(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Which is better, Flashbang or Stun?

The problem with flashes is that they have to hit really close to the person to have any real effect. Whereas stuns will slow someone down if its anywhere near them. Overall i prefer flashes for disorientating people, and because the stun isnt always successful at stopping them from shooting you. Flashes get my vote

Defiantly stun. It effects people from all sides, and it gives you a hitmarker (not sure if the flashbangs do in MW2, they didn't in COD4)

Flash grenades are slower but the thing that I really like about Stuns is that they deafen and disorient your enemy!

Stun wins it for me. Simply because I can throw them quicker. That gives me time to get into a good spot and get my weapon of choice ready.

Stuns,by far.

You can throw them quicker,you can be bent and still stun them,they blind and slow down an enemy,it messes up their aim.

They are great in many ways

Flashbang:
The flashbang effect's last alot longer than the stun, But the flashbang has to hit really REALLY close to the enemy to show the crossairs up on the screen.

Stun:
With the stun its that little more effective than the flashband simply because it slow's down the enemy and you dont need to get it as close to the enemy to know its hit them.

So my vote is for the stun

i usually prefer the flash bang to the stun because it seems to last longer

I prefer stun since that gives you more of an advantage since they can't aim properly, where as with the flashbang, you can spray and pray.

stuns are better