Myth and Facts about the Sawed-Off

[hellaeric09]

Before I start, I would like to first say that this thread is NOT:
-Intended to be an attack on hardcore Gnasher users (though I'm sure some people will take it that way)
-A trolling thread (though I'm sure some people will take it that way)
-A thread detailing how the SO is better than the Gnasher
-An "adapt" thread (I used to hate those as usually the people who said it actually weren't very good)
-An attempt to convert those comfortable with the Gnasher or who want to learn to be confortable with the Gnasher to the SO (as I believe you need to learn to use both to be successful)
-For those who didn't take the time out to read it because it was too long, and want to advertise their laziness/illiteracy with "tl/dr (10 char)" (but do commentas every comment bumps this thread to the front page)

This thread is :
-Intended for those who aren't comfortable with the Gnasher but don't want to switch for fear of being seen as a noob
-For people who already use the SO and are good with it, but feel they must "upgrade" to the Gnasher
-For people who blindly look down on SO users based on other people's opinions
-For people that are ashamed for using the SO
-An attempt to validate the SO playstyle to the aforementioned parties by derailing common myths associated with the gun

And now that that's taken care of, let's get started...

The SO is only used for and by corner campers.

As a corner camping tool, despite the wide spread, the SO very ineffective at corner camping due to its longer reload time and shorter range. The optimum loadout for the corner camper is Gnasher/Retro as both are very effetive at holding a corner, especially against smarter, more aware opponents, while the Gnasher is still as effective at taking out the less aware opponents that round the corner.

People who use the SO do so because it doesn't require aiming/skill.

I put these two together because they are often lumped together by those that perpetuate this myth. Despite the wide angle of effectiveness, the SO does require a significant amount of aiming. However, unlike the Gnasher, the SO presents a unique challenge as the effective range of the gun starves the user of the luxury of hardaiming. While the Gnasher is harder to aim, missing with the Gnasher is not penalized as hard as missing with the SO. In addition, the Gnasher isn't exactly a sniper rifle, and is blind-aimed in the exact same way as the SO in close-range combat. As for skill, most of the skills a skilled Gnasher users needs are very necessary for the SO, especially when going against Gnasher users and other SO users which leads me to my next myth:

SO users don't/can't wallbounce, use cover, and/or generally maneuver as well as a Gnasher user.

I personally love this myth, because I like the surprise that Gnasher users get when they discover I wallbounce just as well as they do. Due to the hit-and-run playstyle of the SO, it is required that in order to get away to live to fire another shot when dealing with a skilled Gnasher user or even another skilled SO user, one must be able to dodge their opponent's (or opponents') shots for the time it takes to reload their gun (and possibly to get back in range). I found my wallbouncing and dodging skills got better when using the SO.

There is no such thing as a SO duel.

Because of the long reload time, teammates with other weapons, the man-up rule, scarcity of ammo for the gun, scarcity of SO players, the long reload time, and the general playstyle of the SO, among other things, SO duels generally don't happen. That doesn't mean one isn't impossible, though, but they are very rare. I've only gotten into one that I could remember and I've been playing since around October (not counting the beta). I'm willing to be in one, but usually, like other SO users, I just pull out my AR, which bring me to my next point:

SO users all use the Retro Lancer because both guns require no aiming.

We already discussed the aiming myth for the SO, and this isn't a debate about Retro Lancer myths. The Retro Lancer is actually a great companion to the SO style of gameplay as it heavily involves fighting Gnasher users in their peak range. Without going deep into SO tactics against Gnasher users, the power of the gun along with the spread and the Retro Charge are great tools in turning the tables on a Gnasher users. Of course, there are occasionally times where the long range of the Hammerburst, or the infinite clip and chainsaw on the Lancer are preferred, and a good SO user does switch accordingly. I'm sure there will even be SO users in the posts after this one who prefer using the Lancer or the Hammerburst as opposed to the Retro.

The SO is for noobs to get used to the feeling of Gears. It's the equivalent of training wheels.

This one is actually very tricky since Rod Ferguson released this statement in the Gears 3 Q&A:
"We recognize people really like the shotgun gameplay so we wanted to find a way to let new players have that same experience who aren't talented with the Gnasher for example. So we wanted to make a weapon that doesn't require the twitch gameplay of the Gnasher but allows them to have that close quarters combat fun. I know it's a controversial weapon. "
This is interpreted by Gnasher enthusiasts as "the Sawed-off is for noobs who can't cut it with the Gnasher" insead of how it should be intrepreted, "the Sawed-off is an alternate weapon designed for people who just don't want to learn how to use the Gnasher." The SO is supposed to be to the Gnasher what the Hammerburst is to the Lancer, which is an alternate loadout option. Just as you don't use the Hammerburst to get better at the Lancer, you don't use the SO to get better at the Gnasher, or even at Gears of War. You use it because it's better at extremely close ranges than the Gnasher is, and that's the intention. In fact, Lee Perry explained the range capabilities of the weapons as:
Sawed-Off → Gnasher → Retro Lancer → Lancer → Hammerburst
If the Sawed-Off was supposed to be a dumbed-down version of the Gnasher, it wouldn't have its own range. In fact, if it was supposed to be just for newbies,then why is it usable outside of Casual Mode, a mode literally created for players level 10 and below (a.k.a. newbies)? And why is it easy to hardaim down a SOuser with the Gnasher before they could even get to you (if you hit them at the proper range, of course)? Why is it that Gears vets can even use the SO? Of course, this is a very controversial area, but looking at those questions should make you think.

