So I know there are tons of threads talking about "what I think needs to change with the game", so obviously the most logical thing for me to do is make another one right? Ayyyy, let's get it.
First off, I want to say that regardless of everything I am about to list, the game is actually really well designed and mostly executed well. I do not know of another game in open beta that runs as smoothly as Ironsight does, which is highly surprising for a free to play game. Anyways, onto the things I want to touch on.
One of the biggest problems that Ironsight is facing right now is the fact that the servers are unstable as all get out, to the point that it makes people not even want to play on certain days. NA seems to have received the worst of this over the past couple weeks with multiple different issues arising during times when nobody is around to address them. There is also the issue that even when an issue is being investigated, you have people saying things like "oh it works fine for me" and such, which leads me to believe that the main issue happening is that the servers are running at almost full load during these times. What happens when you run servers at almost full load is cause many inconsistencies happen, which means some people will have fine games whereas others will have screwy games even though both are happening at the same time. For instance, just last night I was noticing a much worse movement delay was happening on NA, but it wasn't consistent, as it only happened during certain games, but was still happening often. Other people were reporting issues too, but then when it was being looked into, "everything was fine" was the result. This is definitely something that can be caused by servers running at close to full load because constantly context switching can cause handling of movement and other things to take longer than normal (google "context switching" if you want more details on why it is bad). Obviously I could be completely wrong here, but thankfully this is also something easy to check by monitoring server utilization during these periods of time (anything over 75% utilization can cause issues in some cases). The bottom line though is that something with the servers is causing inconsistent gameplay and inconsistency can be the death of a game like Ironsight.
I'm honestly glad that Wiple isn't taking everything the players cry and complain about and immediately nerfing/buffing things because a lot of what players say about different guns really makes me call into question the logic that some of said players are using. That isn't to say that they are all wrong or what I'm going to suggest is all right, but a lot of what I hear being suggested about guns are things that make it obvious that they haven't even take the time to use said guns to find out about what they are suggesting.
And before I get into specifics for guns, I want to clarify how I personally classify certain guns (in general, of course within each category there is still some variation like semi-auto snipers and assault rifles). Sniper rifles are your long range (like the open part on Outpost) "lock down a specific area" guns. You want a sniper rifle to take wide open areas and lock them down, and at that range they should basically be uncontested in a purely gun fight (grenades and what not change that). Non-snipers should have to out strategize the sniper to get in closer before they have a chance (flanking/flashes/stuns/drones/etc). Assault rifles are your mid range kings (like the semi-open parts inside of Mart). They should be able to catch a sniper offguard at that range (unless a sniper is hardscoping a corner or something) and should outrange smgs and shotguns (damage fall off wise). SMGs should be your close-to-mid range kings (like the insides of Outpost and Ironwork). The only way an SMG should be viable is while running and gunning in order to close the distance between them and their targets and catch them off guard. Finally, shotguns should be your point-blank uncontested kings where you catch people around corners or otherwise catching them off guard. They should be an easy kill at a couple meters but become somewhat useless beyond that because of falloff damage (unless you add a slug shotgun then that kinda messes with this generalization). Now onto some of the specifics.
SMGs in general could use more damage falloff because if you ads with most of them (to take away hipfire inaccuracy which is a different matter) you can actually go toe-to-toe with an AR at mid range which shouldn't be happening. Sure, most people aren't going to ads with an SMG, but even with hipfire you can get lucky and win at mid range. A good example of range for an SMG is actually the P90 where the AR player actually has to misplay quite a bit in order to lose the fight at mid-range. That also brings up the issue of the Ar57 and P90 however, which outclass most other SMGs due to their 50 rounds per mag, which is insanely strong in such a fast paced game. I understand that it is realistic to have that many rounds, but it means that you need to sacrifice somewhere else in order to maintain that advantage. You shouldn't have things like the Ar57 and MP7A1 having almost identical stats, but one with a 50 rounds and the other with 30 rounds (yes I know it has extended mags, but I'm talking base stats) because it gives no reason to use the MP7A1 except for the "I don't want to use the OP gun" argument. The P90 at least sacrifices pretty heavily in the range department, but the Ar57 has no downside like that. You either need to also decrease its range or base damage in order to bring it in line with other SMGs. The P90 could also use a tiny damage nerf as well, but not as much as the Ar57 if the Ar57's range is left untouched. Then on the otherside of the spectrum you have the PP-2000 which has fairly balanced stats except for having a 20 round mag. It has almost the same stats as the PP-90M1, but with less damage and 10 less rounds in a mag, and the PP-90M1 itself is on the lower end of the spectrum of SMGs. In reality, the PP-2000 shouldn't even be a primary weapon with the way that it is setup right now. You either need to take it as is and make it a secondary or buff the amount of rounds in a mag or the damage by quite a bit. You can't have a weapon with such a small magazine, with such a high fire rate, that does basically the same damage as the other SMGs, it just gives you no reason to play it because you'll fire at one person and already have to reload whereas most other SMGs can reliably get 2-3 kills in that same time frame.
ARs in general are actually in a decent spot from what I can tell. If anything they could possibly use a very tiny increase in range, but that's arguable and marginal at best. The main two guns that tend to stick out are the HK417 and the M39 EMR as their recoil makes them hard to use at mid-to-long range (versus snipers) and having to use one of their two attachment slots for the hair trigger causes them to fall behind other ARs at mid range. Right now the semi-auto ARs feel like they have the kick of almost a sniper rifle, without any of the damage benefits of sniper rifles, and if you try to use one of your attachment slots up for a recoil-based attachment, then guess what, both of your attachment slots are now taken. This means that you do not get to take advantage of things like sights/silencers/barrels that other rifles get to hold over your head. There are multiple solutions to these issues, like giving semi-auto assault rifles three attachments compared to the normal two, or removing the hair trigger attachment and making them have the hair trigger fire rate by default or just decreasing the recoil overall in general (which you supposedly did once already, but it is still an issue).
Shotguns in general are just inconsistent garbage as they are right now. You can be a meter away from them, aim dead center chest and not kill them. Yes, shotguns should be inconsistent and have horrible damage fall off, but that shouldn't be an issue within like two meters, which is what it feels like right now. If you can get close enough to an enemy and have the aim to hit them in the middle of the chest, you should basically be guaranteed a kill at that point.
LMGs are actually in a half decent state right now, just they take a special kind of player in order to utilize them correctly. In such a fast paced game, being slowed down to the level you are with an LMG is not something a lot of players can deal with and makes the LMGs feel much weaker than they actually are. If you have a player that actually plays around the slow walk speed of the PKP, they can actually completely stomp in this game at most ranges. However, the PKP and Ultimax kind of overshadow the two other LMGs because the Ultimax excels at lower damage, high fire rate, and the opposite with the PKP at higher damage, low fire rate, which leaves the other two in a tricky situation of usefulness. Though I have not used the other two a whole lot so I do not have a whole lot of input in regard to how to address this discrepancy.
Continued in next post due to character count...