My In-depth Take On Ironsight

  • 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.


    Servers:

    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.


    Balancing:

    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...

  • And finally the highly argued sniper rifles. Overall, I am of the thought process that sniper rifles are not as overpowered as people seem to think they are, however that is not to say that I think they are fine as they are right now. I have noticed by watching streamers that are insanely good quick-scopers, that snipers gain the accuracy of being scoped in almost immediately after starting the "scoping" animation and can fire perfectly accurate shots without even being able to see through the scope. I am not even talking about in point-blank situations, as I have personally seen a player that could hit people across the middle of Ironwork before the scope even makes it halfway up to his face. Scope accuracy should not come into play until you are fully scoped in, because it simply doesn't make sense to have it any other way. Why should your shot go perfectly where your scope is aimed when you haven't even looked through your scope yet? This is why running and gunning with the bolt-action snipers is so effective right now, because they don't even have to wait to for the scope animation to finish in order to actually fire. The second part of snipers being fairly strong is that when moving while scoped, your crosshair barely moves at all to the point that I, as someone who snipes somewhat often, almost disregard the sway completely and have pulled off plenty of strafing shots that really shouldn't have been as easy as they were. At mid range (where assault rifles are strongest) moving while scoped in should really make your crosshair move almost the entire height of a player character if not slightly more, to where it makes it easy for you to end up hitting a player in the foot or over their head when trying to strafe kill an assault rifle user in their designed range, instead of now where you either end up hitting their head or stomach, which obviously still kills them. These two modifications would address both the issues of snipers being overly strong at their unintended ranges (close and mid range) while still making them powerful in the right hands. I know plenty of people would say that even this would not be good enough and that snipers shouldn't have a one-hit mechanic unless it is a headshot, but making any changes to that causes the bolt-actions to be useless since the semi-auto sniper rifles are the ones with the one-shot headshots (with faster fire rate), and if you nerf those to not be one-shot headshots, then you have placed them down in the territory of the semi-auto assault rifles. This would leave the only true option for removing the so-called "easy" one-hit mechanic to be removing the bolt-action sniper rifles completely from the game, which I am going to take a guess and say is never going to happen.


    Ranked:

    Everyone knows ranked is broken and needs many modifications before you can call it "good" as even the Community Managers have said so. However, since that is true, it should not be in the game at all at this point. All having a broken ranked mode ingame does is make it so that people who care about ranked try it out say "man this sucks" and quit the game for a different one with a better ranked mode. On the other hand, if you don't have ranked available until it is actually ready, you get those same players that come in and ask if there is a ranked mode and people can say "not currently, but it is being worked on", which is completely understandable for an open beta game and you don't end up losing a player just because you have something available that is nowhere near close to ready. It is easier to explain to a player that something new is coming in the future than to explain to them that something is going to get fixed in the future, since most of the time they won't even give you a chance to explain the latter.


    Netcode:

    I am not going to go into much detail on this since it is probably the most talked about topic (pretty much everything that needs to be said has already been said elsewhere), but to put it simply, change from TCP to UDP and decrease the movement delay by a significant amount. That's all there is to it.


    Supply Boxes:

    I am sure that plenty of people could complain about the chances of getting certain items in certain boxes, but the reality is that these skins in the boxes are the only source of income for Ironsight and the chances have to be low in order for the game to survive. However, with that being said, the chances for getting non-skinned versions of each gun should definitely be higher so that newer players that are getting their fast supply boxes from levels 1-20 are able to receive at least a couple different types of guns before their trial guns run out of time. I am currently level 58 and have spent all my excess GP on supply boxes and I have still yet to receive even half of the guns in the game, which is absolutely ridiculous in my opinion. Sure, you could argue that you don't need all the guns, but you shouldn't need an absurb amount of hours in the game or money spent on the game in order to finally have your choice of any weapon. Also, increasing the rate on the normal guns does not decrease skin revenue in the slightest because nobody is spending real money in order to buy non-skinned guns straight up with GP, nor in order to buy GP supply boxes. This would be a great quality of life change for everyone, but especially for newer players to be able to try multiple different guns without having to worry about renting guns they know nothing about or picking up whatever guns happen to drop in an actual match.


    With alllllll that being said, I am so sorry that those handful of you that actually had to read all the way through this essay of a post. I did not really intend for it to be this long or in-depth but it just kind of happened. I also apologize for any grammatical mistakes as I did not proofread any of this :D. I would definitely like to hear what others feel about the different points that I brought up though, as these things are just how I personally view the game.


    tl;dr - If I knew a good way to cut this down to size, I would have done that in the first place instead of typing all this up.