The SO is a hard-counter to the Gnasher.

This is actually partially correct. The SO is a hard-counter to the Gnasher...at its proper range. Any skilled Gnasher user worth his/her rank will tell you the Gnasher has no problem with the DBS, as long as you are aware of the range and capabilities of the gun. If you treat the DBS user like you treat another Gnasher user, you will find yourself splattered on very wall you bounced off. However, if the DBS user goes charging in, a Gnasher will have no problem hardaiming the **** out of him/her. All the weapons in this game are balanced by range, and which weapon is best to use at what time is determined by how far the target is away from you. That's why a Retro Lancer can beat a Hammerburst at close range, but the further away you get, the greater the advantage is for the Hammerburst.

I hope this post was at least informative for those planning on using the Sawed-Off or who already do. I would like to restate that it is not my intention to turn anyone off from using the Gnasher or berate any hardcore Gnasher fan, but instead that this post made you accept our Gears who prefer the SO and the playstyle that goes along with it. Of course, if you didn't, I don't ****ing care

[Fishead John]

This thread is the King of Sawn Off Threads.


Agree on all points but I still say the SOS has been nerfed to the point that its basically the TF of Gears 3. In most cases in the hands of the playerbase I'd say I got 400 gold that says its worthless.

[NFI]

This thread is the King of Sawn Off Threads.


Agree on all points but I still say the SOS has been nerfed to the point that its basically the TF of Gears 3. In most cases in the hands of the playerbase I'd say I got 400 gold that says its worthless.

Unless you fancy being the Gears version of a Kamikaze pilot.

[SaintPocc]

"missing with the Gnasher is not penalized as hard as missing with the Gnasher"

- hellaeric09

[o Ventus]

"missing with the Gnasher is not penalized as hard as missing with the Gnasher"

- hellaeric09

That doesn't make any sense.

[Siamese Dream]

Very nice post. I read the entire thing and I thoroughly agree with everything you've said. Honestly, the sawed off and rifles have changed the game for the better. The gnasher is fun yes, but it is idolised too much in the gears community. The sawed off and stronger rifles give the game more variety, more challenge, more tactic and for me atleast, make the game more fun. Frustrating at times, but fun. You gave your opinion in a respectful and clear way. Nicely done.

[Bspencer]

Very nice post. I read the entire thing and I thoroughly agree with everything you've said. Honestly, the sawed off and rifles have changed the game for the better. The gnasher is fun yes, but it is idolised too much in the gears community. The sawed off and stronger rifles give the game more variety, more challenge, more tactic and for me atleast, make the game more fun. Frustrating at times, but fun. You gave your opinion in a respectful and clear way. Nicely done.

Couldn't have said it better.

OAN: How can people judge skill based something as superficial as a video game? They are intended for enjoyment, yet people mainly play for mindless competitiveness, thus fostering petty arguments about superficial things. Just play the game and enjoy it for what it is, just sayin.

[E.P.I.C. Lizard]

Agree on most of it. I will never swap out my gnasher with the SO, i would rather have the follow up shots, especially since i play alot of koth. I think overall the weapons are well balanced and each play an important role in certain scenarios.

[SKORGE]

Personally, I feel like a lot of these points were sugar-coated with a positive SoS-based spin in order to present a one-sided argument in favor of the tactics employed by SoS users and the gun itself. To me, it boils down to this. If the Gnasher is restricted to CQC and so is the SoS ... you'll eventually have to come to terms with the fact that the two weapons will always clash in such a scenario. However, the problem is that while you must aim and actually place your shots with the Gnasher, with the SoS you have a cone-of-death. And so, you not only overshadow the role of the Gnasher as a CQC weapon with the sheer fact that the SoS can do more damage to more people with one shot that requires little aiming, but you also bring into question the legitimacy of having the SoS as a true skill based weapon. Was it your skill that gave you the kill or was it the cone-of-death?

... after all, the Gnasher isn't a sniper and therefor cannot be used outside of a "Gnasher-scenario" aka CQC. Therefor, how is one to deal with a SoS in such a situation?

