How can COD's multiplayer be improved, or is it as good as it gets?
- Thread starter brodie21
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Remove health and damage buffs and add so many weapons people can't decide what is overpowered or not.
by no means as good as it get Battlefeild 2 blows it out of the water. First you need larger map so we can use reallistic ranges, inster bullet travel time (Badcompnay), More weapon costumabilty, vechicles, no health regen system, locational damage (if you get shot in the arm you can't use it now not that you dies instantly like a head shot)
I would suggest adding a hint of balance to the list of weapons (let's face it, M16's, Barretts and P90's will dominate while Skorpions, shotguns and AKs can taste the bitter, bullet riddled fish of defeat over and over again).
Part of the problem may be due to the sheer number of weapons (why do we have 5 sniper rifles and only two shotguns?).
Part of the problem may be due to the sheer number of weapons (why do we have 5 sniper rifles and only two shotguns?).
Never believe anything is as good as it gets, or there would never be any improvements in anything. I would say, allow more players per match, increase the size and color of the maps, more weapons, get rid of the gunship after a certain amount of kills, make it so spawn points never put you in the middle of a battle...blah blah blah.
COD multiplayer? Good? Blaphsemy. The game is more unbalanced than a one legged horse whose leg is attached to his tail.
CoD 4 online is fun but incredibly unbalanced as far as the matchmaking system goes. I'll often be on a team of people who are around level 20-30 pitted against basement dwelling CoD overlords with inhuman reflexes who have been level 55 for ages. Nine times out of ten we get decimated.
The weapons are unbalanced as well. Like someone else said, M16s, P90s and snipers pretty much dominate. More weapons would be nice so players who don't have all the awesome guns actually stand a chance. I wouldn't complain about bigger/more maps but I don't think it's that big of an issue.
So yeah, tl/dr: matchmaking and weapon balance needed.
The weapons are unbalanced as well. Like someone else said, M16s, P90s and snipers pretty much dominate. More weapons would be nice so players who don't have all the awesome guns actually stand a chance. I wouldn't complain about bigger/more maps but I don't think it's that big of an issue.
So yeah, tl/dr: matchmaking and weapon balance needed.
M16 is yours at level 1, and the only good thing with P90 is the huge clip and better accuracy while spraying. Either way, level 55 is not exactly hard to reach when you play HQ.Hexadecimal16 said:
There's nothing wrong with the other weapons. On one of the prestige ranks I unlocked all scopes on all guns, and I had equal success with the "overpowered" M16 as a Scorpion or Uzi. Then again, I found the TMP the best gun in CS back in the 1.0-days.
Improving CoD's multiplayer? Simple, remove health regeneration, perks, bullet penetration and kill streak bonuses and go back to when CoD was actually good. Both CoD1 and UO had the best online multiplayer I have ever seen in a game. The vehicles in UO weren't a problem because of respawning panzerfausts, Flak 88's and satchel charges.
The Skorpion has massive short-range damage but loses it extremely fast, barely any recoil and easy sights. It is a 2-shot kill if standing on top of the enemy, but does minimal damage before an M203 grenade has had enough travel time to explode.
Shotguns are great in a stealth setup(always a 1 hit kill in close combat), with either Sleight of Hand or UAV jammer and silent walking. With damage boosting and spread reducing(yes it works) perks they will be a 1 hit kill up to max range.
AK47 and AK47u are two of the best weapons in the game, high damage, surprisingly low recoil, the only problems are that the AK47 is slow and the AKS47u has insane bullet spread.
The difference in weapon amounts is probably because other weapon licenses(to use the name/model) were too expensive to acquire, or the weapons would completely unbalance the game.
Weapons ARE balanced, none require more than 5 shots to kill if the target isn't using Juggernaut, and 6 shots if the target IS using Juggernaut.Iron Mal said:
The Skorpion has massive short-range damage but loses it extremely fast, barely any recoil and easy sights. It is a 2-shot kill if standing on top of the enemy, but does minimal damage before an M203 grenade has had enough travel time to explode.
Shotguns are great in a stealth setup(always a 1 hit kill in close combat), with either Sleight of Hand or UAV jammer and silent walking. With damage boosting and spread reducing(yes it works) perks they will be a 1 hit kill up to max range.
AK47 and AK47u are two of the best weapons in the game, high damage, surprisingly low recoil, the only problems are that the AK47 is slow and the AKS47u has insane bullet spread.
The difference in weapon amounts is probably because other weapon licenses(to use the name/model) were too expensive to acquire, or the weapons would completely unbalance the game.
The starting weapons are actually some of the most powerful weapons you can use, all other weapons will have comparable power or advantages/disadvantages.(combination of: higher/lower rate of fire, spread, recoil, reload time, damage or damage distance)Hexadecimal16 said:
just improve it, lol I love the people who are saying to make it more like Battlefield!? WHY!? if you like battlefield then play battlefield. Have you ever wondered what makes Call of Duty sooo popular? They must be doing SOMETHING right! I like both Battlefield and CoD, but if I feel like one, i play it, if not i play the other.
The only complaints I have is random multiplayer spawns and VEHICLES ( just make em easier to kill, 6-7 rockets is pushin it.
The only complaints I have is random multiplayer spawns and VEHICLES ( just make em easier to kill, 6-7 rockets is pushin it.