Response to Wolf's K2 Review (#owned)

[[MPGH]Hero]

Well any ways, you did point out flaws. The recoil of the K-2 is not that horrible for me, actually.
Never trust the status they show on when you hover your mouse towards your weapon.
Spray pattern is tight...
So a Tight Spray Pattern + Somewhat Heavy Recoil = Tight recoil spray.

[Wolf]

In this thread, I will discuss the merits and flaws regarding Wolf's view of the K2. I read his review and noted that there were several...instances of bias in his writing.

None of this is intended as a personal insult to him, simply as a means of giving the MPGH population a correct view of the K2.



You used the K2's "image" stats as opposed to the actual stats of the K2.

In terms of accuracy, the m4 is the best rifle in the game. The k2 has 4 bullets before recoil really takes hold up close, and yes the m4 has 3. The m4, however, shoots more accurately while moving, and recoil resets far quicker than the K2. Therefore, the m4 has higher accuracy.

In terms of power, the K2 has a slight advantage over the m4, being three shots to kill to the body (as opposed to the m4's...three). But, the K2 does slightly more damage. However! At distance, THE K2 does less damage than the m4a1!

Ok, I said accuracy/power, ie accuracy divided by power. It means the power makes up for the accuracy the m4a1 has over it. And just fyi, these reviews are meant to be a PLAYERS perspective, not someone who is always checking what they hit at what distance




This is, perhaps, the stupidest thing I have ever heard someone write in an analysis of a gun's merits. Pick this gun because people won't gun steal you? Are you high? Are you (expletive deleted) high?

Moving on.

I simply meant people who pick up guns generally don't pick up the grey ones, they go for the gold/silver/camo/red ones.

He listed his gameplay stats (in ghost mode, where the gun matters very little; if you know where the ghost is you will kill them), not how he used the gun, or it's advantages, or anything relative to why a player should use the gun.

It's first thoughts, I simply relayed my first game with it. My first thought: This is a brilliantly underused gun.

This is true. The AK is a close-up gun (in general), while the m4a1 is a distance gun (in general). The K2 is a marvelous blend of both guns, combining up-close firepower with long-range accuracy.



You think it's only good because the CrossFire developers won't fix it's overpowered stats? Why doesn't every player in WoGL use a K2?


Because I feel you can do well with any assault rifle, and as i've said before it's underused.


The K2's reload is terribly slow in comparison to the m4a1 or the AK47. In addition, its fire-rate is slower than the m4 as well.


I never notice the difference in reloads because they are pretty much similar.


This is true, but I don't like how he is spinning his analysis in favour of the K2.

Every assault rifle, you can one-shot across the map with. Duh? It's a headshot-to-kill.

The K2 has a sharp damage-over-distance loss, dealing only 23 damage in the chest across Long A at Black Widow.

You right ever assault rifle CAN one shot accross the map, doesn't mean the k2 isn't better than the m4's and doesn't mean the ak isn't better at it in than the k2. Being able to do something doesn't mean someone can't do it better than you.


Why does this matter?

A review gives every aspect, the price is very important. Due to your vip you've obviously spent a lot on the game and do not remember when you were new to the game and had to save up money.


This is absolutely and blatantly not true.

The k2 is a balanced mix between the AK47 and the M4A1. Both guns, however, are better than the K2.

K2 vs. M4
Fire Rate: M4, M4+1
Reload time: M4, M4+1
Damage rate: K2, K2+1.
Accuracy cooldown: M4, M4+1
Recoil (over first 5 bullets): K2, K2+1.
Weapon Weight: M4, M4+1

The M4 wins 3-2 over the 6 most important points of a gun.

K2 vs. AK47
Fire Rate: AK47, AK47+1.
Reload time: AK47, AK+1.
Damage rate: AK47, AK47+1.
Accuracy cooldown: K2, K2+1
Recoil (over first 5 bullets): K2, K2+1
Weapon Weight: K2, K2+1.

The K2 ties with the AK47 3-3 over the 6 most important points of a gun.

Saying "imo it's better than the m4" is stupid, ignorant, noobish, and so many other things that I don't even know what to say to it.

"the important points" are wrong. Simply I play better with the k2 than the m4, and better with the ak than the k2. These are my reviews about how I feel the gun plays, not how the developers made it.

A skilled player wins matches, not guns. Use what works for you. I agree that the K2 is underused, and a decent gun. However, it is not any better than either of the other two.

It can though, you said it would beat the ak at long range (I don't agree, but what ever) and you said it would beat the m4a1 at close range.


That's true.

People say it's a scrub gun because they QQ every time they die. They'll do the same to Tars, QBZs, XM8s, and everything else.

And, this gun is designed to be a hybrid between the AK47 and the M4A1. Up close, you will be out power-housed by the AK47, and far away you will be out-sniped by an m4. However, it is balanced in every situation, and is a very good gun!

Just to stress the point, my reviews are my point of view, that's it. Not how the gun was meant to be made or anything, simply what i FEEL is right and wrong about it. I would say your a mathematician/scientist due to the fact you always think about the numbers.