[Xx Dantes Rage]

Personally, I feel like a lot of these points were sugar-coated with a positive SoS-based spin in order to present a one-sided argument in favor of the tactics employed by SoS users and the gun itself. To me, it boils down to this. If the Gnasher is restricted to CQC and so is the SoS ... you'll eventually have to come to terms with the fact that the two weapons will always clash in such a scenario. However, the problem is that while you must aim and actually place your shots with the Gnasher, with the SoS you have a cone-of-death. And so, you not only overshadow the role of the Gnasher as a CQC weapon with the sheer fact that the SoS can do more damage to more people with one shot that requires little aiming, but you also bring into question the legitimacy of having the SoS as a true skill based weapon. Was it your skill that gave you the kill or was it the cone-of-death?

... after all, the Gnasher isn't a sniper and therefor cannot be used outside of a "Gnasher-scenario" aka CQC. Therefor, how is one to deal with a SoS in such a situation?

^^^I Agree with all of this^^^

[Evil Nello]

The SOS is easy to defend against.

So anybody in 2012 still complaining about the SOS clearly needs to practice more. This is the difference between being a Gnasher Pro and a Gnasher noob!

Yes! You can definitely miss target with the SOS by being too shallow. I know because people miss me all the time when I roll out the way!

Sure the SOS spread is wide, but the range is flat as a pancake!

No Excuses!
If you let someone get that close to you with an SOS, blame yourself -not the SOS user.
If you don't check behind you and someone gibs you in the back, blame yourself -not the SOS user.
If you die because you didn't check the corner, blame youreself -not the SOS user.

[x Death Anxiety]

The SOS is easy to defend against.

So anybody in 2012 still complaining about the SOS clearly needs to practice more.

Yes! You can definitely miss target with the SOS by being too shallow. I know because people miss me all the time when I roll out the way!

Sure the SOS spread is wide, but the range is flat as a pancake!

No Excuses!
If you let someone get that close to you with an SOS, blame yourself -not the SOS user.
If you don't check behind you and someone gibs you in the back, blame yourself -not the SOS user.
If you die because you didn't check the corner, blame youreself -not the SOS user.

If you use the SoS and defend it on the forums Blame yourself
If you act like the SoS is a fair gun, You must be an SoS user, and then you must BLAME YOURSELF

This game is fun

[Evil Nello]

If you use the SoS and defend it on the forums Blame yourself
If you act like the SoS is a fair gun, You must be an SoS user, and then you must BLAME YOURSELF

This game is fun

And rather than actually come up with a valid argument, you resort to ad hominem. (BTW I'm a little under 4000 kills with my gnasher, which is more than any of my other loadout weapons.)

Yet the point remains that SOS users are easily dealt with. If you die from an SOS, it is ultimately the result of your own slip in judgement i.e. letting them get that close to you, not checking corners, and not looking behind you.

But i suppose its easier to just blame other people for your weaknesses.

[Nonoru]

There is no such a thing as Sawed off battles. (Unless both opponent are so bad they can't get a kill on the first shot).

Personally, I feel like a lot of these points were sugar-coated with a positive SoS-based spin in order to present a one-sided argument in favor of the tactics employed by SoS users and the gun itself. To me, it boils down to this. If the Gnasher is restricted to CQC and so is the SoS ... you'll eventually have to come to terms with the fact that the two weapons will always clash in such a scenario. However, the problem is that while you must aim and actually place your shots with the Gnasher, with the SoS you have a cone-of-death. And so, you not only overshadow the role of the Gnasher as a CQC weapon with the sheer fact that the SoS can do more damage to more people with one shot that requires little aiming, but you also bring into question the legitimacy of having the SoS as a true skill based weapon. Was it your skill that gave you the kill or was it the cone-of-death?

... after all, the Gnasher isn't a sniper and therefor cannot be used outside of a "Gnasher-scenario" aka CQC. Therefor, how is one to deal with a SoS in such a situation?

You bring here the very reason why i'm confused with the Gnasher.

As a weapon it's the only gun that doesn't have a niche.
At close range the Sawed off has the upper hand.
At medium distance the Retro Lancer has the upper hand.

Where is the gnasher supposed to fit in the weapon balance.Most people would answer to this "BUT the Gnasher is effective at both ranges".
Yes it can be effective at both ranges but still loses to the previously mentioned weapons in each of these niches.
And even in the case the person "wins" an encounter it's not thanks to the gun itself, but because of the user (who has to use different maneuvers in order to outmatches these guns).
Situation where the user has to compensate for the lack of niche for the gun.

I might add that the Gnasher is the starting weapon which asks the most from the user and the risk/reward is always here when you use it.
At close it's impossible when in the "Sawed off efficient range" to win when facing it(at most you get a draw).
The person using the Gnasher has to create distance in order to get the upper hand and thus needs to break the "close range" status.

At medium it's impossible to win when (the Retro and Gnasher) users start shooting at the same time.The only ascendant you can create here is if you have an active reload(and not your opponent obviously) and/or use maneuvers to evade the shots and again i'm not taking the fact that the Retro has stopping power.(Again the situation where the user has to compensate for the lack of balance between weapons.)

Hence why i'm confused about the gun.

