Optional choice? Sniping - Run and gun, what goes in between?

[I <3 U]

...I think having iron sights for guns lacking a scope would be cool.

:)

affirmative.

roger that.

[CurdyMilk]

I'm trying to figure out what type is choice is not optional...

[JrvUnleashed]

It's a waste of a button, just move slowly to increase accuracy, no need to have a button for it.

Yes, because there are never enough keys on the keyboard  ::)

[DreadStunLock]

Haha Jrv, you almost made me think that PS is going to be for a console xD

Agent@ That is why you suck at CT.

[Farley4Fan]

What?  This is already a tactical FPS.  They aren't gonna be like "oh I was gonna download this free game but then I saw it didnt have iron sights and i was all like EFF THAT ISH!!"

[Spark Mandriller]

It is kinda broke IMHO...

What's broken about it?

[DreadStunLock]

Wait you guys are unhappy because there are no Iron Sights, or you want Iron Sights? Or you think it's unbalanced? Because I think, sacrificing movement for a tighter bullet spread is way worth it?

[Spark Mandriller]

Sights are dumb. If you're using a rifle you can just use the scope on that. If you're not using a rifle then you kinda gave up the ability to do long distance shooting for spam/close range damage. Why do you want to make all the guns the same? That's just silly.

[DreadStunLock]

Well, no, but guns like Uzi wouldn't hurt to have an Iron Sight, + Assault Rifle is almost like a sniper rifle, and Iron Sights only give you a tiny zoom with a tighter bullet spread and disadvantage of it, is the fact that you can't move :/

[Spark Mandriller]

Yeah, it would hurt, 'cause it makes the different guns too similar. What's the point of giving a choice between them if they can all do the same things? Let them have their strengths and weaknesses and choosing between them will be a lot more interesting.

[DreadStunLock]

I guess, but how is a tight spread similiar to other guns? I just don't get it.

[Cronky]

I think this is one of those "Less is more" situations.

Adding sights, while a logical progression on CT's formula, does haze the line between each of the guns uses if given an advantage on top of the few guns already inherent pros and cons. (in my opinion). I could go on for a few pages with unrelated text, but I'll stop myself... In the end, while it will affect the game if put in, probably not drastically. Does seem like an unneeded advantage to the Merc gameplay that is already in their favor within an average round.

Being stopped when using it would definitely be dumb though. Slowed down? Okay, but the use of the sights in the way you said gets pretty bad when you'd only be using it to kill someone right in front of you... or someone running down a straight hallway (because you couldn't move when using the sights).

(I think I'll just throw in this next part just because)

What they need is a gadget for the Merc that is a sidearm pistol (thinking CoD here). Faster to whip that out than reload your primary gun, but not as powerful as it either. I could see using the sight on that to aim.

[DreadStunLock]

To be honest, I wouldn't mind if a Mercenary had a knife, in reality, when you are a mercenary/soldier/hunter, you always need a knife. That's just my opinion.

[knooger]

To be honest, I wouldn't mind if a Mercenary had a knife, in reality, when you are a mercenary/soldier/hunter, you always need a knife. That's just my opinion.

It's not reality :P
Anyway I remember there was thread/posts about secondary weapon.

[DreadStunLock]

And that thread said what? Come on, Knoob, not much use of that post if you just going to say there was a thread :/