M-16, LMG, Explosive, undergrowth tweaking

[VipersGhost]

If I baby an M16 and shoot it while prone, without any effort of my own...the rifles sites will fall back close to where I fired...sorry, gravity takes place and the M16 kicks like a baby so theres just not much to deal with. In my town we learned to shoot these things (.223 rifles) when we were like 10 years old, its not like we had to "pull the gun down" to adjust for recoil...sure on full auto guys do that...but not on a little M16 single shot. IMO this should be the goal for modeling recoil.

[Hitperson]

guys i have seen post saying about the "zoomed in m16" the reason for that is because the m16A4+ acog has yet to be finished oh and why should the PKM get more zoom that other weapons??

[Longbow*]

I like my M16A2 and PKM\SAW\QBB-95\HK-21
If you fail to use them , thats your problems . Get some skill instead of whining on the forum .

[IAJTHOMAS]

Improvised roadside explosives have annhilated British challenger tanks in Iraq. They aren't made of adamantium, you know.

Actually, as I heard, only once has the armour of a C2 been penetrated by an IED causing injury to the driver inside. The tanks in PR are far superior to the ones that you are taling about.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... irq124.xml

[ZaZZo]

Bob_Marley come save the thread..!

Anyways I couldn't be arsed reading it all but I saw somethign about the MGs completely useless.. I kinda don't agree on that, those are very usefull if you stick with your sqad instead of running off ramboing because you got a cool gun.

Also the M-16 may seem a bit wierd firing in game, I also really hated the gun in the beta but I got used to it now and it's as good as any other gun. It's just a matter of getting used to the changes really.

[Rico11b]

If I baby an M16 and shoot it while prone, without any effort of my own...the rifles sites will fall back close to where I fired...sorry, gravity takes place and the M16 kicks like a baby so theres just not much to deal with. In my town we learned to shoot these things (.223 rifles) when we were like 10 years old, its not like we had to "pull the gun down" to adjust for recoil...sure on full auto guys do that...but not on a little M16 single shot. IMO this should be the goal for modeling recoil.

[font=&quot]True, if you are in a good body position and have good sight picture and good sight alignment. The rifle should recoil and fall back onto the target. It may not fall perfectly where you were aiming, but it should be close. Not jump up and stay up like it does now in game. Just remember that you should not fight the recoil, you must let if happen and let it's energy flow thru you. Also don't try and anticipate the recoil, because that will cause you to start throwing rounds off. The more you anticipate the recoil the worse your shot groups will get.[/font]

[nidpants]

And why would tanks hide from infantry?
They are frigging tanks!

In built up areas, infantry are SUPPOSED to be able to dominate armor, which is why tanks need to bring infantry/engineer support, but the lack of cover in a relatively flat desert will easily negate infantry's advantage. I disagree that there should be a greater allowance for heavy AT - there shouldn't be more than one heavy AT weapon per every 2-3 squads. This merely requires a change in tactics - either infantry learn to melt away from tanks and dig in till support arrives, or prepare by mining avenues of approach and digging in the heavy AT for the sneak rear shot.

C4 and SLAM are simply not designed to take out heavy armor (and anti-spalling systems and materials prevent the crew and electronics from being injured by the shock). These are best used for - gasp - demolition of strategic assets i.e. command posts, bunkers, ammo caches etc.

The LMG's are fine as is. I think suppression could be made more effective by increasing the range at which you'll go tunnel vision from passing rounds, and if it passes RIGHT by your head, maybe LSD vision. But i trust the devs to model the LMG's correctly, and not give in to the temptation of balancing.

[Ace42]

And your sarcasm is cautiously noted Ace42.

Glad someone noticed it.

Yeah I've never been a fan of the M16 recoil, but it's a topic that's been discussed to death in the past.

Clearly the wrong people won, then.

I've used them, and have seen other players use them with satisfactory results. The thing is, the constant line of tracer rounds the support kits tend to put out seems to draw enemy fire towards your direction, which is really a good explanation as to the short life expectancy for support gunners.

