Why 4 and 0 is a Good Score
When Call of Duty:World at War was released earlier this year, I eagerly went down to JB Hifi and bought it. Initially, I found the multiplayer quite daunting, as I’d started it late (though I bought the game the day it was released). So, all the players were much higher ranks, with “better” weapons, skills etc. As of this article, I’m still not at Rank 65, much less thinking about prestiging.
Because I’d previously played CoD4:MW (Call of Duty 4:Modern Warfare) to death last year (and ended up selling it in disgust due to the inaction by Infinity Ward towards fixing the ranking up bug), I quickly settled into my usual style of play for these games, being a sniper.
Many games passed, whilst I put up with and adjusted my game style to the horrible Springfield w/ scope – terrible weapon with a terrible scope. I moved away from sniping (because I was too slow at sniping with the Springfield, and the maps are too small), I started using what I deem to be CQB weapons (the Thompson (which I love…), and the other rifles and MG’s). Of course, because my style of play is as a sniper, I’m no good at CQB, and would often get smashed in the scoring.
Eventually, I ranked up enough to unlock the Russian Mosin-Nagant, and found it to be quite nice, and _then_ unlocked the scope for it. Godly weapon! Back to sniping I went, even on relatively small maps.
A thought crossed my mind – how about I unlock the scope for the M1 Garand? In the game, the Garand is a painful semi-auto, because of the stripper clip, and it’s weak power. However, unlock the scope, and I found I could one-shot kill people across the map easily, and accurately to boot!
The Garand contributed to my slinking away into a corner to snipe away all game. The end result, lots of games where I’d shot 4 rounds for 4 kills with zero deaths…
