dastealth wrote:

 

I agree that alot of people complain about the shotguns for no apparent reason. In saying you think shotguns in Black Ops were terrible, you are missing the point of Balance. In Black Ops shotguns were not as powerful but when used correctly as a shotgun should be they were extremely effective. Yes it was very disappointing to see that there was a limited selection of attachments but this also was a good ploy to steer people away from using shotguns in general. Shotguns are extremely powerful already in their effective range. Do you really want more people to all of a sudden start using the shoutguns more because they are easier to kill with. I don't think you are fully understanding what I am trying to say.

 

There are already more people using shotguns in MW3 than there were in Black Ops. You said earlier you went up against a team using shotguns and you beat them by using a shotgun. Now put yourself against the same team except this time use a different weapon. You will see that it would be extremely frustrating if they are any good with them.

 

Also as I said earlier, the connectivity to each individual player is different and therefore a gun can work against 1 player and not the next.

 

I will also try and find a clip of an extremely long Shotgun OHK kill some time.

A good ploy to steer people away from shotguns? Or they had no clue how to make a balanced game.

You actually think the only way to beat a team of shotgunners (mw3) is to use shotguns? Are you for real? Have you not used any smg (rapid fire+steady aim) in mw3? It is beyond easy mode.

I challenge anyone at IW, that thinks shotguns are fine, to a FFA match, on any map they choose. You take whatever shotgun you want, while I use the pp90. It wont even be a contest.

markocc wrote:

 

Ghandi, I have one more quick question for you. I am not 100 percent sure of this but I believe there was a change in host selection since MW2. If I remember correctly (I could be wrong) in MW2 when you connected to a 50ms ping host through the search that was the person that ended up being the host. It seems as though MW3 throws out that original host you connected to at a low ping and then picks another one before the match starts, which could have a much higher ping. If this is true is there any way we can have the old match making system back where you do not migrate to another random host before the match starts. It seems kind of counter productive to search for a low ping lobby if it ends up picking a different host before the match starts.

 

MW2 was leaps and bounds ahead in match quality when compared to Black Ops and MW3. As the old saying goes, "If it aint broke, don't fix it".

I'll check this because my memory isn't what it once was but I believe MW2 similarly always selected the best host before entering the game. It did this silently, however.

I'll verify this tomorrow.

Cheers,

G IH A IN ID II

Can someone explain why I can snipe with no problems, but shotguns hitmarker?  If lag is such a big factor, why can I aim for headshots and get them without lag screwing me over? Pure curiosity.

@xtorchxstangx

Will you provide us with your gamertag/ PSN ID so we can verify this?  Besides, you specifically said USAS 12, one of the two shotguns people rarely complain about.  We care more about buffing manual-action shotguns and the AA 12, not the Striker or USAS.

dexter1992 wrote:

 

That is correct. COD4 was the game that did not, and thus lobbies with everyone having red-yellow bars was frequent. I hope we never go back to that.

I believe Black Ops did not change host once one was selected unless a migration occurred or the host left. This system seemed to work quite well as you knew if you were going to expect lag or not the next match. Of course this system is slightly different to that one.