So you want balance between the guns... yet... you want the BEST smg to be worse than the worst AR? So by that logic any and all ARs should be better than any and all SMGs.
Then what would be the point? Might as well just make it a 1 gun game. The point is to have a mix and you are way off base to think that is not the case. Yes SOME smgs are better than SOME ars.
Attachments make a big difference as well. I almost always use SMGs for these maps... but I'd take a stock AN-94 to the Chicom (stock) any day.
I swear people's intelligence lowers with each passing year.
I do agree that it's irritating as hell when you get hitmarkers with an assault rifle (AN94) and the person wielding the B23 just mows you down.....it happens. I just try and keep my distance at all times as an avid AR player. I understand why Treyacrh did what they did. No one used pistols in BO1 since they simply sucked. You were better off using a launcher as your secondary in BO1. It's all about tweaking your play my friend. It wasn't easy for me to tweak my own at first but it's a necessary change. Otherwise, these situations will drive you to rage.
The SMG's seem OP because of the map size and the average distance that gunfights usually occur. I deal with this stuff all the time too. You may be called a camper but hey, your not going to charge into that little room knowing someone is in there and all you have is a three round burst AR? That would be stupid IMO. Let them come to you.
The pistols should be 3 hit kill and have a range limit. They are there for support, not as a primary weapon like they are right now.
An AR with two attachments costs 3 points. A pistol with two attachments costs 4 points, and there is no option to get a 3rd attachment. That is the advantage primaries have, and it isn't right in my opinion, because pistols are much more challenging to use. Pistols deserve every bit of their power based on their cost.
I have use every pistol as my main weapon with no primary and will have them diamond soon. Sometimes they are very good, but if you think the guy that killed you with a pistol at medium range is going to do any worse with an AR, you are crazy. If I can kill you with some effort at 20 yards using the Five Seven, I will kill you easily at 40 yards using the FAL.
Complaining about pistols and shotguns is like asking to be killed more, as they are the most challenging weapons to use well.
So you want ARs to be the best weapons in the game for every situation?
Like BO1 then.
All of the weapons are good if you learn how to use them.
Actually... The worst SMG should be better than the best AR (in close quarters). You really don't have any idea of balance judging by your op.
If you cant kill a sub user at long range that is definatly your fault, but because of how the maps are designed smart sub users can maneuver round the map to suit their closs range.
At long range a rifle will have the advantage, but when im using a sub i try really hard not to spend much time in long sigted areas, whereas when im using a rifle i try to stay around the map where i can have the long vision