Quick Scoping Overpowered? CoDs 4-Black ops

[kikon9]

Well put it this way: In MW2 when somebody comes out of nowhere, you have a very little chance to hit him/her and even if you do, you have a chance of getting a "Hitmarker". Plus why is quickscoping cheap when there are weapons like the Spas or the M16?

Because those are meant to be close range while the sniper rifle is supposed to be restricted to mid to long range.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

the worst thing about quick scoping is the fact that you'll pop some prick running around with a sniper rifle from long range and the'l send you a message saying "HARDSCOPING NOO0000BBB!!!111"

Pardon me for using the gun the way it was designed for...

but it doesn't matter any more because the quickscopers ruined it for all snipers and trearch have made sniping next to impossible now

basically this. its ridiculous how many spam messages i got for having decent skill and shooting you across the map between crates in the head, and you spam the one shot one hit kill at all range aim assist fuck machine and its "pro"

cod trolls are obvious cod trolls.

 

[Requx]

It was op snipers where the best gun. But you can't quickscope anymore so this thread is kidna void.

 

[PrimoThePro]

I've never played any of the Call of Duty games, so I looked up quickscoping. Wow, yeah, that's not at all how a sniper rifle is supposed to be used. People who do this kind of thing online in competitive multiplayer games are jerks.

Play the game the way it was meant to be played or GTFO.

Like I said, Call of duty was never a series meant for realistic sniping. If you want some realistic sniping, play a Battlefield game or that game "Sniper: Ghost something".

Even if it doesn't have realism, that excuse doesn't hold up against the fact that a sniper now becomes a long range, mid range, and short range weapon, all purpose. No weapon should be like that. All weapons have a certain purpose, Sniper is supposed to be mid to long range. Not a shotgun.

 

[PrimoThePro]

Reality: Assault Rifles and SMGs are effective at ANY range.

Sub machine guns offer very awful long range, too much kick back, and while Assault Rifles may be effective, their specific range is mid range. Face it off close range against a SMG or a Shotgun, it will lose every time. Use it long range and you get torn apart by snipers.
Besides, as you have said, this game doesn't focus on reality.

 

[Spirultima]

Quickscoping is a very controversial tactic and I understand all of the hate for it but since when is quick scoping "Cheap"?

Becuase you basicaly use it as a shotgun and use the aim-assit in a way its not meant to be used.

I'm sorry, but in the name it does say "Aim assist". Machinegunners can use it so i dislike it when people whine when they only seem to complain about the snipers who use it; "Do what i say, not what i do". Just to note, i've never been a quickscopper because its a cheap and pathetic tactic but i'm an avid sniper with Aim Assist off.

Get rid of Aim Assist completely i'd say, make Call of Duty a game that requires more skill then no skill at all.

 

[PrimoThePro]

You mean something might actually compete with the Assault rifle dominance? WE CAN'T HAVE THAT!

Seeing as I posted essentially a response to this at the same time as you posted this, I will not fault you. I will reiterate, Assault Rifles are mid range beasts, but faced off against a specialty close range class like SMG or Shotgun, it will lose, faced off against a Sniper at long range, it will lose. It holds no dominance. It can be used to take advantage of the weaknesses of other classes that cannot cope in their respective weak areas, such as, Assault Rifle V. Sniper at close range, obviously Assault Rifle wins. You ruin the balance when you make Snipers that much stronger.

 

[PrimoThePro]

I'm sorry, but in the name it does say "Aim assist". Machinegunners can use it so i dislike it when people whine when they only seem to complain about the snipers who use it; "Do what i say, not what i do". Just to note, i've never been a quickscopper because its a cheap and pathetic tactic but i'm an avid sniper with Aim Assist off.

Get rid of Aim Assist completely i'd say, make Call of Duty a game that requires more skill then no skill at all.

I like this idea. Makes people finally shut up about Quick Scoping, and in fact, anything at all they complain about. If they fail, it just means that it's their skill that fails.

 

[PrimoThePro]

This is why I am suggesting to have crossbows adjusted this way. Because crossbows are not long range beasts, but still use one shot kills. So quickscopers will get the weapon they want in a balanced way.