Cheers!

@B0ttl3 (Didn't reply straight away because I was in switzerland)

All my responses in the quote in red.

hes just now on a shame

@Live it's called having and life, and not posting a thread saying im leaving because that is just utter spam. If you asked anyone who actually talks to me outside mpgh you'd have known i was in switzerland, not to mention I hardly visit the cf section really so unless someone mentioned me I wouldn't have even realised this thread was here.

[tdct]

@B0ttl3 So you accuse him of being bias and correct it by creating another bias thread

[B0ttl3]

@B0ttl3 So you accuse him of being bias and correct it by creating another bias thread

@tdct 'Cept mine's not biased. Any statement in my post can easily be backed up by game stats / professional play / facts.

I appreciate the joke-attempt.

Just to stress the point, my reviews are my point of view, that's it. Not how the gun was meant to be made or anything, simply what i FEEL is right and wrong about it. I would say your a mathematician/scientist due to the fact you always think about the numbers.

@Wolf I disagree with an entirely opinion-based review of a gun being sticky'd. If you play very well with the k2, by all means use it. But a thread saying "the k2 is just plain better than the m4" shouldn't be up top.

Nice find, you are helping him improve in making better reviews in the future

This was the goal of the thread. And to troll. A little. But mostly this.

[Lord of legend]

very cool reniwe.

[nickoo]

I agree with you

[tdct]

@tdct 'Cept mine's not biased. Any statement in my post can easily be backed up by game stats / professional play / facts.

I appreciate the joke-attempt.




@Wolf I disagree with an entirely opinion-based review of a gun being sticky'd. If you play very well with the k2, by all means use it. But a thread saying "the k2 is just plain better than the m4" shouldn't be up top.




This was the goal of the thread. And to troll. A little. But mostly this.

@B0ttl3 You're opinion is a fact whereas his an opinion?
Narcissistic

[Wolf]

@tdct

@Wolf I disagree with an entirely opinion-based review of a gun being sticky'd. If you play very well with the k2, by all means use it. But a thread saying "the k2 is just plain better than the m4" shouldn't be up top.

@B0ttl3

In this game, the stats hardly matter. Reviewing a gun on it's stats would mean the uzi wouldn't be a bad gun, yet its terrible. It would mean the dsr is a lot better than the awm, but yet the awm is better? You are too mathematical with your statements. You chose a gun by how good it looks, I chose a gun by how well I play with it. Also I never said the k2 was plain better I simply meant I like it better than the m4, but I like the ak better than the k2.

And you obviously didn't make this to help me, you made it to voice your opinion and make it look like you were better than me. It just back fire heavily. My response to yours was about as long as your orginal post, yet you replied with less than 5 lines of words, which I have replied with this. I think about what I write giving more than one arguement each time I post, whereas you just repeat the same thing over and a over which is just your opinion which is what your arguing about to me in the first place. You don't have any logic arguing like that.

[B0ttl3]

@B0ttl3 You're opinion is a fact whereas his an opinion?
Narcissistic

Facts aren't opinions.

Troll.


Anyway...let me point out the numerous flaws in Wolf's self-prioritizing response.

@B0ttl3

In this game, the stats hardly matter.

What on earth are you talking about? The k2 reloads slower than the m4. That hardly matters? The k2 does less damage than the AK. That hardly matters? Need I go on...?

Reviewing a gun on it's stats would mean the uzi wouldn't be a bad gun, yet its terrible.

What? The uzi is stat-wise and tactic-wise a terrible gun. It has terrible damage-per bullet. 3 for a headshot. Terrible recoil. Absolutely no range. How on Earth is that a stat-wise good gun?

It would mean the dsr is a lot better than the awm, but yet the awm is better?

What? The AWM is better than the AWM stat-wise, because of the scope delay when you quickswitch. How on Earth is the DSR better?

You are too mathematical with your statements. You chose a gun by how good it looks, I chose a gun by how well I play with it.

That has zero relevance to anything in this thread, other than reinforcing that your review was opinion-based.

Also I never said the k2 was plain better

Yes, actually, you did.

the k2 is just plain better than the m4

I simply meant I like it better than the m4, but I like the ak better than the k2.

Yet again, your review is opinion-based.

And you obviously didn't make this to help me,

I made it because I wanted to get your terrible review un-stickied and make you a better reviewer in the process.

you made it to voice your opinion and make it look like you were better than me. It just back fire heavily.

I am better than you. But, that's not why I made this thread. See above. Also, how did it backfire? Three-quarters of the posts were laughing at you.

My response to yours was about as long as your orginal post, yet you replied with less than 5 lines of words, which I have replied with this.

So you're saying that because you write longer responses, they're somehow smarter...?

Gosh. I guess everything I've learned when studying the philosophy of argument is wrong.

