Fallout Studios Forums

Multi player ofc! Tho in SP im going to go straight in on the hardest level, no messing around on normal first

Pav3d, on 1 Aug 2009, 18:12, said:

I did that on MW1, still blocked on Zakhaev's son mission >_>

I can't remember any other FPS (on PC) that managed to have both awesome SP and MP.

Some levels were pretty frustrating in CoD4 even in normal. IIRC there were 4 difficultys in CoD4, so I'm going second hardest. I do seek the challenge but I don't want to spend hours to try one situation over and over again.

Stalker, on 1 Aug 2009, 16:07, said:

First of all I need to do some derailing ...anyways here is a comparison of pro's in the CoD vs. CoD2:
CoD: Sprint, Vehicles, FG42,deployable LMG's (MG34, .30cal, Dp-28) Pavlov (hey that map is too awesome), cookable grenades, satchel charges, zooks, artilery strikes and the ability to beat the crap out someone with a grenade (or in cooler cases with Binoculars), ability to have 2 main weapons+sidearm (and unlike CoD2 it had PB when it was released)
CoD2: Shiny graphics, PPS-43, Half a dozen african maps

as you can see CoD has more in common with the 4th title than CoD2 is.

Now onto the SP MP comparison (after all that text i will wonder if anyone is gonna read the rest):

SP= very good and very fun but only backdraw is that is gonna be too short (and due to the lame ass health system too easy even on the hardest difficulty) but on the otherhand MP will be full of smacktards, imbalanced equipment, smacktards, weird and stupid glitches and smacktards. But all in all my final decision will always be the same: SP
Edited by TehKiller, 01 August 2009 - 21:24.

the equipment and such was fine in COD4 MP, but the only thing that wasnt balanced was the red perks, stopping power/ juggernaut are hands down the best, no matter what

so Desert Eagle, AKS74U, P90 and M16 were perfectly fine? I'd say otherwise. As said there will always be some kind of imbalance in weapons (lazor accurate and high damage in the case of these 4 weapons). Combine that with the fact that the winning team gets access to even more stuff (choppers anyone) it allows them to massacre the weaker team even more

true true.

that and the fact that the auto-team maker made the most imbalanced teams ever... (at least on the xbox)

TehKiller, on 1 Aug 2009, 23:23, said:

Fixed that for you

i thought the guns were balenced, its just too many people used those examples... you could fare just fine using just about any gun in the game, in fact, i actually dont like the P90, and personally i think the m14 is better than the m16, along with the mp5 better than ak74, and the desert eagle is strongest, but its weakness is not being silencable

M16 with stopping power: best gun in the game. one well placed burst and its all over. It sucks the fun out of the game for me, I stick to the g36c since its actually fun to use.

a lot of guns are underrated in cod4.

like the measly m9 pistol

KiraSama, on 2 Aug 2009, 13:30, said:

Hey it aint my fault that CoD2 didnt had any expansions. Besides theres still alot of more assets in CoD (not UO) than there is in CoD2

Weapon balance is always a much disputed topic for any FPS game.

COD4 took a very odd approach to weapon balance. After playing the game for a while, I eventually realised that the starting weapons in COD4; e.g. the Mp5, the AK64, the M16, the first shotgun, the first sniper rifle, were all just as good as the guns you unlock later in the game as you progress up each rank.

I believe this was done to allow the people just starting to play COD4 to compete against those using guns you unlock at the later levels.

This means, a level 5 COD4 player using an M16 with stopping power, could theoretically do better than a maximum prestige level 55 player using a G36C with stopping power.

I think for the most part this approach to weapon balance works very well. Pretty much any weapon in COD4 can be useful if given the right perks.

Now we come to the second part of balance, the COD4 perk system.

I believe the COD4 perk system was set up in a different way. The player gets some of the most powerful perks right off the bat, stopping power, and juggernaut being two good examples.

However the player has to work for and level up to around level 40 to get the deadly 3 frag grenade perk. By this time they'll have gotten most of the other perks in the game as well.

