I know this is a hot button issue and there have been tons of threads made about it, but I haven't seen a lot of feedback on the first few pages regarding the RoF post-1.13.
My thoughts on the situation should be obvious from the title: this was NOT a "nerf" as much as a reduction in how much the mod increases your rate of fire, and just because they reduced it does NOT necessarily mean it is less effective. If anything, the mod is now MORE effective as it has just the right balance of recoil, accuracy and rate of fire. Before, as much as it pains me to say it, the mod took at least SOME skill to aim effectively with, as the recoil was significantly higher and you had to pull down on your right analog stick to keep your crosshair on the target. Now, the recoil is much more manageable but the gun STILL kills faster than a normal M9.
What's the problem, you might ask? Sure, the RoF does exactly what it's supposed to, which is increase the effectiveness of the gun, but I recall that large thread from a few weeks ago asking for a complete removal from the game, NOT a "10% reduction" which arguably made the mod better. If this is all ND is going to do to appease the people who realize how silly this mod is, it's not going to be enough. I'm seeing even MORE people running around with it than before the patch. I'm sure part of it is the GMAL nerf, but they could have just as easily gone to something like Marlowe's or Flynn's M9 but chose not to because the RoF is so manageable now.
Basically, this thing needs to go, not get a tiny "nerf" in an effort to rebalance it. It has no place on a long gun most effective when aiming, ESPECIALLY when the AK, GMAL, etc. don't have the same offerings. I'm seriously baffled as to why it's even in the game; people complained about the RoF mod on the AK in the summer beta so much that it didn't make it into the final version, but THIS did? Come on, it's the same **bleep** concept.