[hellaeric09]

There is no such a thing as Sawed off battles. (Unless both opponent are so bad they can't get a kill on the first shot).



You bring here the very reason why i'm confused with the Gnasher.

As a weapon it's the only gun that doesn't have a niche.
At close range the Sawed off has the upper hand.
At medium distance the Retro Lancer has the upper hand.

Where is the gnasher supposed to fit in the weapon balance.Most people would answer to this "BUT the Gnasher is effective at both ranges".
Yes it can be effective at both ranges but still loses to the previously mentioned weapons in each of these niches.
And even in the case the person "wins" an encounter it's not thanks to the gun itself, but because of the user (who has to use different maneuvers in order to outmatches these guns).
Situation where the user has to compensate for the lack of niche for the gun.

I might add that the Gnasher is the starting weapon which asks the most from the user and the risk/reward is always here when you use it.
At close it's impossible when in the "Sawed off efficient range" to win when facing it(at most you get a draw).
The person using the Gnasher has to create distance in order to get the upper hand and thus needs to break the "close range" status.

At medium it's impossible to win when (the Retro and Gnasher) users start shooting at the same time.The only ascendant you can create here is if you have an active reload(and not your opponent obviously) and/or use maneuvers to evade the shots and again i'm not taking the fact that the Retro has stopping power.(Again the situation where the user has to compensate for the lack of balance between weapons.)

Hence why i'm confused about the gun.

The ranges go something like this:

DBS>Gnasher>Retro>Lancer>Hammy

At a certain range, if a Gnasher and a Retro user hardaims their guns and shoots each other, the Gnasher wins (at peak Gnasher range, it takes 2 shots to down). It is at this range where it has its niche, because at peak Gnasher range, a DBS user can be hardaimed down before they can even get in their range. The further you move away, however, the less pellets hit your target and thus the less powerful your shots are. Of course, you will take a heavy amount of damage, but as long as you continue to fire, you will win.

[hellaeric09]

Personally, I feel like a lot of these points were sugar-coated with a positive SoS-based spin in order to present a one-sided argument in favor of the tactics employed by SoS users and the gun itself. To me, it boils down to this. If the Gnasher is restricted to CQC and so is the SoS ... you'll eventually have to come to terms with the fact that the two weapons will always clash in such a scenario. However, the problem is that while you must aim and actually place your shots with the Gnasher, with the SoS you have a cone-of-death. And so, you not only overshadow the role of the Gnasher as a CQC weapon with the sheer fact that the SoS can do more damage to more people with one shot that requires little aiming, but you also bring into question the legitimacy of having the SoS as a true skill based weapon. Was it your skill that gave you the kill or was it the cone-of-death?

... after all, the Gnasher isn't a sniper and therefor cannot be used outside of a "Gnasher-scenario" aka CQC. Therefor, how is one to deal with a SoS in such a situation?

If the Gnasher had the exact same range as the SO, you would be correct, but you must consider the greater range of the Gnasher, which is long enough to hard-aim down a rushing SO user. I know because this happened to me several times. While the Gnasher performs more than well in SO range, the optimum range of the Gnasher in Gears 3 is in between the optimum ranges of the SO and the Retro. In CQC, the dominant weapon is the SO, but getting in those ranges against a good Gnasher user is tough, and that's where the skill comes in.

[Kuronishen]

Personally, I feel like a lot of these points were sugar-coated with a positive SoS-based spin in order to present a one-sided argument in favor of the tactics employed by SoS users and the gun itself. To me, it boils down to this. If the Gnasher is restricted to CQC and so is the SoS ... you'll eventually have to come to terms with the fact that the two weapons will always clash in such a scenario. However, the problem is that while you must aim and actually place your shots with the Gnasher, with the SoS you have a cone-of-death. And so, you not only overshadow the role of the Gnasher as a CQC weapon with the sheer fact that the SoS can do more damage to more people with one shot that requires little aiming, but you also bring into question the legitimacy of having the SoS as a true skill based weapon. Was it your skill that gave you the kill or was it the cone-of-death?

... after all, the Gnasher isn't a sniper and therefor cannot be used outside of a "Gnasher-scenario" aka CQC. Therefor, how is one to deal with a SoS in such a situation?

This sums up how I feel about the SO pretty nicely.

Also, I feel that the gun itself is an issue niche wise, in that Epic added it into the game when the CQC combat was already pretty close to ideal in TU5 Gears 2. Same issue with them including the retro lancer. I'm all for diversity, but sandbox and balance becomes exponentially harder with the more weapons you add, especially to the starting loadout.

I also feel that the SO promotes a very detrimental/stale style of gameplay in that regardless of whether the shot lands, the gun encourages the player to run off reloading, turning the combat into a back and forth style of cat and mouse. Bait the shot on the SO user -> make them miss -> shoot them in the back as they run and hope to down them -> If you fail to they reload and it starts all over again. Is that game style broken? No. Is it tedious? Ohhhh yes.

As for broken, don't even get me started on the retro lancer. But that's a different story.

