8 points is just 2 decent perks, and you have to choose 3 bad ones to get it at a 7 kills. Assault at 5 give you a dog, and streak kills count for your next streak, and you don't lose them when you die. So you are claiming 7 kills to get a few good perks and 3 weak perks (which you lose immediately when you die) is equal to the assault or support kill streaks. Then why isn't anyone using it? And why aren't you? Because it's been nerfed to the point of uselessness. And the amount of people using it is the evidence.
I actually DO use it because, unlike many people of the community, I like to extensively try stuff rather than bash it and label it "useless" without ever trying it at all.
And amount of people alone is not evident of anything, especially still this early. Otherwise, by that logic, the MSBS should never have been nerfed since not that many people were using it compared to other ARs. The AK-12, Remington R5, Honey Badger, Bulldog, and such would've been nerfed LONG before the MSBS.
MW3 itself had plenty of examples of stuff people initially thought (or even still think) is garbage. The MK14, for instance, was labeled as useless for quite a while simply because it was semi-auto, and people didn't want to waste their time having to actually pick and choose their shots more carefully rather than just hold the trigger to spam bullets with a full auto AR. Or the PM-9 was seen as useless compared to the MP7 and the other SMGs, and it wasn't until near the end of the MW3 year did more and more people start learning of its potential through those who actually decided to use it for themselves. The USAS-12 (and pretty much every other shotgun) was seen as pointless compared to the Striker, but again, after more people began actually trying it, it picked up more use as time went on because people learned for themselves that stuff isn't always as great/bad as they see mentioned on forums.
They cant be taking it 'back to gunbattles' because in ghosts gunbattles are over the second someone sees you due to the low health. In previous CODs u had time to jump out of they way of ur enemies' bullets to try to win the gunbattle. now its like 2 bullets and its over
How on earth does killing someone not show skill? If youre not paying attention and/or have slow reflexes, why should you be allowed to kill someone who is paying attention and does have superior reflexes?
You are probably a camper telling from your posts. so when u sit in ur corner aiming down ur sights at an path waiting for someone like me to walk past, i should get a fair chance to dodge ur shots and try to kill u instead of me just dying instantly. And if im not paying attention then u'll still easily be able to kill me but if i am paying attention and i do have quick reflexes there's still no chance for me to win because I die so quick. your comment, sir, is invalid.
Wow, calling him a camper and his post invalid just because he doesn't agree with your complaint that's been a complaint in pretty much every CoD game? That's sad..
Again, you are more than likely on the bad side of lag. Otherwise, get rid of the delusion in your head that you're such a godly CoD player and accept that you won't win every gun battle. Much of CoD gun battles comes down to luck like because you managed to hit someone and making them flinch, causing their gunfire to rise up and give them a lucky headshot on you, thus killing you faster.
Not to mention that...well...CoD has hardly been about "skill". Stats aren't a true indication as they can easily be skewed depending on how one plays, or hacked.