1 2 3 4 5 6 Previous Next 54 Replies Latest reply on Feb 20, 2013 9:56 AM by RallyOrDie Go to original post RSS
      • Test #1
        30. Re: LMGs need a buff??

        And this means?

        Last Edited: Feb 19, 2013 9:36 PM
        • Test #1
          31. Re: LMGs need a buff??

          All LMGs are a 3-4 hit kill.  That is pretty good I have to say.  Considering SMGs are 3-6 and ARs are 3-5 in the same ranges.  I think Treyarch balanced the LMGs pretty well. 

          Last Edited: Feb 19, 2013 9:38 PM
          • Test #1
            32. Re: LMGs need a buff??

            asianman12 wrote:


            I disagree.  3-4 hits should be the max at range.  Up close it should take 2-3 bullets. It takes 4-6 at range as of now at range which is terrible.

            most guns take 4-6 at range. most of the assault rifels do atleast. the Mtar, The type 25, M27 and so on all take 5-6 shots at long range 4 close (from the bridge on turbine to the top of the plane)

            Last Edited: Feb 19, 2013 9:39 PM
            • Test #1
              33. Re: LMGs need a buff??

              lol you can't work it out?

              Last Edited: Feb 19, 2013 9:41 PM
              • Test #1
                34. Re: LMGs need a buff??

                Exactly the 4 bullet kill range for a LMG is a 4-6 bullet kill for any other weapon.  The 3 bullet kill range for a LMG is a 3-5 bullet kill for any other weapon.   I think that LMGs are quite balanced.

                Last Edited: Feb 19, 2013 9:43 PM
                • Test #1
                  35. Re: LMGs need a buff??

                  You are talking about the lowest damage and ranged LMG against one of the highest damage and ranged ARs.  One thing that the QBB LSW has is fire rate.  Much higher than the MTAR.  I don't quite see what you are trying to prove but you are seriously failing at it.

                  Last Edited: Feb 19, 2013 9:54 PM
                  • Test #1
                    36. Re: LMGs need a buff??

                    Well, for starters, LMGs are not JUST anti-personnel weapons. They are also anti-vehicle weapons in BO2 and they do a damm good job that. I don't care if I have to throw rocks at opponent vehicles (not literally rocks, but I have tossed everything from EMPs to Frags into the air hoping to take them out), I will do everything I can to take down opponent air support.


                    In that process, I have fired SMGs, ARs, and LMGs at enemy aircraft. Of those, the only one that stands any real chance of taking anything down are LMGs. SMGs and ARs will use up pretty much all the ammo you have ... and, at best, they will get a Stealth Helo to start smoking. An LMG, on the other hand, will take one down with less than one mag. That's with or without FMJ, though FMJ does deliver on the promise to bring down that enemy air support far faster than a gun without it.


                    Best of all, as has already been stated, FMJ makes a huge difference on LMGs in standard engagements against opponents. I love hearing people scream "Oh, yeah! magical heat seeking bullets again!" when that's not at all what happened. What happened is that they ducked for cover behind a flat wall and I shot through the wall to take them out.


                    Like MW3, LMGs work best when prone. The problem is that BO2 is not very conducive to being prone for any affective length of time. You might get as many as three kills while prone, but with the many routes to flank players, that's all you get before someone has flanked you. Maybe it would be different if you have one or two teammates covering your flanks, but so far I have yet to see that work, either.


                    That makes LMGs best for laying down heavy, sustained cover fire; shooting down VTOLs and helicopters; taking out Guardians and Sentries at range; and medium to long range 1v1 engagements. Run & Gun can happen, but it is not the ideal purpose for LMGs in BO2.

                    Last Edited: Feb 20, 2013 12:35 AM
                    • Test #1
                      37. Re: LMGs need a buff??

                      That's the issue.  A low damage LMG should not be out-damaged by a fully automatic AR, ever.  There is only one true LMG and that's the MK48.  The QBB fires the same speed as the MP7.  I'd rather use the MP7 and take one to three bullets extra at long range than use the QBB and suffer from mobility and ADS times.  Then I can stock up on my class setups more easily.


                      If the LMGs didn't suffer from damage drop off at all, like in MW3, they would be more viable weapons at the ranges they are supposed to excel in.

                      Last Edited: Feb 20, 2013 1:01 AM
                      • Test #1
                        38. Re: LMGs need a buff??

                        They should be a 3-4 hit kill at all ranges and the MK48 is probably the only decent LMG to use when suppressed.  I don't think many people run LMGs suppressed.  And one or two bullets being needed at long range for ARs isn't much as many of them fire quite quickly with little recoil.

                        Last Edited: Feb 20, 2013 1:10 AM
                        • Test #1
                          39. Re: LMGs need a buff??

                          LMGs were my first Diamond group they are fine the way they are.


                          If they buff the group at all, then they will stop being a niche weapon for the grown ups and become a widely used weapon..... Trust me you don't want that!

                          Last Edited: Feb 20, 2013 1:48 AM