Overall the only thing I'd consider, "unbalanced" in COD4 is the 2 claymore and 3 frag grenade perks. Since the patch, claymores are almost impossible to outrun once you step on one. I wouldn't mind that much, except that the claymore doesn't kill the person who planted it, even if the person that planted it is standing on the claymore itself. If the enemy that planted the claymore could die in it's explosion, then I'd consider it a fair perk.

As for free frag, a perk that allows you to hurl not one but three highly explosive, extremely deadly, grenades into the enemy spawn position on some maps, well that just seems like an extremely cheap way to get kills.

The bottom line is, that although some parts of game are balanced in a questionable way, I still have frankly stupid amounts of fun playing it online with friends. It's still my favourite multiplayer 360 game.

*Wonders how many people took the time to read this*

- Sam
Edited by Samster01, 02 August 2009 - 17:50.

Real or not? I have heard that there is no UAV Jammer perk in Modern Warfare 2, and I believe that this is cause there will be other 3 kill perks that one player may have.

Any one else have info on the perks?

Where did u hear this? google brings up nothing

Rumor from a friend on XBL but I didn't know if there was anything on this rumor.

I think the weapon balance isn't that bad.

Pistols: I didn't really notice any differences. Of course the Desert Eagle is the best, but it's the last you'll unlock.

SMGs: I think they are all more or less equal. The P-90 is a bit better but it's the last you'll unlock, so thats okay too.

Shotguns: IMHO the Automatic is better than the Pumpgun. Again this is okay.

Rifles: Yeah, M16 is really powerful, but the burst isn't that good in melee combat. AK, M4, G36 are equal imho. As for me, I never really used the G3 and M14. Useless to me.

Sniper: M82=M21>SVD>R700>M40

LMGs: I guess they are equal too. I personally preferred the RPD

Then you my friend didnt played enough to notice the difference between SMGs...AKS-74u is the 2nd unlocked "SMG" and it has the firing rate of a MP5 and way higher accuracy and dmg even when spraying bullets around.

M16 is actually brutal in close range as all its enough is to land a burst into someones face (especially if you got stopping power...and chances are pretty much high that you will). As far as "assault rifles" go the more you unlock the worse the weapons are. Best rifles are AK and M16 (ok M4 can tag along).

apparently LMG's (well never noticed anything wrong with them) and Shotguns (they utterly fail...they tried to avoid CoD2 situation but end up making a useless weapon) are the only ones without any problems

Honestly I never liked the M4 at all. The M16 and AK are the way to go and the G36C is useful though it takes a while to get it. The grenade launcher attachment is also fairly useful on certain maps I've found but I rarely give up a perk to get it.

TehKiller, on 3 Aug 2009, 10:37, said:

It has been a while since I played. I leveled fast so I used the P-90 most of the time.

I think G36 is ok.

I agree, there shouldn't be any useless weapons. But sadly this happens to every game where players can freely choose their weapons. Look at Counterstrike: 90% of players are using M4/AK-47 + Desert Eagle.

There will always be a 'best' weapon. And if they make every gun have equal stats it would be boring. And if the unlocked weapons would be better, beginners wouldn't have a chance.

not entirely true.

i for once, suck with m16.

I am not entirely sure how this is about CoD:MW2?!?!

Perhaps returning to topic rather than discussing weapon balance is in order.

Sorry, but I can't really understand your argument.

We are discussing possible improvements for Modern Warfare 2, by analysing it's predecessor's flaws.

But if you wish so...

What do you guys think about vehicles. SP or MP. IIRC there is none controllable vehicle in CoD4, but you are the gunner in a few situations. In MP there were none at all.

In MW2, the AC130 is confirmed for MP, but I doubt we will see another Spectre-SP-level. In CoD2 and 5 there were Tank-levels. CoD5 had Tanks in MP, but I really disliked them.

Should MW2 have driveable vehicles in SP or MP?

Stalker, on 3 Aug 2009, 16:39, said:

No you are just arguing over weapon balance for COD4. No where in the above posts does anyone say I think it should be thus for MW2.

it's not because the original intent of the thread isn't stated in EVERY SINGLE REPLY made that it hasn't got anything to do with it

we are discussing COD6 and COD4 in comparison, no need to be a forum nazi.