An interesting concept, and I do like the idea, but then you have people complaining that mid range is now polluted with one shot kills, that you need more then one bullet. But the crossbow is a great idea, if you miss, you're essentially fucked. But as another guy said, just take auto aim out of it entirely. No Quickscoping, all skill.

 

[Flac00]

Because you are using a long range weapon at short range, giving you a one-hit kill. Yes, shotguns do the same thing, but you can't use a shotgun at medium and long ranges. Basically, with quickscoping you turn your rifle into an all-purpose weapon against all realistic properties, with it being capable of one-shotting at any range.

No, you cheap bastard, no.

This was fine in Call of Duty 2. Why is it so different now?

There was no auto-aim in COD 2. Trust me, on the PC version of the game, quick-scoping still is evil.

 

[Zannah]

Treyarch got rid of quick scoping, or so they think.
ACOG on a FAL or M14 and the sleight of hand pro perk. Quickscoping exists on the psuedo snipers that 2 shot.

So now using a semi automatic assault rifle is overpowered? What's next - nerf pistols, a full clip to the head at point blank range still kills me?

 

[Flac00]

I've never played any of the Call of Duty games, so I looked up quickscoping. Wow, yeah, that's not at all how a sniper rifle is supposed to be used. People who do this kind of thing online in competitive multiplayer games are jerks.

Play the game the way it was meant to be played or GTFO.

Like I said, Call of duty was never a series meant for realistic sniping. If you want some realistic sniping, play a Battlefield game or that game "Sniper: Ghost something".

There is a difference between realism and balance. Snipers are supposed to be long range, otherwise it screws up the balance of the game.

 

[infinity_turtles]

Anything that can be used in the game without freezes/crashes/ect ect and is available to all players is fair game in my opinion. If a tactic is available and you're not using it, that's your problem, not the other players. The only exception to this rule is anything that is equivalent to god mode, in that the only thing that can counter it is itself.

Seriously, as much as the loud obnoxious quick-scopers annoy me*, all this whining over quick-scopers, noobtubes, commando, ect ect just seems kind of pathetic. I get it, you want the game to be something else and you're not playing to win. Now stop your continual bitching and find something else that fulfills your needs.

*Because of the loud obnoxious part

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I'm sorry, but in the name it does say "Aim assist". Machinegunners can use it so i dislike it when people whine when they only seem to complain about the snipers who use it; "Do what i say, not what i do". Just to note, i've never been a quickscopper because its a cheap and pathetic tactic but i'm an avid sniper with Aim Assist off.

Get rid of Aim Assist completely i'd say, make Call of Duty a game that requires more skill then no skill at all.

This exactly, quickscoping was only an issue because of the exploitation of aim assist. Quickscoping without aim assist with a gamepad is SKILL. I can't believe so many people think what Treyarch did is fine because there's no more quickscopers. Treyarch broke sniping to fix quickscoping. I don't understand why people support such a crappy and lazy developer. There's so many ways to fix quickscoping that doesn't break sniping.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

There is a difference between realism and balance. Snipers are supposed to be long range, otherwise it screws up the balance of the game.

If Treyarch just removed aim assist or properly coded it, quickscoping wouldn't be an issue and it would take skill to do. The shotgun isn't good at long range because the pellets separate. A sniper bullet has the same effect if you hit someone at 5 feet or 500 feet. The reason the sniper rifle sucks at short range is because it's not automatic and you got only one shot if someone is coming at you with a AR or SMG. Without aim assist, the sniper rifle at close range will almost always lose in a shootout in a game. Another solution would be for sniper rifles to only kill in one shot if you hit the head or upper torso so the sniper couldn't get a kill just by hitting a leg or something.

 

[IBlackKiteI]

Since you can one-shot an enemy with a sniper rifle before they can get a shot off with their assault rifle, smg, lmg, knife, pistol or anything.

With any automatic weapon, anyone who gets the first shot in wins.

