Call of Duty: War Zone will change dramatically once Call of Duty: The Vanguard released. Along with the launch of the premium game, a better anti-cheat system is added to the free title. Hopefully this will prevent hackers from playing and allow gamers to take advantage of the new map. With a lot of excitement about finally leaving Verdansk and exploring an island in the Pacific Ocean, there is a lot of hype around the month of November.
However, it should be noted that some Call of Duty: War Zone fans are more concerned with the planned integration than they are excited. This is because many fear that history will repeat itself and that integration with Call of Duty: The Vanguard will be as bad as the Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War the integration did. Based on what’s happened with the game so far, that seems like a real possibility, and Call of Duty: The VanguardWeapons could end up dominating the meta as soon as they arrive.
Why Call of Duty: Vanguard’s Weapons Could Be Shattered
Call of Duty: The Vanguards weapons are in serious danger of being overpowered. Since Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War debuted, this game’s guns were the only viable option, with older guns from Call of Duty: Modern Warfare become useless. Not only most Modern war guns unable to compete, but some Cold War era weapons have proven to be so powerful that they completely spoil the experience.
A clear example of this is the DMR 14 meta, with the Tactical Rifle so broken that celebrities and pro gamers have joined in the calls for a nerf. His reign lasted incredibly long, with the Tactical Rifle dropping enemies with just a few hits. When paired with the MAC-10, the players were unstoppable. As the nerves finally arrived, the weapon was instantly replaced by the AUG. At the same time, the rise of the FFAR took place, which means that both Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War the weapons were all seen by players for several weeks.
On top of that, weapons like the MP5 and CR-56 AMAX have been nerfed despite being among the only viable weapons in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare. Unfortunately, there’s a good chance the same can happen once Call of Duty: The Vanguardthe integration of takes place. While it is possible that Raven would make the new weapons incredibly weak to prevent this from happening again, it would likely anger the community even more. Instead, it seems likely that the Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War the weapons fall off the ladder, with the Modern war weapons become even more useless.
The Problem With Call of Duty: Vanguard’s Ten Attachments
The other thing to note about the new weapons is the way Call of Duty: The VanguardThe gunsmith is working. Players can equip 10 different attachments on each weapon, and while this allows for more customization, it instantly creates a never-before-seen problem with the Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War fire arms. If no changes are made, Call of Duty: The Vanguardpistols may contain more accessories than any other weapon available in Call of Duty: War Zone.
Obviously, more accessories mean more powerful weapons, and the Call of Duty: The Vanguard the guns have attachments that could provide a serious advantage. Ammo types like FMJ could erase armor, while the Skill and Kit sections allow players to take two special perks with them in battle instead of just one. Although Raven limits the number of attachments that Call of Duty: War Zone players can use on the Avant-garde guns, they could always have an advantage because of the type of accessories offered.
Not only the Call of Duty: The Vanguard weapons have good stats on their own, but Call of Duty: War Zone uploads that use the many types of attachments can end up being demonstrably under control. It’s not hard to imagine a scenario in which at least one of the ammo types is broken, causing everyone to use the attachment no matter what weapon they use. With that in mind, players have yet another reason to expect a meta where the Avant-garde the equipment is the only thing worth using.
Fortunately, there are a few things developer Raven Software can do if they want to stop a nasty meta from taking shape. The first option is the easiest, and it would see some attachment locations removed for Call of Duty: Warzone versions of Call of Duty: The Vanguard fire arms. For example, things like the location of the additional advantage and the type of ammunition could be omitted from War zonebecause they are not available for other weapons. While this would limit the customization available for newer weapons, it would help keep them in sync with older weapons.
Another option would see the new weapons separated from the old ones. Rather than removing Verdansk 84, it could be left as is, with all Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War weapons that can be used there. The new Pacific map could only use Call of Duty: The Vanguard weapons, something that would allow players to use all 10 attachments without worrying about weapon mastery. This would prevent older guns from being upgraded, as they would be kept in their own set of playlists. It would also help with immersion, as players would only be seen using 1940s weapons on a map from that period.
Regardless of how this is done, Raven Software must be extremely careful with Call of Duty: The Vanguard the integration. Currently, all signs point to the weapon lineup being broken, with the meta shifting completely in favor of the Avant-garde fire arms. If too much is done to keep them from being brought under control, they could be so weak that their addition is unnecessary. Raven must make smart decisions with these weapons, making sure new and old weapons are worth using. Otherwise, the massive arsenal available to the Call of Duty: War Zone community will not make sense, because anything that does not come from Avant-garde would be ignored.
Call of Duty: War Zone is now available on PC, PS4, PS5, Xbox One, and Xbox Series X.
MORE: Call of Duty: Warzone – All Halloween 2021 Leaks So Far
Call of Duty: Vanguard will likely include a Zombies mode, and it should try to fix Black Ops Cold War’s biggest mistake.
About the Author