Which is better?

[Peeko]

[Exodus]

Well none is really better. It depends on the user. A really skillful CPS 2100 could defeat a CPS 1200, although it doesn't mean the actual weapon is better.

Here are some catagories and their winners:

Range: CPS 2100
Shot time: CPS 1200
Weight (when full): CPS 2100
Output: CPS 2100
Capacity: CPS 1200

Also, the 1200 has a strap, but it could do without. But still, a strap is great in some places, and others it is not really needed.

[Triforce Elite]

I reckon the 1200 is better.

[SSCBen]

This must be some foreign language, I'm having trouble decoding it. :O

The 2100 is cheaper currently, so that got my vote. If they were the same price it would really depend on what the user wanted. The 2100 lacks a strap, and the 1200 lacks a guide pumps. Other than that they are the same for the most part.

If I were modding then then I'd get the 2100. I could add a strap but not a guided pump so easy.

[Veteran]

I chose the 1200 because from what I've seen of it, it has a longer firing time than the 2100.

[Soakologist]

They're really the same gun. You got a solid weapon either way.

[Iceman]

In my book, the CPS 1200 classes as a light-medium assault rifle, and the CPS 2100 a medium assault rifle. You will get more power out of a CPS 2100, but more shot time out of a CPS 1200. Niether can reaslly be best, but one can definatly be an advantage over another in certain situations. For example, Id choose a CPS 2100 for sniping, since i can get a good shot off, and Id choose a CPS 1200 as a scout's weapon if I was far from a filling source. Again it depends on the situation, and the preference of the user.

-Ice

[Exodus]

Iceman's right. Both can be better than each other in certain situations. In a bush/forest war I'd go with the 1200 because it holds more water, which will be useful since there aren't really any taps in the bush.

For a suburban water war (say, around a school) I'd choose the CPS 2100 because it has more range and power. You'll need both because there isn't too much good cover. You won't need capacity as much because there are a few taps on the sides of buildings.

:unclesam:

[trekkie00]

I chose the 2100 because I've used it and I like the output, weight, and design.

[Soakologist]

I suppose that if I had to choose, I'd pick a 1200 (2001 model) because it's not colo(u)red like a frickin' hot dog stand. I can't stand the 2000 version of the 1200 though..

[DRACO]

i like the 2100 better range and it has a pump that dosent break as easy

[Veteran]

Welcome to Isc DRACO, I know you from SSc. Please use proper posting ettiquite by using commas and periods.

[DX]

I prefer the 2100. The tracked pump is a definate plus, it is durable and slides easily. I like the output and range, but most of all the 2100 is a modder's gun.
There are 3 marks and each model acts differently when k-modded. Therefore, when you k-mod a 2100, you never get the same results twice. Some become super-efficient, my first got more than 10 shots per tank. Others gain higher output, or stunning range. 2100's are also very light, so a strap isn't necessary.

[Space_Cowboy]

A CPS 2100 is more durable, and it has more range, power, and output than a 1200, so I'd rather use a 2100. Don't get me wrong though, a CPS 1200 is a great soaker. The 2100 is just my preference.

Well none is really better. It depends on the user. A really skillful CPS 2100 could defeat a CPS 1200, although it doesn't mean the actual weapon is better.

It isn't even a skill issue. It's merely an issue of preference. They're basically the same with small differences here and there.



Edited By Space_Cowboy on 1091411692

[Soakologist]

What makes you guys so confident that the 2100 is more durable than its predecessor, the 1200? ???

[Space_Cowboy]

It feels more robust, it has thicker plastic, and a tracked pump.

[Soakologist]

The pump, when moved to fast, will go through the 1500-syndrome, where it snaps back while you're pumping. I don't know about thicker plastic, and I actually don't like tracked pumps, though yeah, they are less prone to breakage.

Like I said, it's all a matter of preference.

[Falcon]

I voted for the CPS 1200. The advantages that it has over the 2100 (in my opinion) are:
1. Longer shot time
2. Shoulder Strap
3. Larger PC
4. Larger reservoir
5. Easier to pump

The advantages that the 2100 has over the 1200 include:
1. Greater output
2. It's slightly lighter
3. It's better balanced (the 1200 is more back heavy)
4. More durable pump

They're both pretty good soakers, but I tend to lean towards the 1200, mainly because of the shoulder strap. It just makes handling multiple tasks at once so much easier.

I would actually choose a CPS 1000 over both of them, since I think it's the best all-round small CPS. But since it wasn't included in the choices, I chose the 1200.



Edited By Falcon on 1091606366

[Drewsky92]

I think the 2100 is an all-around better water gun, and making a strap is denifitally easier than making a track-guied pump.



Edited By Drewsky92 on 1091628960

[Veteran]

I like the design of the 1200 better because I actually prefer the non-track mounted pump, even if it's not as durable.