(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); I think the Stun is beeter because it doesnt blow up untill it hits the ground Unliike the Flash :S

alot of people prefer stuns simply because they can throw them faster, and they go great with semtex's.

i much prefer flashbangs because the radius is huge, they blind the enemy, it lasts a long time, and i play more defensively so the longer throwing time is no problem.
on the whole when i throw flashbangs in a room i never die but with stuns i often do if ther already aiming at the door.

Flash is better for defensive players, stun for people that like to rush hard (my personal play style).

I agree with the post above me, I prefer stuns.

most people prefer stun only because they can throw it quicker which is stupid. the flash had a better effect when it is in any radius of the enemy while the stun can only go off when it touches the ground so if there is little ground where the enemy is, it is better to use a flash. and yea, flash is for people who tend to rush hardcore and like fast pace but why choose stun just because its a faster animation?

so flash > stun i would say in most situations.

I prefer flash, because when i use a stun and chuck it into a room im almost always killed. I prefer the flash because when i flash a room and i go walking in i generally come out on top. Its just preference, like intervention or barrett

I definetely like flash better.

stun slowz the enemy down, flash juz blindz em itz not hard to spray i do if i get flashed and usually get a kill or two, but stun grenadez slow em down they can see u but itz harder for them to move to shoot at u