Completely different experience to mine, then. Yeah I've seen people use them with "satisfactory results" (IE they've managed to scrape equal with players using non-limited kits) - but that kinda undermines the purpose of having a special limited kit. Kinda like the guy who said "I do ok with an M16, because it reminds me to work harder" - clearly indicating that it is a markedly inferior gun. Replacement in the tubes? Thank god, but I'd've rather it was balanced right first time around, especially given the fact that the topic has apparently been "done to death".

Yah the support guns are "passable" if you "work really hard at using them safely" - but compared to a gun that will do you right under all circumstances, that's still an inferior weapon, and pointless for a limited kit.

If you run into an enemy tank, hopefully someone in your squad was smart enough to take some form of AT with you guys.

Like the light AT kit which takes more shots to kill a tank than the player has, and is limited so quite possibly unavailable? And has a fraction of the range a tank does (snipey-snipey) ? That'll work well. Or the SLAMs (what are they for if not AT? Taking out cars? Like you'll ever need to do that...) ? Or C4? (not even enough to take out an APC!)

If you're the squad leader and don't like the members of your squad then kick them. If you not the squad leader then leave the squad and create your own. Lock your squad then INVITE people into your squad. Problem solved.

Yes, unless you live in reality, where most players on a public server want a squad they can be in just to avoid an auto-kick, and really couldn't give a fig about what a complete stranger thinks they should be doing. In those circumstances kicking players who don't want to be in your squad, or inviting those that you do, will both result in a one-man squad. Great stuff!

Go ask someone who's been in combat how effective 5.56 is

Ok... <wanders off> "Sgt Smith, how effective is the 5.56?" - "Why, Ace42, it's pretty effective. Three shots will kill a man pretty much." "Why thankyou for putting that to rest."

Ok, now we're done with argumentum ad ignorantiam, we can move on to the meat-and-bones of this.

Does a 5.56 "kinda" penetrate body armour, and "kinda" do some damage? Or does armour stop it (making the gun near useless on body-shots, and as such stupid to include in the game), or is it effective enough that three shots could quite easily be lethal?

Are you seriously saying "Three shots of 5.56 lethal? Nah, it would take an extra one or two shots to kill!" is a scientific modelling?

Didn't think so, so why not adopt a model that enhances playability?

Ace needs to chill out or leave...this is a constructive environment...not a complaint forum.

And here was me thinking that proposing alternatives was "constructive" criticism... But hey, every heretic needs a stoning, right?

grass rendering is being worked on etc etc.

So, then, I don't need to "chill out", I just need to be told "hey, you're right, it's being worked on. Glad you noticed it too."

Thus, to make you do it yourself by moving your mouse, we can only simulate the weapon going upwards since you can't adjust for recoil going backwards only by using your mouse & keys.

You can't adjust for horizontal recoil either, as it can be randomly left or right, rather than just pulling down. A point I think I made...

And AFAIK LMG's with scopes on them are in the work.

Is that realistic? I haven't checked out the modern additions to support weapons, but apart from a few specialist SF outfits, I've not heard of scoped support guns before...

Insurgents DO have spawncars, and in Basrah especially they can spawn at a wide variety of places.

Again, not on the map I was on the other day, or if they did, they lasted about 30 seconds. Hardly comparable to being able to repeatedly deploy a rallypoint throughout the course of a round that can take an hour or so.

I suppose I could always do my best to intentionally TK noobs driving the spawn-cars, but would you applaud such an action if you just saw a load of apparently arbitrary TKs on your server?

Do this until you only have people left who will at least do what you say.

#One is the loneliest number that you'll ever doooooo...

Seriously, you guys really over-estimate the popularity of this mod if you think populated low-latency servers are that common that you can just up sticks and move to a "better" one if you can't get a good (disciplined) squad together.

]nd try e.g. the iGi-Server, you are more likely to meet teamplay-orented people there than on most other publics.(At least in my experience).

Will check it out, although I suspect that the reason I haven't been on that server is due to it being on a different tectonic plate, and as such the lag is prohibitive.

Actually, as I heard, only once has the armour of a C2 been penetrated by an IED causing injury to the driver inside. The tanks in PR are far superior to the ones that you are taling about.

