[SoLiDUS]

I noticed a lack of consistency in Counter-Strike the first day I started
playing the game but gave it little to no attention after the initial thought
crossed my mind.

Lately, it has been resurfacing with a vengeance: the AWP is to CS what
the heel was to Achilles; it ruins it. Why has this weapon received (don't lie)
preferential treatment ? Surely it cannot be the calibre!

[quote:1af3d]Intermediate in size between .50 calibre and 7.62mm NATO, the .338
Lapua Magnum extends the current 7.62mm 850m maximum sniping
range to beyond 1,400m. In other comparisons with the 7.62mm NATO,
the .338 Lapua Magnum doubles the armour penetration and exhibits 40
per cent less effect from crosswind.[/quote:1af3d]

Now, bullet penetration aside (which matters not in CS), the gun is clearly
not all that powerful. So why the special treatment ? Why should the Arctic
Warfare Magnum be able to do something the assault rifles can't, seeing
as they both go far beyond penetrating armor ?

I believe in order to make the game more interesting (and subsequently,
hear less bitching from people like me), we should cut the awp's power by
as much as 40%: the gun would compare to the assault rifles in its power
and an overall game balance would ensue.

I would like feedback to know what some of the other Counter-Strike
players think of my idea, knowing it will never be implemented because
too many lamers will vote to keep its power "way up there" because of
its special status as "sniper rifle".