[caspers31]

Personally, I feel like a lot of these points were sugar-coated with a positive SoS-based spin in order to present a one-sided argument in favor of the tactics employed by SoS users and the gun itself. To me, it boils down to this. If the Gnasher is restricted to CQC and so is the SoS ... you'll eventually have to come to terms with the fact that the two weapons will always clash in such a scenario. However, the problem is that while you must aim and actually place your shots with the Gnasher, with the SoS you have a cone-of-death. And so, you not only overshadow the role of the Gnasher as a CQC weapon with the sheer fact that the SoS can do more damage to more people with one shot that requires little aiming, but you also bring into question the legitimacy of having the SoS as a true skill based weapon. Was it your skill that gave you the kill or was it the cone-of-death?

... after all, the Gnasher isn't a sniper and therefor cannot be used outside of a "Gnasher-scenario" aka CQC. Therefor, how is one to deal with a SoS in such a situation?

not a very well thought out opinion the gnasher is no longer a cqc weapon i have been downed many times from a gnasher with one preactive shot from 40 feet away and the fact that you can fire five shots to one sawed off shot is a big advantage i myself laugh at people that whine about the sawed off because to me to be good with it takes way more skill than the gnasher because you have to get in close in order to be effective with it and to many if i go against someone with a gnasher and there not good enough to drop me before i get to them then thats on them not me. im a sawed off user myself and love the hate mail makes me laughed but am also onyx master at arms and gnasher onyxed twice and sawed off four times

[AJ Crawford]

People don't complain about corner camping with holding the corner in mind. They're usually talking about someone waiting around a corner with the SO... BAM! ... RUN AWAY!

[God of War]

People don't complain about corner camping with holding the corner in mind. They're usually talking about someone waiting around a corner with the SO... BAM! ... RUN AWAY!

people do that with the gnasher and no one talks **** about it

[Gears of Wario]

Yeah, love this thread.
Still agitates me people complain about the gun lol

In my honest opinion, I find the SO more fun & challenging to use than a Gnasher.

[AJ Crawford]

Yeah, love this thread.
Still agitates me people complain about the gun lol

In my honest opinion, I find the SO more fun & challenging to use than a Gnasher.

... really? Don't get me wrong... I love to pick up the SO from time to time. It is fun to pull the trigger and feel like you just blasted some mofo with a cannon. But more challenging to use? You be trippin'.

[Fishead John]

... really? Don't get me wrong... I love to pick up the SO from time to time. It is fun to pull the trigger and feel like you just blasted some mofo with a cannon. But more challenging to use? You be trippin'.

Pre-nerf I'd agree with you to an extent. Post-nerf you have to be the one whos tripping. The Gnasher is beyond easy to rack up kills with in comparison to the SOS. It's more of a challenge to get anywhere near the numbers of kills with such limited ammunition capacity. Where as you can bleed the Gnasher dry and and atleast have a kill for every 2-3 shots in one life.

[AJ Crawford]

Pre-nerf I'd agree with you to an extent. Post-nerf you have to be the one whos tripping. The Gnasher is beyond easy to rack up kills with in comparison to the SOS. It's more of a challenge to get anywhere near the numbers of kills with such limited ammunition capacity. Where as you can bleed the Gnasher dry and and atleast have a kill for every 2-3 shots in one life.

Capacity has nothing to do with it, though. We're talking which is the more challenging weapon to use, not which will get you the most kills. The Gnasher requires you to aim, to be accurate. The SO requires you to have someone in front while you pull the trigger.

[Gears of Wario]

Capacity has nothing to do with it, though. We're talking which is the more challenging weapon to use, not which will get you the most kills. The Gnasher requires you to aim, to be accurate. The SO requires you to have someone in front while you pull the trigger.

Re-post:

I believe so. The Gnasher has 8+ feet more range than the SO, and SO users get punished if they miss or there are two people.

And since when do you need to aim with the Gnasher?

[Gears of Wario]

... really? Don't get me wrong... I love to pick up the SO from time to time. It is fun to pull the trigger and feel like you just blasted some mofo with a cannon. But more challenging to use? You be trippin'.

I believe so. I the Gnasher has 8+ feet more range than the SO, and SO users get punished if they miss or there are two people.

[Justifire]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OW_GQHy41Eo

[DragonEmperor]

Wonderful thread, 5 stars.

This thread is the King of Sawn Off Threads.


Agree on all points but I still say the SOS has been nerfed to the point that its basically the TF of Gears 3. In most cases in the hands of the playerbase I'd say I got 400 gold that says its worthless.

I like your post but it really annoys me and makes me dislike this post at the same time because you couldn't take the time to type out "TF", I have no idea what that is and now I am forced to ask you about it =\.

