Will be there a Nuke/MOAB?
Posted by Xarfex on May 4, 2012 3:57 AM
Heading says all.
-
Like (0)
Posted by Xarfex on May 4, 2012 3:57 AM
Heading says all.
From what ive been reading they said there will be no Nuke/Moab.
I hope not.
MOAB's & Nukes encourage killwhoring & ignoring the objective.
I agree. And even though there was no title or anything for it there was still boosting and camping for it. It's kind of fun to try for in MW3 but really, what's the actual point to it? In games modes like TDM it's only going to get you a max of 6 kills anyway. My Pavelow can get more than that...
RbKiLLa wrote:
No, Treyarch isnt dumb like IW.
^ This
i hope not, why not just remove killstreaks that will stop a lot of camping, all they do is make people camp
MOABs are good. Black Ops was incredibly boring in that aspect, dogs were an 11 killstreak. Sure, that is great and all, but the MOAB was a constant challenge every game. A challenge that keeps on giving. What difference does it make if there is a 17 killstreak like the osprey gunner(which is overpriced and trash anyways) or a constant 25?
Trust me, the camping and killfarming is WORSE in Black Ops than MW3, yet Black Ops has no MOAB.
Although, no nuke though. THat is completely unfair. I suggested that the nuke should come back in MW3, although it doesn't end the game. I don't think people were fond of that, but overall people embraced the MOAB.
People will killfarm regardless, so what difference does the MOAB make? What about the people who play TDM or Kill Confirmed? ALL my nukes, minus one, were in Team Deathmatch. My Domination nuke was me defending flags.
If you can hold a flag for 25 kills, you deserve a MOAB.
If you can harrass people at a flag, you deserve a MOAB.
If you can clear flags for your team mates, you deserve a MOAB.
If you are a OMA and can take flags single handedly, you deserve a MOAB.
If you camp and killfarm unstrategically, you don't deserve a MOAB.
MOAB's are for little kids, this game is supposed to be about shooting each other.
Why do you need this "pat on the back" for doing what you're supposed to be doing anyway?
anoreo wrote:
MOABs are good. Black Ops was incredibly boring in that aspect, dogs were an 11 killstreak. Sure, that is great and all, but the MOAB was a constant challenge every game. A challenge that keeps on giving. What difference does it make if there is a 17 killstreak like the osprey gunner(which is overpriced and trash anyways) or a constant 25?
Trust me, the camping and killfarming is WORSE in Black Ops than MW3, yet Black Ops has no MOAB.
Although, no nuke though. THat is completely unfair. I suggested that the nuke should come back in MW3, although it doesn't end the game. I don't think people were fond of that, but overall people embraced the MOAB.
People will killfarm regardless, so what difference does the MOAB make? What about the people who play TDM or Kill Confirmed? ALL my nukes, minus one, were in Team Deathmatch. My Domination nuke was me defending flags.
If you can hold a flag for 25 kills, you deserve a MOAB.
If you can harrass people at a flag, you deserve a MOAB.
If you can clear flags for your team mates, you deserve a MOAB.
If you are a OMA and can take flags single handedly, you deserve a MOAB.
If you camp and killfarm unstrategically, you don't deserve a MOAB.
Saying who deserves it and who doesn't really doesn't mean anything. You put something as stupid as the 25 killstreak then you shift the focus off of winning games and smart play to "what can i do to get a 25 killstreak" each and every game. Maybe not for you, but for the bigger majoirty of call of duty players.
It's pretty easy to spot when you jump into a domination game and 0 people go for flags, instead they run to spawn points in hopes of gaining a moab.
Given that I mainly play S&D the Nuke is moot for the most part.
My honest reaction is 'meh'.
proberlys not only IW seem to be stupid enough to add crap like that
I think a MOAB will be a good idea because it doesn't end the game like the nuke does