I think about what I write

Let me refer to you something you said in your post earlier:

It just back fire heavily.

giving more than one arguement each time I post, whereas you just repeat the same thing over and a over

Because I can prove that I'm correct with the same information, I do not have to constantly create new arguments or scenarios in which I could possibly be correct

which is just your opinion

I based all of my analysis of your comments on facts. How on Earth is that just my opinion?

which is what your arguing about to me in the first place. You don't have any logic arguing like that.[/FONT]

I backed up my opinion (that your review was biased and unfair to be stickied) with irrefutable facts. That is, actually, the definition of logical argument.



You just got burnt, roasted, torn apart, destroyed, annihilated, decimated, and a million other grammatically incorrect verbs.


GOOD GAME, THANKS FOR PLAYING @Wolf

[xXBrokenBonezXx]

Facts aren't opinions.

Troll.


Anyway...let me point out the numerous flaws in Wolf's self-prioritizing response.



What on earth are you talking about? The k2 reloads slower than the m4. That hardly matters? The k2 does less damage than the AK. That hardly matters? Need I go on...?




What? The uzi is stat-wise and tactic-wise a terrible gun. It has terrible damage-per bullet. 3 for a headshot. Terrible recoil. Absolutely no range. How on Earth is that a stat-wise good gun?




What? The AWM is better than the AWM stat-wise, because of the scope delay when you quickswitch. How on Earth is the DSR better?



That has zero relevance to anything in this thread, other than reinforcing that your review was opinion-based.



Yes, actually, you did.





Yet again, your review is opinion-based.




I made it because I wanted to get your terrible review un-stickied and make you a better reviewer in the process.




I am better than you. But, that's not why I made this thread. See above. Also, how did it backfire? Three-quarters of the posts were laughing at you.




So you're saying that because you write longer responses, they're somehow smarter...?

Gosh. I guess everything I've learned when studying the philosophy of argument is wrong.





Let me refer to you something you said in your post earlier:






Because I can prove that I'm correct with the same information, I do not have to constantly create new arguments or scenarios in which I could possibly be correct



I based all of my analysis of your comments on facts. How on Earth is that just my opinion?





I backed up my opinion (that your review was biased and unfair to be stickied) with irrefutable facts. That is, actually, the definition of logical argument.



You just got burnt, roasted, torn apart, destroyed, annihilated, decimated, and a million other grammatically incorrect verbs.


GOOD GAME, THANKS FOR PLAYING @Wolf

ok bro not trying to offend you or anything but @Wolf is a way better reviewer than you.
He has been doing this shit for months.
So dont say shit about him which i know you will regret.

[[MPGH]Time]

K-2 For the win

[Tristan]

He ripped u apart.

He ripped u apart.

[Karma]

@BoTTL3
@DomoGenesis
dawm that just went
wolf just got blown to fckn smithereens LOL FTW u just dropped the bomb on wolfXD

[Arimu]

dude u should start writing way more reviews, you should even apply for EDITOR for CF, you have a very extensive knowledge

[Wolf]

Facts aren't opinions.

Troll.


Anyway...let me point out the numerous flaws in Wolf's self-prioritizing response.



What on earth are you talking about? The k2 reloads slower than the m4. That hardly matters? The k2 does less damage than the AK. That hardly matters? Need I go on...?

No I mean game stats, as in the ones it shows when you put you mouse over it.


What? The uzi is stat-wise and tactic-wise a terrible gun. It has terrible damage-per bullet. 3 for a headshot. Terrible recoil. Absolutely no range. How on Earth is that a stat-wise good gun?

No as in STATS, the rof easily makes up for that fact.


What? The AWM is better than the AWM stat-wise, because of the scope delay when you quickswitch. How on Earth is the DSR better?

No again the speed of it would easily make up for it as in STATS.

That has zero relevance to anything in this thread, other than reinforcing that your review was opinion-based.

That's my point. It is opinion-based, my point.

Yet again, your review is opinion-based.

That's my point.


I made it because I wanted to get your terrible review un-stickied and make you a better reviewer in the process.

Maybe pm a minion/mod?


I am better than you. But, that's not why I made this thread. See above. Also, how did it backfire? Three-quarters of the posts were laughing at you.

Your better than me? Go make a full review then.


So you're saying that because you write longer responses, they're somehow smarter...?

Gosh. I guess everything I've learned when studying the philosophy of argument is wrong.


No i'm claiming you didn't take into account what I said, just repeated the same argument over and over.


Let me refer to you something you said in your post earlier:


Because I can prove that I'm correct with the same information, I do not have to constantly create new arguments or scenarios in which I could possibly be correct

No my arguments counter yours, yet you don't counter them?

I based all of my analysis of your comments on facts. How on Earth is that just my opinion?

It was. Your opinion is that you don't like how my reviews are opinion.


I backed up my opinion (that your review was biased and unfair to be stickied) with irrefutable facts. That is, actually, the definition of logical argument.

No you didn't. It was your opinion. Everyone else likes my reviews, you don't. Fair enough.

You just got burnt, roasted, torn apart, destroyed, annihilated, decimated, and a million other grammatically incorrect verbs.


GOOD GAME, THANKS FOR PLAYING @Wolf

Thanks for that, you sounds about 12 years old.

People gotta get off your nuts. Your literally just repeating the same things over and over

@B0ttl3