Personally, I feel like a lot of these points were sugar-coated with a positive SoS-based spin in order to present a one-sided argument in favor of the tactics employed by SoS users and the gun itself. To me, it boils down to this. If the Gnasher is restricted to CQC and so is the SoS ... you'll eventually have to come to terms with the fact that the two weapons will always clash in such a scenario. However, the problem is that while you must aim and actually place your shots with the Gnasher, with the SoS you have a cone-of-death. And so, you not only overshadow the role of the Gnasher as a CQC weapon with the sheer fact that the SoS can do more damage to more people with one shot that requires little aiming, but you also bring into question the legitimacy of having the SoS as a true skill based weapon. Was it your skill that gave you the kill or was it the cone-of-death?

... after all, the Gnasher isn't a sniper and therefor cannot be used outside of a "Gnasher-scenario" aka CQC. Therefor, how is one to deal with a SoS in such a situation?

You need to remember that the cone on the sawed-off shotgun is meant to be part of its "thing", which is to be able to kill more than one person at a time with a single shot, which the Gnasher cannot do, but the gnasher's "thing" is to be more consistent and provide more kills per clip, there are plenty of situations where it is your "skill" that rewards you a kill instead of the cone, since most of the time you have to be in close range which is roughly hugging distance the barrel is almost always in their chest which is impossible to miss with even if it is the Gnasher so I don't think that is as valid as you think.

Also it's more about just straight up, see guy, aim in general direction and shoot, it's also about timing and a bit of precision, that cone is not as large as you think, I've misssed people by being slightly off of my mark and it has resulted in death and others I get away but the thing is, I don't have 8 shots where I can just shoot shoot shoot until they die, I have one shot with a 5 second reload, that shot needs to count or horrible thigns can happen.

People don't complain about corner camping with holding the corner in mind. They're usually talking about someone waiting around a corner with the SO... BAM! ... RUN AWAY!

I strongly hate this argument because it makes no sense, for one thing if you are sitting behind a corner (stop hugging corners, you're a moron) and kill somebody from this corner, why would you need to "run away" ? You just killed (most likely) the only person even remotely close to you, that would be stupid.

Secondly as Lee Perry said: "Hiding around corners isn't the sole domain of the Sawed-off, it's long been the tactic of Gnasher players, chainsaw fans, nade taggers, and nearly everyone who does anything besides run straight at opponents since Gears 1 was released and people realized the camera position meant they could get away with it,"
Which is completely true.

Yeah, love this thread.
Still agitates me people complain about the gun lol

In my honest opinion, I find the SO more fun & challenging to use than a Gnasher.

More fun? Easily, when I am up against X amount of people vs. just me I am doing it for survival not fun, afterwards it's more of an adrenaline rush/anger as opposed to joy, when I kill 2+ people with a Sawed-off shotgun it is fun, amusing and silly, I don't generally get upset using the weapon unless I shoot someone and they do not die, it's even more annoying when I do this and they shoot from the same exact distance and still kill me, but that isn't what I was getting at, it is far more fun to use.

Challenging, I'd say so, I can easily kill people with my Gnasher which isn't that hard, it's easy to aim and takes no effort to kill people with honestly, which is why I do use it however, I can kill more than 1 person with it within a single "clip" where as the Sawed-off I cannot, I use both shotguns because I can and because I want to, but if I need to kill more than one person with more than one shot then I'll use my Gnasher.

Mind you the sawed-off shotgun is also easy to get kills with but it is much harder to get within that kill zone than it is in the Gnasher, I've walked up to people with an active (600 damage) and shot a person with the barrel in the back of the player (600 health) and they do not die, this gets me killed more than anything and it irritates the hell outta me, you don't need to get as close as hugging distance with the gnasher you can kill them from well beyond 50 feet from my experience, that isn't "harder" to do it's certainly not more "skillful" either, how often do your enemies let you get close enough to hug them? I'd imagine not often.

Most of these are obvious true or false statements and didn't need an explanation but other than that I agree.

This is the internet and on top of that a gaming forum board, it certainly needs explaining.

... really? Don't get me wrong... I love to pick up the SO from time to time. It is fun to pull the trigger and feel like you just blasted some mofo with a cannon. But more challenging to use? You be trippin'.

It's more fun to get that well timed earned kill with the Sawed-off shotgun than it is to just mindless spam the right trigger on the gnasher and eventually get a kill (if they don't swallow your marshmellow bullets for lunch that is), because put it aside if you like but that is what you do with the Gnasher, you hit the right trigger until they die which is anywhere from 1 to 2+ shots.

It's harder to get within hug range and time your shot than it is to sit at 10-20+ feet and shoot until they go down or just plain gib in front of you, certainly more satisfying as well.

[curtisp]

Wonderful thread, 5 stars.

I like your post but it really annoys me and makes me dislike this post at the same time because you couldn't take the time to type out "TF", I have no idea what that is and now I am forced to ask you about it =\.

