Armies lose even less distinction from each other by allowing players to use captured weapons en-mass. At least now usually only heroes use captured weapons on most servers.
Right, because because the quality of a game is always proportional to how different each team's weapons are. I'm sorry, did you think you were playing Halo, where the humans get firearms and the covenant get lasers and homing needles? Maybe you thought we were talking Alien vs Predator, where the aliens are supposed to wrap their enemies up in cacoons to get health back?
Plenty of solid competitive games have been built around both sides getting the same weaponry. If anything, the further a game goes in attempting to provide team-specific weapons and abilities, the more likely the game is to have balance issues, as the devs have opted to travel a slippery slope.
So in truth, your idea that giving the same weapon to both teams is somehow bad, only comes from your own arbitrary vision of how the game is "supposed" to be, which isn't based on game design principles, and sure as hell isn't based on history. Why don't you take your random "AVP with WWII skins" idea and sell it to Infinity Ward?
Option B) Nobody likes more RNG in their FPS game. Bad design for the superior player to catch someone offgaurd only to lose due to a ****ty dice roll.
If we used the mantra "nobody likes X difficult mechanic" as the basis for everything, we wouldn't have things like recoil or reloading, which causes the "superior" player to lose when he got the drop on someone, because he forgot to reload.
A superior player should be prepared for the eventuality of things beyond his control going wrong, like misfeeds. It takes less than a second to rack the charging handle and manually load the next round; if the enemy is able to respond in less than a second based on only the barely-audible "click" of a dryfire, then it wasn't much of a drop the "superior" player had. If the player hesitates and fails to immediately rack the charging handle, he wasn't so superior after all.
As it is, most casual players don't control their fire very well, nor do they count off their rounds, so they would still die far more often because they forgot to reload than from misfeeds.
Option C) This is already in-game? Not sure what your getting at.
It's not in the game, because the recoil is not low. The point is that the disadvantages of the higher rate of fire are highly overlooked and no one realizes that even with less recoil, the weapon would still be less controllable and expend more ammo. When you take into account that the weapon's excessive fire rate will turn many attempted 3 round bursts into 5 round bursts, attempted 5 round bursts into 7-8 round bursts, then the drum mostly just compensates for the weapon's uncontrollability (which has little to do with recoil) and once you account for that, there's only a few extra rounds left over which according to "balance" are "unfair" and shouldn't be there. A few extra rounds is totally not worth ruining the game's realism over.
And the rest I'm not really understanding you 100%. At medium range its exponentially more effective to burst than magdump. It would be even easier to magdump at farther ranges with lower recoil. And of course at short range you magdump. You would do the exact same thing even if there was low recoil.
Right now, due to the exaggerated recoil and exaggerated firing animation, combined with exagerated damage differences between SMG and rifle wounds, it's 50/50 at best whether any given 3 round burst will hit the enemy at all, much less take him down. Holding the trigger down, walking your bullets into the enemy and holding them there till he dies, is pretty much always more effective than squeezing off a short burst or two.
If these factors were fixed, magdumping would go way down, because you could count on a short burst taking the enemy down, and wouldn't want to waste your ammo. Magdumping really should not be necessary, even at short range - it's really only necessary now because the exaggerated recoil compounds with RO2's crappy pointshooting system to turn pointblank shooting into a crapshoot.
Insurgency 2's pointshooting system much more accurately reflects instinctual shooting from the shoulder, and as a result, a skilled and disciplined player can almost always take down a single surprise target at close range with just 3-6 rounds. Magdumping really should not be necessary unless **** really hits the fan, because hitting people at short range is just not THAT ****ing hard.
