going to control a court yard. Do you honestly think a OHK sniper, with aim assist, no sway or bullet drop off, that can function at mid to long range should ALSO have no flinch? Now answer that without saying anything about shotguns. Just think of the game in general. Is that a fair weapon type in a game where almost every other weapon requires 3-5 shots. Answer honestly and try to take your personal bias out of it.
-
I do not think we should go back to the meta we had when snipers dominated, they were [i][/i]too strong. But i do think that they need a bit of a buff and a nerf. I believe that the flinch should be reduced drastically, that or take HCR off of all pulse rifles, like they did to Mida Multi-tool. The amount that your scope flinches, even with unflinching is ridiculous. And i think that even if you dont run snipers, you can attest to this. I think that the zoom nerf is perfectly fine, and i also think the quickdraw and snapshot nerf is fine, yes its a little more sluggish than back in the day but i also think thats the way it should be. However, i think the body shot damage should be reduced and the headhsot damage unnerfed. I think you should be rewarded when hitting a headshot and alsmot punished in a way for hitting a body shot. I also believe that the handling nerf should be undone. If i choose to play aggressive with a sniper then i should be rewarded, obviously ive practiced enough to be able to rely on my sniper in more than one situation. With the bodynshot damage decrease, you will be almost forced to try and hit the quick headhsot, or else with the decrease, itll give the pulse rifles and such a fair shot at killing you before you kill them. Now its a 3 shot sniper body vs a three burst pulse, id say thats pretty even. Just as a side note, by no means do i want shotguns to be nerfed, if anything they need to remove the spray from shotguns, I just want snipers to be viable as well.