You need to remember that the cone on the sawed-off shotgun is meant to be part of its "thing", which is to be able to kill more than one person at a time with a single shot, which the Gnasher cannot do, but the gnasher's "thing" is to be more consistent and provide more kills per clip, there are plenty of situations where it is your "skill" that rewards you a kill instead of the cone, since most of the time you have to be in close range which is roughly hugging distance the barrel is almost always in their chest which is impossible to miss with even if it is the Gnasher so I don't think that is as valid as you think.

Also it's more about just straight up, see guy, aim in general direction and shoot, it's also about timing and a bit of precision, that cone is not as large as you think, I've misssed people by being slightly off of my mark and it has resulted in death and others I get away but the thing is, I don't have 8 shots where I can just shoot shoot shoot until they die, I have one shot with a 5 second reload, that shot needs to count or horrible thigns can happen.

I strongly hate this argument because it makes no sense, for one thing if you are sitting behind a corner (stop hugging corners, you're a moron) and kill somebody from this corner, why would you need to "run away" ? You just killed (most likely) the only person even remotely close to you, that would be stupid.

Secondly as Lee Perry said: "Hiding around corners isn't the sole domain of the Sawed-off, it's long been the tactic of Gnasher players, chainsaw fans, nade taggers, and nearly everyone who does anything besides run straight at opponents since Gears 1 was released and people realized the camera position meant they could get away with it,"
Which is completely true.

More fun? Easily, when I am up against X amount of people vs. just me I am doing it for survival not fun, afterwards it's more of an adrenaline rush/anger as opposed to joy, when I kill 2+ people with a Sawed-off shotgun it is fun, amusing and silly, I don't generally get upset using the weapon unless I shoot someone and they do not die, it's even more annoying when I do this and they shoot from the same exact distance and still kill me, but that isn't what I was getting at, it is far more fun to use.

Challenging, I'd say so, I can easily kill people with my Gnasher which isn't that hard, it's easy to aim and takes no effort to kill people with honestly, which is why I do use it however, I can kill more than 1 person with it within a single "clip" where as the Sawed-off I cannot, I use both shotguns because I can and because I want to, but if I need to kill more than one person with more than one shot then I'll use my Gnasher.

Mind you the sawed-off shotgun is also easy to get kills with but it is much harder to get within that kill zone than it is in the Gnasher, I've walked up to people with an active (600 damage) and shot a person with the barrel in the back of the player (600 health) and they do not die, this gets me killed more than anything and it irritates the hell outta me, you don't need to get as close as hugging distance with the gnasher you can kill them from well beyond 50 feet from my experience, that isn't "harder" to do it's certainly not more "skillful" either, how often do your enemies let you get close enough to hug them? I'd imagine not often.

This is the internet and on top of that a gaming forum board, it certainly needs explaining.

It's more fun to get that well timed earned kill with the Sawed-off shotgun than it is to just mindless spam the right trigger on the gnasher and eventually get a kill (if they don't swallow your marshmellow bullets for lunch that is), because put it aside if you like but that is what you do with the Gnasher, you hit the right trigger until they die which is anywhere from 1 to 2+ shots.

It's harder to get within hug range and time your shot than it is to sit at 10-20+ feet and shoot until they go down or just plain gib in front of you, certainly more satisfying as well.

LOL you can come spam your gnasher trigger at me all you want but you won't get a kill, sorry but it does require more than that lol, although I did get a laugh when reading this post from you. Like I said before somewhere on here if you use a SOS it doesn't mean your not skilled, thats not the point lol, the point is that weapon does not require a lot of skill, I didn't say requires NO skill, I said it doesn't require a lot.

[Fishead John]

Wonderful thread, 5 stars.

I like your post but it really annoys me and makes me dislike this post at the same time because you couldn't take the time to type out "TF", I have no idea what that is and now I am forced to ask you about it =\.

Twisted Fate.

[bleeding pepper]

Agree with the original post. Alot of people are quick to jump to conclusions when it comes to just about anything in online videogames. Gaming discourses are created by the majority and certain styles of play are more respected than others. It's just closed minded snobbishness really, and new players fall into believing and accepting this status quo. These concepts of respectability and 'noobishness' are all socially constructed of course. In GOW respectibility comes from being good at wallbouncing and using the Gnasher. In say, Halo respectability comes from use the Battle Rifle or DMR (or other scoped weapons like the Carbine/Needle Rifle).

My main issue is that the status quo it creates and maintains makes the game one-dimensional - there is an expectation for players to use the Gnasher instead of the SO for status reasons, and if you opt for the SO then you're singled out as a 'noob'.

Fact is I will probably never be a great Gnasher user. I've tried but just am not that great at it and I will lose as many duels as I win. I'm primarily a rifle user and always will be. My style of play will be completely different and rely on flanking, using the element of surprise, giving the enemy a wide arc and relying on more precisional accuracy from rifles.

Also just to add in response to peole saying that with the Gnasher, you have to hard-aim - how many wallbouncing Gnasher users hard aim? Alot of friends I observe playing, or Gnasher montages I watch on Youtube don't use hard-aiming half the time.