  • TL:DR


    Game needs more servers

    SMGs: need more falloff and some greatly outclass others

    ARs: DMRs are outclassed by the other ARs

    Shotguns: are broken

    LMGs: Are fine

    Snipers: Quick Scoping needs a nerf

    Ranked: is Broken

    Netcode: change from TCP to UDP and decrease the movement delay by a significant amount

    Supply Boxes: How Ironsight makes money


    Your welcome

  • If I understood you correctly, I disagree with a few things you said

    I will start with the Snipers. No they are not fine. I do not think it is fair for anyone to go up against an instant kill weapon that can be used as a run and gun. Not only that, it is part of the EMR/DMR problem. If the Bolt Actions were not so powerful, the EMR/DMR's would find more of a use in the game. I did propose a fix to it in one of my prior threads. Based on feedback and comments I did improve on it (outside of the post)

    Remove the hold breath function. Put in a bipod/deploy action/function for the Snipers and MG's. Then increase the breathing and sway to a point where the Snipers are forced to be crouched, proned, or deployed. If people want a run and gun medium-long range ish weapon, it should be the EMR/DMR's

    As for the MG's, they are not fine. Only the MG 3 matters as it has the best stats. Even if you got the weapon attachment, and perk to lower its recoil, it is insanely hard to control. Good luck getting a good bullet grouping. You don't need a breathe or sway mechanic for it but, at the least give it a bipod/deploy function. That way it is easier to control, and can do its job of point defense

    Ranked games should only be fixed when/if Ironsight gets a sense of direction. It is a run and game right now with no real identity. I explained that in some of my prior posts but, the TLDR is that they need to figure out if they are going for a tactical game, or keep it as run and gun but, with some tactical elements

    At first I did think shotguns were broken but, I later realized that they are inconsistent sometimes. I do agree with the community on that, and that they should be a primary weapon not a secondary

    Here is a Google Document that lists a bunch of change suggestions and other things. I think you will find it interesting

  • If I understood you correctly, I disagree with a few things you said

    I will start with the Snipers. No they are not fine. I do not think it is fair for anyone to go up against an instant kill weapon that can be used as a run and gun. Not only that, it is part of the EMR/DMR problem. If the Bolt Actions were not so powerful, the EMR/DMR's would find more of a use in the game. I did propose a fix to it in one of my prior threads. Based on feedback and comments I did improve on it (outside of the post)

    Remove the hold breath function. Put in a bipod/deploy action/function for the Snipers and MG's. Then increase the breathing and sway to a point where the Snipers are forced to be crouched, proned, or deployed. If people want a run and gun medium-long range ish weapon, it should be the EMR/DMR's

    "Overall, I am of the thought process that sniper rifles are not as overpowered as people seem to think they are, however that is not to say that I think they are fine as they are right now."


    Did you even read the sniper rifle section? Both of the suggestions I gave address the run and gun aspect of sniper rifles both at point blank range (quick scopers) and at mid range (ads walking). As for your bipod/deploy option, as fast paced as the game is, I feel like having to deploy a bolt-action or even having to go prone in order to use the bipod (if there is no window/ledge nearby) would basically completely remove them from the game because while bolt-actions shouldn't have massive mobility, they still have to participate in very mobile gameplay. Whatever they end up doing to bolt-actions has to still allow them to be just as useful as other guns (otherwise nobody would ever have a reason to use them), just not as easy as they are now because of the one-shot mechanic.

  • I read the sniper rifle section

    I see there was a miscommunication somewhere along the way. I wasn't trying to say that you have to be prone to use the bipod. I was trying to say crouch or prone (no bipod) to get a reasonable shot. The bipod will help you achieve a much better shot if you do use it though (while proned or deployed on say a window)

    I think even with a Bipod, or being forced to a crouch/prone position, that you will still have them as run and gun weapons. You do not have to run far for them to be used (given their range)

  • I have noticed by watching streamers that are insanely good quick-scopers, that snipers gain the accuracy of being scoped in almost immediately after starting the "scoping" animation and can fire perfectly accurate shots without even being able to see through the scope. I am not even talking about in point-blank situations, as I have personally seen a player that could hit people across the middle of Ironwork before the scope even makes it halfway up to his face. Scope accuracy should not come into play until you are fully scoped in, because it simply doesn't make sense to have it any other way. Why should your shot go perfectly where your scope is aimed when you haven't even looked through your scope yet?

    This, tbh fam

    I think they should make the accuracy kick in after like half a second or something as well. Let's all be "hardscopers"

  • Oh yes, I take it you don't like the avatar....what in the world will we do now ?

    It was not a matter of like or dislike but more something like....

    "Woah if that guy find it appropriate to do so here What might he do next ?" rofl

    OK, Mr. glowing cat :D I hope you enjoy this avatar then... :))