Damage and spread should definitely stay the same. I think that the recoil reset time should stay the same, but if it changes, should only be decreased slightly. The deagle already is decently accurate on the 2nd and 3rd shots. I think the importance of the deagle lies in the first shot - and nobody uses it anymore because that first shot is no longer reliable. It's the same deal with people complaining about the AK-47 and it's 97% accuracy. I think Valve would eliminate a lot of these problems if they just improved first shot accuracy across the board, especially for the deagle, AK, and M4s.

I understand the argument against this, that it's a tactical shooter and thus closing the distance to your enemy is the tactic that will allow you to win eco rounds and use a deagle successfully/more effectively - but that's not the point here. The deagle is meant to be accurate at long range, as noted in the description, and its not, plain and simple. I'm sure Valve never intended to make the deagle essentially ineffective at long range, but I think they have a fear of the deagle being too powerful (like CSS) which makes them reluctant to improve it much. There was a week or so where the deagle in CSGO was really OP and I think they are cautious about going back to that (as it would totally change professional play, making ecos much more winnable).

The deagle also has poor moving accuracy so it's the only pistol that's really impossible to run and shoot accurately at medium-long range. You need to stand to fire it accurately. Which is not a problem in the slightest. But what this means is that you are sacrificing mobility, agility, etc. for a weapon that is only very slightly better at long-range shots. It just isn't worth it, so it's never bought. Some of these problems with long-range accuracy will improve if the hitboxes are improved to match the models (or vice versa) as well. But it won't eliminate the problem.

I'd rather use a USP-S or P250 at long range and that is definitely saying something.