[Terra D Serph]

Agree with the original post. Alot of people are quick to jump to conclusions when it comes to just about anything in online videogames. Gaming discourses are created by the majority and certain styles of play are more respected than others. It's just closed minded snobbishness really, and new players fall into believing and accepting this status quo. These concepts of respectability and 'noobishness' are all socially constructed of course. In GOW respectibility comes from being good at wallbouncing and using the Gnasher. In say, Halo respectability comes from use the Battle Rifle or DMR (or other scoped weapons like the Carbine/Needle Rifle).

My main issue is that the status quo it creates and maintains makes the game one-dimensional - there is an expectation for players to use the Gnasher instead of the SO for status reasons, and if you opt for the SO then you're singled out as a 'noob'.

Fact is I will probably never be a great Gnasher user. I've tried but just am not that great at it and I will lose as many duels as I win. I'm primarily a rifle user and always will be. My style of play will be completely different and rely on flanking, using the element of surprise, giving the enemy a wide arc and relying on more precisional accuracy from rifles.

Also just to add in response to peole saying that with the Gnasher, you have to hard-aim - how many wallbouncing Gnasher users hard aim? Alot of friends I observe playing, or Gnasher montages I watch on Youtube don't use hard-aiming half the time.

I think you said this quite nicely.

Along with my post on the previous page (page 15), which I believe got ignored due to it being the last post on that page--it happens--when I'm going around a corner to try to bait someone into taking a certain advantage, and I'm killed because someone used the sawed-off, I never think "He only killed me because he had the sawed-off." I wholeheartedly believe that he either got the jump on me or I was not cautious enough.

The SO is probably not only used by cornercampers, but a hell lot by it it is, and a skilled someone with it is briefly invincable because the thing just shoots quicker as the gnasher. (if you need to take the corner)

People who use the SO do so because it doesn't require aiming/skill, compared with the gnasher it is close to zero

SO users don't/can't wallbounce, use cover, and/or generally maneuver as well as a Gnasher user. Lets reread this sentence and see the difference and at a generally on one place. SO users generally can't wallbounce, use cover, or generally maneuver as well as a Gnasher user.

Stef, despite the popular belief, I have yet to see the majority of corner-campers in any of my matches hold a sawed-off more often than a gnasher, and I play when the population is supposed to be the highest--at night on the weekends.

The sawed-off doesn't require as much aiming as that of someone who uses the gnasher, however, to make up for this "crutch," you only get one shot, and if you're not in the correct range, the only thing you get is a small blood-splatter. Of course, this can be argued over that fact that most people melee after they miss, which will down you, but that is entirely your fault for not dodging after the fact. It's not like the sawed-off stuns you in place, making you unable to move quickly.

Sawed-off users are not put into this general category of "unable to wallbounce." Yes, generally, when you think of a sawed-off user, you think they rush in for a kill, and more often than not, it's true. But it's not like players suddenly lose the ability to wallbounce just because they chose a different weapon. I know plenty of people who do in fact flank, wallbounce, and bob and weave their way into range of an enemy, and they carry a sawed-off while doing so. That is not "noobness," that is pure tactic. The fault goes into the person they're trying to get close to. Why didn't that person back off? Why did they continue to fire without moving?

[GenesisDX]

Yeah, love this thread.
Still agitates me people complain about the gun lol

In my honest opinion, I find the SO more fun & challenging to use than a Gnasher.

Im my honest opinion the SO is not challenging to use. Get in close pull the trigger and win, no aiming involved.

[BWG]

Im my honest opinion the SO is not challenging to use. Get in close pull the trigger and win, no aiming involved.

So getting close to an opponent presents absolutely no challenge you're saying? Sorry, not buying it.

[cmann333]

So getting close to an opponent presents absolutely no challenge you're saying? Sorry, not buying it.

Not hard man, we get it though you think it's challenging lol. Depends on the situation of course.

[GenesisDX]

So getting close to an opponent presents absolutely no challenge you're saying? Sorry, not buying it.

Look man, the sawed off was put into the game for people that werent good at close combat, the man who had a hand in making the game said this himself. The sawed off isnt challenging to use and if you think it is I dont see how you are effective with any other weapon. Yea it has one shot and takes forever to reload, but in CQC it has the advantage of not having to be on target since the shot cone is HUGE

[GoodButNotAsFamous]

Most of these are obvious true or false statements and didn't need an explanation but other than that I agree.

[DenyThisFlesh]

While most of the OP is true, the Sawed-Off will always be treated as a noob weapon due to being designed that way. It's definitely more difficult to use now than it was originally, but it's still pretty easy to use and doesn't require anywhere near the same accuracy as the Gnasher. That being said, I don't have a problem with people using it. It's easily countered by every other starting weapon.

[TerrorTwilight]

Anyone who likes this thread, please go back to Halo/COD please! Thanks in advance!

[Gears of Wario]

Anyone who likes this thread, please go back to Halo/COD please! Thanks in advance!

Nice way to contribute to the topic bro!

/sarcasm