I agree with your view on this. There is no reason for a sniper to be using the sniper in close range. It is meant as a long range support weapon.

Perhaps if they lowered the damage it done in CQC or short range it would limit the affectiveness of QSing. Make it require 2 rounds to kill if the player is less then 30 feet from you.

After all a sniper is high powered weapon and at close range would just pass through the target doing less damage then at longer ranges. It would be moving to fast to do as massive amount of damage at close range; unless was a heart shot or a head shot.

I'm on the side that says it's not OP at all. I see it as a very valid game mechanic and one of the essentials I look for when buying a title.

I don't think most complaints are because some one person is dominating whole teams while qs'ing..I think it's got more to do with people losing S&D rounds while planting the final bomb to someone who's been waiting for that setup shot. Or the guys who think they're good at it but lose you S&D rounds, HQ, TDM, etc. while trying to trickshoot (easily remedied by pertying up BTW).

I'm not one of those guys hanging out on a ladder waiting to hopefully get a killcam in S&D either, I play mostly DOM & HQ. I agree those guys are annoying but it's not the sniper rifle in their hands that's annoying. It's these guys camping for entire games trying to get clips/killcams. The weapon they're camping with is irrelevant.

I agree with you on this kastro. I think it realy comes down to the fact that they should enver have allowed game footage on youtube. Then it would not be as popular is is not where every little wannabe youtube start has to come and try it out.

Which is why I normaly report any video links to youtube vidoes of it on the forums as spam unless being shown why QS is flawed and needs to be removed from the game.

No to quickscoping.  Not only is it a ridiculous mechanic, but its incredibly frustrating to play against.  It has no real purpose in the game.

Sniper rilfes - like shotguns - should be a niche weapon with a very specific specialization.  They should excel in longer range engagements only.

Assault rifles (and smgs to a smaller extent) are already all purpose weapons.  Not every single weapon in the game needs to be excellent at every range.

@ OP: I hope you're not reading too much into "polls" like this when making design decisions.  What you have going on with these forums is what we applied statisticians call "self-selection bias" -- as you no doubt know well, the people that respond to posts like this are not representative of the customer base as a whole.  In the case of sniping tuning, however, I think you have a particularly extreme "triple" self-selection bias problem in that: people who like run-and-gun sniping dropped Black Ops right away (and left the sample pool -- #1); subsequently, people who like to use sniper rifles "now & then" stopped following the Black Ops forums because they currently are playing MW3 (and also left your pool - #2). So what's left in a pool of potential respondants? People who are either (A) never use snipers and are indifferent to any tuning you might do with those guns in the future, or (B) people who are actively (for whatever reason -- I'm not sure when guns in videogames became so political!) contra run-and-gun sniping.  The folks in group A are indifferent and won't respond; the folks in group B will all say "AGAINST" (source of bias #3). So that's the criticism part; were I to offer some constructive suggestions, I'd say: why not add a multiple-choice poll feature to the MP menu in whatever the newest CoD game is that asks these sorts of questions of a wider (more representative) customer base? (You're still going to get some self-selection bias, but probably fewer "degrees" of it.)