Copy-paste of my answer to the previous thread:
Why use M16 when you can use ACR?
705 RPM versus 780 RPM with burst fire delay;
3 shots fired in 0.155 seconds with the M16
3 shots fired in 0.170 seconds with the ACR
4 shots fired in 0.255 second with the ACR
4 shots fired in 0.350 seconds with the M16 AT BEST
4 shots fired in 0.400 seconds with the M16 (with a very good M16 user)
5 shots fired in 0.340 seconds with the ACR
5 shots fired in 0.437 seconds with the M16 AT BEST
5 shots fired in 0.480 seconds with the M16 (with a very good M16 user)
From here on, it is only downhill.
M16 was beastily in CoD4 and MW2 because of it's accuracy, rate of fire and damage.
Never forget that it killed in 2 hits, 3 at long range, with stopping power, firing each burst at 925 RPM.
On short to medium range, it was a shotgun and assault rifle coupled in one.
With it's 925 RPM firerate and M4 (CoD4 and MW2) and ACR (MW2) dealing LESS damage than the M16 (30 base damage compared to M16's 40 -- 42 versus 56 damage with stopping power), and the AK47 (CoD4 and MW2) and SCAR-H (MW2) firing at mid-600 RPM, the M16 actually COULD kill faster than all the weapons above even if you needed two bursts for the kill.
(M16 fired 9 rounds faster than SCAR-H and AK47 could fire 9 rounds, more accurately, and it killed faster than M4 and ACR even when you missed 6 times with each of the different weapons)
In Black Ops, maps were generally larger, and weapons less accurate -- allowing it to be useful simply because it had beastily accuracy wheras the automatic ARs did not.
Apart from FAMAS and Galfield (Galil and Enfield had the same recoil and same number of hits to kill).
In MW3, you have a sub-machinegun that is more accurate and that fires faster (MP7) and an assault rifle that is just as accurate and that kills as fast or faster (when missing with one single round or more) than the M16 (ACR).
The M16 being nerfed from 925 RPM to 780 RPM was a GREAT nerf for the OP M16 from MW2 and CoD4.
Problem is, without stopping-power or 50 base damage, the weapon is useless when the 700+ RPM weapons kill in the same number of hits.
ACR is especially beastily, as it can one hit kill in hardcore whereas M16 can not.
In addition, ACR rewards accuracy a lot better than the M16 on long range:
Headshot, headshot, foot: M16 does NOT kill, while ACR kills
Headshot, foot, foot: ACR kills but the M16 still does not.
There is no reason what so ever to NOT use the Type 95 or ACR over the M16.
Type 95 two-hit kills up to roughly 25 meters, and 3 hit kills up to 37 meters compared to M16's 37.5 three hit kill range.
The fact that Type 95 needs five hits to kill on 45 meters or longer hardly affects your game, as no weapon bar snipers are a threath at this range and most maps don't even have 45 meter ranges where you can be caught in the open.
M4 is also a canidate, so is G36C -- both having a harder time on long range than ACR.
To further disgrace the M16, I can mention that rapid-fire makes Type 95 more accurate, and that the Type 95 isn't less accurate than the M16 to start with, and finally: The M16 with rapid-fire still fires slower than the Type 95 without rapid-fire, giving the Type 95 a completely free proficiency.
Really.
It should have been 50 base damage, 35 damage on long range -- at 780 RPM. Drop rapid-fire.
THEN the CM901 should've been 50 damage, and so should the AK47.
It would have felt EXACTLY like the previous MW games where everyone used stopping power anyways.
THEN the silencer would reduce the damage of the high-damage automatic ARs one level, and reduced the range of the M16 and low-power ARs by 50% instead of reducing damage.
SMGs like UMP, P90 and MP5 would be 50 damage (reduced damage with silencer while the other SMGs only get reduced range; UMP should be 650 RPM like it is in real life)
Finally: For ALL 50 damage weapons: Add a 0.9 limb multiplier: Hitting the foot will not result in a two hit kill.
