@jarple said in The MP7:
@MarksmanMax Just chill out, seriously. I think you're extracting some other kind of information/answer from my post that wasn't intended lol.
Might've been a little harsh lmao but I like to think critically about this kind of stuff.
@jarple said in The MP7:
@MarksmanMax Just chill out, seriously. I think you're extracting some other kind of information/answer from my post that wasn't intended lol.
I don't like that extended mags is a 'must have' on the MP7. The solution the post creator said was to lower the supply cost of extended mags, and that is just silly in my opinion. That mean's you'll get somewhere between 100-140 bonus rounds (100% increase) and twice the duration for maintaining fire/double mag size before reloading all for just 3 supply cost or less. The post creator even suggested that the MP7 should have extended mags equipped by DEFAULT! Talk about zero foresight with the balance complications that brings.
Well +1 since I also think that the Ext. Mags are required for the MP7 to be somewhat useful.
-> You do get double the ammo capacity (and double the killing potential). The problem is that the killing potential for the MP7 is already pretty garbage and while Ext. Mags can help remedy that it's not worth the seven supply. Why mod a gun that's garbage when you can just spend that supply on a better gun (like shotguns, which are cheaper already, or the Mk 18 which is ten times better).
-> Meanwhile, an Ext. Mag on a Mk. 18 is only one supply, and that gives you 35 rounds as opposed to the MP7's 40 and the Mk. 18 does far more damage than the MP7 does.
-> For the MP7 to be somewhat viable at medium range (and even close range) you also pretty much need a Compensator (and this comes from a guy who doesn't run a Comp or Foregrip often at all), so that's a total of ten supply for a decent firearm. It's just not economical.
@jarple said in The MP7:
Extended mags is OP on the MP7, FACT, that's why everyone takes it and it's un-viable without it. I presented mathematical evidence to show just how strongly extended mags is on something like the MP7.
-> Extended mags aren't OP on the MP7 at all. It converts the MP7 from a garbage gun to a decent gun, and for seven supply you can buy pretty much any other gun and mod it and it's a far better choice. As for why "everyone" takes the MP7, I don't know, although anyone I see playing Breacher runs a shotgun so I don't know who these people are.
Anyone running an MP7 clearly doesn't know how strong shotguns are lmao.
@jarple said in The MP7:What I was saying is changing the supply cost just makes the situation worse because:
- If it's cheaper, you'll still take it no matter what because it's an overloaded-hella-strong attachment
- If It's more expensive, you've literally further tied the effectiveness of the MP7 to the extended mags attachment, basically creating another instance of AP rounds and how if you don't use it then you're at a major disadvantage.
-> If it's cheaper, you'll buy it because it's required for the gun to not suck.
-> The MP7 is already reliant on the Ext. Mags attachment because 20 bullets with the RPM of that SMG is never enough. Changing the supply cost has nothing to do with that.
-> More ammo per mag is completely different from AP rounds. Both allow you to get more kills per magazine, but that's the only similarity. AP ammo gives your gun about four times extra damage. I'd take AP over more bullets in Ins2014 any day. More ammo means nothing if you can't shoot all of it before you die. It just means you can spray everywhere easier and prefire every corner.
@jarple said in The MP7:
You do realize that I said the game needs an overall re-vamping in terms of movement/damage before we heavily change individual weapons.
Where, exactly?
@jarple said in The MP7:
You do realize that the MP7 still has a ridiculous fire rate, so 'four shots' goes out real quick.
You do realize that the Glock isn't even in the same category as the MP7.
I honestly can't remember the exact firerate of the MP7. I'll assume it's 900 (which is generous tbh).
In theory, if an AKM fires two shots at 600 RPM and the MP7 fires three shots at 900 RPM, then both guns have the exact same TTK since a Heavy Armor target dies in two 7.62x39 shots or three 4.6x30mm shots.
Then you have this problem where you have 5.56 weapons (like the Mk. 18) that fire considerably faster than 600 RPM and still kill in two Torso shots.
Then you have weapons that have one-shot capabilities (either by default or by cheesing the Long Barrel attachment on .308 battle rifles) that the MP7 also can't compete against (while a shotgun can).
The Glock isn't in the same category as an MP7. Yeah, I know that. No shit. The problem is that it outperforms the MP7 completely. With an Ext. Mag and a Compensator, it has better recoil control and better damage and is much cheaper (5 supply compared to the 7 for the MP7 /w Ext Mag).
@jarple said in The MP7:
You do realize that the Glock fires 9mm and not 4.6x30 AP like the MP7.
You do realize that the Glock fires ~4 times slower than the MP7.
-> Yeah. I knew that already lmao.
As I already pointed out, both calibers are roughly the same. 9mm is actually better since it two-shots unarmored targets while the MP7 can't.
-> How fast the Glock fires depends on how fast you can mash the mouse button lmao.
You do realize that the Glock has HALF the velocity of the MP7.
You do realize that the Glock has HALF the effective range of the MP7.
You do realize that the Glock has HALF the penetration power of the MP7.
-> Yeah, because you're gonna snipe someone at range with an MP7. You're actually better with a Glock at that point unless you spent too much supply to be able to full-auto past five meters and actually hit something.
-> Also, just to mention, both the M45 and L106A1 two-shot Heavy Armor players in CQB making those pistols even better choices (unless you like a handgun with 33 fucking rounds lol).
You do realize that you actually don't need the compensator on the MP7, just crouch every time you shoot lol, it's common knowledge in the current state of INS:S.'
I knew that already. I was actually one of the first people to point that out myself. I can link the vid if you wanna see it lmao.
Also, that doesn't even make the gun viable for me. Meanwhile, I can laser 30 rounds of a Mk 18 at a target 50 meters away with probably about a 8-12 inch grouping since there's zero horizontal recoil.
You do realize that you only get 64 bonus rounds from extended mags on the Glock and even less if not using Heavy Carrier.
You do realize that 64 bonus rounds from glock extended mags is LESS THAN HALF of the 140 bonus rounds the MP7 gets with extended mags.
-> How many rounds are you firing, though? The Glock 17 doesn't have full-auto, and using semi-auto on the MP7 is a terrible idea IMO since the damage is so garbage.
Also, those extra 33/66 bullets cost you two supply on a pistol that costs two supply. The MP7's forty rounds requires seven supply.
You do realize that bringing up and comparing gun after gun to the MP7 just so you have some argument points isn't a great way to go about it.
-> I'm just saying how shit this gun is. It doesn't need another nerf.
You do realize that extracting only part of a quote and taking it out of context to then argue against it is a great way to get roasted.
-
I extracted part of it because honestly the post was too long lmao. Also, most of the post was just examples of extra ammo counts. I can do math lol.
-
I extracted the part that literally summed up your entire post (TL;DR?).
-
How'd I take this quote out of context?
I can play the 'You do realize' card as well. I'm on your side though, I don't want the MP7's effectiveness tied to extended mags, that's exactly what my post was about lol.
I mean, you can play the "You do realize" card, although you have to state facts that I don't already know about the game for it to work lmao.
The MP7 honestly just needs 40 rounds by default since it's already far outgunned by other weapons (even the weapons in the same class).
EDIT:
EDIT2:
get yer smilies outta here