Good point, well made. However the IED that was used to take out the C2 in that article wasn't "far superior" to the weapons used to take out the tanks I was talking about: "It was an improvised explosive device and the technology is at least 50 or 60 years old" to quote from the article cited. While I stand corrected, having done some more research, it would be nice to think that a purpose-built munition like a SLAM, used multiple times in the same area (I believe I stated that taking a whole kit's worth would be reasonable), would get the job done. Compare the damage of a SLAM to an AT mine in the game and ask yourself what the differences are. "AT mines focus damage" - well shaped charges do too. "Mines are used on the under-side of vehicles" - well we can't get under tanks, so approximating this precision just by getting close to one is the best the engine can do AFAIK.

Reality aside, there's a strong balance / gameplay prerogative to be considered.

those are very usefull if you stick with your squad instead of running off

Which is harder than it sounds, given the fact that support kits move slower, have to be prone to be "effective", etc.

I also really hated the gun in the beta but I got used to it now and it's as good as any other gun. It's just a matter of getting used to the changes really.

According to the (admittedly frugal) statistics I've observed since getting ABR running and checking out some of the pages it generates, US lose more rounds than they win. On maps like EJOD I can only really put this down to the M16. Yes it's being replaced, but it would be nice if a "real" (it's what most US soldiers are using ATM, right?) could be included in a "reality" game without being a real pain in the backside.

This merely requires a change in tactics - either infantry learn to melt away from tanks and dig in till support arrives, or prepare by mining avenues of approach and digging in the heavy AT for the sneak rear shot.

Digging in? To what? Impenetrable terrain? Heavy AT? There's only a couple available to the whole team. Mining avenues of approach? With what? Engineers get like one each, and they are easily avoided. A full squad could barely mine a comprehensive region, let alone the one engineer (if you're lucky) you'll find in any given squad. Never mind the fact that mining whilst under-fire by a tank that is happy to sit still and snipe you from miles-away is totally ineffective.

These are best used for - gasp - demolition of strategic assets i.e. command posts, bunkers, ammo caches etc.

Even though you generally have more than one asset in a location, but only 1 C4 from a kit, and SLAMs aren't too effective against most "assets" (not tried ammo caches, but a squad-mate did report planting one on a cache that survived and had to be grenaded. That might be his player-error though).

I think suppression could be made more effective by increasing the range at which you'll go tunnel vision from passing rounds, and if it passes RIGHT by your head, maybe LSD vision. But i trust the devs to model the LMG's correctly, and not give in to the temptation of balancing.

"Tunnel vision" - it amuses me that people here are so keen to extol the virtues of "modelling guns on reality" whilst completely ignoring all the totally unrealistic components added to make up for the shortcomings of trying to model reality on a hampered virtual engine. Saying you'd rather have a "correctly" modelled LMG compared to a *playably* modelled LMG, while civillians are running around chucking stones at people and getting knived, strikes me as polishing the brass on the titanic. At the moment PR is a great mod and really quite playable. "Ultra-realistic" mods are never playable, and as such have a tendancy to wither and die quite quickly. Thank god that PR isn't going that way (or at least if it is, it's doing so incredibly ineptly - in real life a single soldier can't build a massive bunker in like a minute... IRL it wouldn't even be done by the time a round finished!).

So, to sum up: I hate to burst your bubble, but PR isn't "perfectly modelled" on "real life guns" - the BF2 engine isn't sophisticated enough to do that. The devs (hats off to them) have used "artistic license" to come to the guns' configurations at present in an attempt to approximate "realistic feel", and suggesting the use "artistic license" in a different way to make the game more playable isn't really the heresy all the neigh-sayers here would like to pretend it is.

[Eddie Baker]

Everything you have commented on has been brought up before. Please do a quick search before posting a new thread next time.

With regards to optical sights on LMGs, telescopic (ELCAN M145 MGO) and close-combat sights (various) are routinely attached to the SAW in US infantry fire-teams and the M145 MGO is used on the M240s. The L110A1 (Minimi-Para) used by UK infantry can be and has been outfitted with the SUSAT telescopic sight on operations. Whether or not we will implement them in game as such is up in the air.

This thread is locked because of previous discussion and you received one warning for your attitude in general and a snide reply to a Dev's reasonable suggestion to research how the 5.56 has performed recently in combat conditions.