News - The Tac-56 Needs A Nerf - Weapons Of Warzone 2 Ep. 6

fps

Hey there, this is the one boom today we're talking about the TAC 56 in Modern Warfare 2's multiplayer; this is going to be about Warzone or DMZ or ground war just traditional multiplayer because I'm a Normie. The TAC 56 has been talked about a lot recently because the competitive players are using it, the pros are using it, pub stompers are using it, and people in ranked play are using it.

It is a very viable weapon; if you want to know why, just go over to Simthic, GG. It's really easy to figure out why people are using it. This weapon is going to kill in three shots up to about 28 meters to the upper torso. I mean, the ISO is a little bit better because it can kill in three shots without needing the upper-torso shots.

Essentially, the ISO is just unbalanced. Attack 56, but of course the ISO fires at 600 RPM, but the scar here fires at 625 RPM, and the rifle is also very controllable, which makes a lot of sense. Realistically. I mean a scar is a pretty heavy weapon platform in the 556 round, which is fairly accurate and has low recoil.

fps shooter games

I mean, if the M4 in this game is going to be controllable, it would only make sense that this gun would be a little bit more controllable than the M4 just due to its weight increase. I don't think article games should be completely balanced off of real life, but I just think it makes sense. You can clearly see it's a heavier-looking rifle, so if it's going to fire the same caliber at a lower rate of fire, it would just make sense that it's a lot more controllable that way.

I don't think article games are going to get too much into the ergonomics of a weapon, but in terms of just weight, rate of fire, and caliber fired, this should be a more accurate, controllable weapon than the M4, but when you have something that's a little bit more accurate than an M4 but only slightly slower, that's why you start getting into some potential balance issues.

Also read:

So what do I mean by this? Well, for starters, the M4 and the Attack 56 both have the same aim-down sight speed, which is not very balanced, and in my opinion, they also both have the same sprint-to-fire speed, which also doesn't make much sense to me seeing how the TAC 56 is supposed to be considerably heavier.

fps topics

It also doesn't make sense that the M4 is only ever so slightly faster when it comes to ads, walking, and strafing speeds, as well as sprint speeds and tactical sprint speeds. Basically, the M4 is for people who want a higher rate of fire and slightly faster movement speed, but, unfortunately, this is not a customizable weapon.

You can make this gun faster than a default M4, while still having the controllability, versatility, and long-range adaptability of the TAC 56, which is a little concerning, at least in terms of balance. I mean, look at this incredibly simple build on the screen here now; this is taken from SIM. And, this build only aims down sight two milliseconds slower than default, making it incredibly controllable.

I've tested out this build myself, and it's faster than a stock M4 while being an absolute laser beam capable of three shotting people to the upper torso with a weapon firing at 625 RPM and capable of three shotting people to the upper torso and head with absolute laser beam like accuracy while moving around as fast as an M4.

fps articles

I think there's some pretty good ground here for a Nerf gun. I don't think the gun should have a massive damage difference, though. I'm going to propose two little nerfs here because I believe the attack 56 is a little bit out of control. It's only moderately slower than something like an M4, and I think it should be a little bit heavier and built to be a little bit slower, and I think the attachments that speed it up, like the TV Cardinal stock and the 12-inch tack short barrel, should have more downsides than they currently do, like less recoil stability, less bullet velocity, and less range, because by using the short barrel, you're only missing about five meters off your three-shot kill range; it goes from around 28 to around 23, and again, that's not that bad, and you can do a little bit of extra tuning to.

gaming

Tune that up a little bit, like I think the scar versus the M4 already is a little bit glaring, just completely naked, but when you compare the scar with attachments and tuning to an M4 with attachments and tuning, there's a reason that people in ranked are running the scar attack, 56, but it's a scar out, as we all know, and one of the big reasons the scar wasn't adopted by our military or by militaries in general is that it's heavy.

It's just a heavier, clunkier rifle. I'm not saying it's impossibly heavy and I'm not saying it's unusable, but there's a reason it didn't replace the M4. First of all, the real reason for that is that it's too expensive in real life. The heaviness and the ergonomics just didn't help at all. I think that could translate into the game here by just having a little bit worse printout time, aim down sight speed, and movement speed, and I think the attachments that make up for those slower shortcomings could maybe bring it more in line with an AR platform thing like the M4 or the m13b or something like that.

gaming opinions

If you wanted to bring it more in line, I think you should have more accuracy downsides. Basically, give the two high mobility stocks more of a recoil increase, and the same thing should go for the attack short barrel. Then, I think the longest barrel should also have more shortcomings than it currently does.

I think the reason you should want to use attack 56 is that you want a heavier, more versatile, and more controllable AR, but that heavy, controllable part should come at the cost of mobility, not in addition to the mobility it has in this build on screen. Damning i honestly don't know how you can just condone this level of accuracy and mobility.