Wrong, with any burst fire/shotgun/sniper weapon whoever gets the first shot in wins, along with all the overpowered SMG's and assault weapons.

This is of course assuming your talking about Modern Warfare 2, seeing as Black Ops and to a lesser extent CoD 4 are gods of balance.

 

[Yagharek]

Whoever shoots first with an assault rifle doesn't win. Some people are better at aiming than others(particularly noticeable over long range), and there are also factors such as drop shotting, and whose gun is better suited to the range, which make a difference.

Quickscoping took advantage of auto-aim and snipers being so powerful to be brilliant at any range. For those who say "But SMGs can be used at any range", go and play one of the games before they took out idle sway. Yes, you can kill someone from the other side of the map with a SMG on Cod4. You will need to have some skill though, and you will need to adjust for idle sway and recoil over the long range, and fire in very short bursts. If your opponent just runs, they have a very big chance of survival. If they have a gun better suuited to the range, they will kill you most of the time.

This is sadly less true in the games after MW2. In MW2 it's because of lack of sway and recoil.

In black ops, it's better, but because there isn't much sway, it isn't perfect. ARs can be beaten by SMGs from longer ranges than they probably should a lot of the time. Snipers can be beaten by ARs from longer ranges than they should. This is, imo, down to a lack of sway in part, but more because of the map design. There aren't many places that snipers can snipe from where they can't be seen by someone with an AR.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

The only thing I ponder with quick scoping is... could everyone easily accomplish it or did it require a certain degree of skill to perform with any amount of consistency? I cannot where it was, however someone a while back mentioned that statistics did not support the notion quick scoping was all that dominate or even efficient on an overall basis, and you were more likely to be killed unless you fell into the somewhat rare category of being good at it.

Granted, having not played MW2. I can only speculate and will not defend nor oppose QSing for that specific reason. If the aforementioned is a correction assumption. Then I do believe this was 'rectify' based solely upon people unable to QS, whining. A comparable example would be the "Noob combo" in Halo 2, which was never altered because Bungie cited it required no skill and was easily accessible to everyone. They did consequently downplay its power by incorporating a battery, which rapidly drains, in Halo 3 onward. Nonetheless the effectiveness is still present.

And I swear to god, I will stab anyone that legitimately attempts to claim it is not realistic to QS.

 

[MetallicaRulez0]

The ability to quick-scope makes sniper rifles unbalanced. It makes them lethal one-shot kills at close, medium and long range.

It's not that bloody complicated.

If snipers were imbalanced, you'd see people who quickscope with high Kill/Death ratios. You'd also see competitive players (MLG and such) sniping. Neither of those is true.

People only think quickscoping is cheap because they feel cheated when they get 1-shotted, even though an AR, SMG, or Shotgun does the same thing and requires less skill. People that say it's "an exploit of aim assist" have no idea what they're talking about or how the game mechanics actually work.

 

[Flac00]

There is a difference between realism and balance. Snipers are supposed to be long range, otherwise it screws up the balance of the game.

If Treyarch just removed aim assist or properly coded it, quickscoping wouldn't be an issue and it would take skill to do. The shotgun isn't good at long range because the pellets separate. A sniper bullet has the same effect if you hit someone at 5 feet or 500 feet. The reason the sniper rifle sucks at short range is because it's not automatic and you got only one shot if someone is coming at you with a AR or SMG. Without aim assist, the sniper rifle at close range will almost always lose in a shootout in a game. Another solution would be for sniper rifles to only kill in one shot if you hit the head or upper torso so the sniper couldn't get a kill just by hitting a leg or something.

Yeah, that could work. I guess I never have really like the sniper. If I ever do I counter-snipe, and that is fun. I just think each weapon type should be placed in each catagory and only work at that catagory:
Mele-Point Blank
Shotguns-Close Range
SMG's-Close-ish Range
Assault Rifles- Medium Range
Battle Rifles- Medium-Long range
Sniper Rifles- Long Range

Note: Battle Rifles are like the M1 garand with ironsights or something like that. Not long enough range and takes at least 2 shots to take someone down. Snipers should only kill in 1 shot for headshots.