Automatic rifleman bipod

Bringerof_D · Post by **Bringerof_D** » 2008-02-02 02:23

now in PR 0.7 when you pull up the sights for automatic rifle man you cant look around fast, now i asume thats because of the bipod.

heres my suggestion is to make the bipod only work when you're prone, i mean i've nailed people firing in standing and for me thats not realistic. as well it really hinders my ability to turn around to check my 6 even when i'm standing

ReadMenace · Post by **ReadMenace** » 2008-02-02 03:09

Bringerof_D wrote:now in PR 0.7 when you pull up the sights for automatic rifle man you cant look around fast, now i asume thats because of the bipod.

heres my suggestion is to make the bipod only work when you're prone, i mean i've nailed people firing in standing and for me thats not realistic. as well it really hinders my ability to turn around to check my 6 even when i'm standing

The sluggishness might also be from the fact that it's a large, heavy weapon..

-REad

RCMoonPie · Post by **RCMoonPie** » 2008-02-02 03:12

I agree....if you want to make a fast turn to aquire targets....
drop the weapon from your site view and spin....then re-sight.

GR34 · Post by **GR34** » 2008-02-02 03:28

or just hit the sensitivity up button on you G5 mouse hehe it turns like normal then

Post by **OkitaMakoto** » 2008-02-02 04:05

ReadMenace wrote:The sluggishness might also be from the fact that it's a large, heavy weapon..

-REad

x2

You cant just flip a SAW, etc. around. especially while firing. While you might have a bit more freedom than shown, its already easy enough to un'scope' and shift your angle.

nedlands1 · Post by **nedlands1** » 2008-02-02 04:13

A combination of FH2's MG34 deployment system and my "maglinking" concept would be ideal, if I may say so myself. The weapon would be separated into two weapons which share ammo. One would be the "deployed" version with the bipod down and the other would be the "undeployed" version with the bipod retracted. The "deployed" version would be slower to bear on target, practical only when prone and very accurate. The "undeployed" version would be like a heavy assault rifle with more muzzle climb.

BloodBane611 · Post by **BloodBane611** » 2008-02-02 04:31

The "undeployed" version would be like a heavy assault rifle with more muzzle climb.

Why more muzzle climb? The climb of the weapon shouldn't change, but the accuracy of the shooter certainly would. I think increased deviation would be much more appropriate. Still, it sounds like a good idea.

Post by **Jaymz** » 2008-02-02 04:35

I think all SAW's in general need more standing deviation.

nedlands1 · Post by **nedlands1** » 2008-02-02 04:36

BloodBane611 wrote:Why more muzzle climb? The climb of the weapon shouldn't change, but the accuracy of the shooter certainly would. I think increased deviation would be much more appropriate. Still, it sounds like a good idea.

The LMG's tend to have higher ROF then their assault rifle brethren. Hence the larger overall muzzle climb. The muzzle climb for individual shots would probably be less or similar though.

LeggyStarlitz · Post by **LeggyStarlitz** » 2008-02-02 05:00

From my own (limited) personal experience with the SAW, I found it surprisingly accurate while standing. My guess is a combination of the 5.56mm round and the front end weight keeps it from climbing too fast.

Any current SAW/Minimi users care to comment?

deciuj · Post by **deciuj** » 2008-02-02 05:32

When firing a LMG/SAW in a prone position, the deviation should b significantly lower then it should when firing standing/crouching. If you ever fired a Minimi in a prone position you would notice that it is uber accurate, and absolutely no muzzle climb at all.

Even while standing and firing, the minimi's front end heavy and low recoil from its cartridges causes very lil to absolutely no muzzle climb.

VipersGhost · Post by **VipersGhost** » 2008-02-02 06:26

[R-CON]nedlands1 wrote:A combination of FH2's MG34 deployment system and my "maglinking" concept would be ideal, if I may say so myself. The weapon would be separated into two weapons which share ammo. One would be the "deployed" version with the bipod down and the other would be the "undeployed" version with the bipod retracted. The "deployed" version would be slower to bear on target, practical only when prone and very accurate. The "undeployed" version would be like a heavy assault rifle with more muzzle climb.

x2

excellent idea

Pain · Post by **Pain** » 2008-02-02 11:27

The SAW isnt a heavy machine gun like the m60 or anything like that.

Its a light machine gun designed for infantry battles and squad using.
You can give supressive fire in all stances with it and you dont need to go prone. The bipod can put on everything in every height but the bipod isnt necessary to use it in all stances while moving.

RHYS4190 · Post by **RHYS4190** » 2008-02-02 12:19

The support gun blur needs to be incressed i recon, it not right that a rifle is better at suppressing then a support gun.

kilroy0097 · Post by **kilroy0097** » 2008-02-02 12:56

I x3 [R-CON]nedlands1 suggestion of making it similar to FH2 in deployment of LMG when prone. Makes complete sense and works like a champ in FH2. In the immortal words of Picard, "Make it so.".

RCMoonPie · Post by **RCMoonPie** » 2008-02-02 14:16

BloodBane611 wrote:Why more muzzle climb? The climb of the weapon shouldn't change, but the accuracy of the shooter certainly would. I think increased deviation would be much more appropriate. Still, it sounds like a good idea.

I agree....the "climb" shouldnt increase.
Reason....The muzzle velocity of a weapon doesnt increase because of the shooters positioning. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other.
But, the accuracy of the shooter would increase or decrease based on the positioning.
Basic shooting principle...
Prone....most accurate
Sitting/kneeling....very accurate
standing/off-hand....least accurate

But....we are talking about the M249. It is an "exception to the rule" in my book. It is lighter than most LMGs and can be shouldered in the standing position and fired with ver good accuracy.

[R-DEV]Jaymz wrote:I think all SAW's in general need more standing deviation.

I see the point you are trying to make.
But...the M249 in reality is still a very accurate weapon when shouldered in the standing "off-hand" position. More so than in-game.

BloodBane611 · Post by **BloodBane611** » 2008-02-03 04:05

The SAW is 2 pounds lighter than the HK 21, 4 pounds lighter than the PKM, and at least 2 pounds heavier than the QBB-95. So overall, I don't think that it will be significantly easier to shoulder or more accurate than the other LMGs. The only thing going for it is that it is shorter than either the PKM or the HK 21, although both of those weapons have significantly less muzzle climb and are more accurate in real life, as well as firing heavier, more accurate rounds.

Also, you would do well to use the "EDIT" button. No one likes a double poster.

RCMoonPie · Post by **RCMoonPie** » 2008-02-03 15:46

BloodBane611 wrote:The SAW is 2 pounds lighter than the HK 21, 4 pounds lighter than the PKM, and at least 2 pounds heavier than the QBB-95. So overall, I don't think that it will be significantly easier to shoulder or more accurate than the other LMGs. The only thing going for it is that it is shorter than either the PKM or the HK 21, although both of those weapons have significantly less muzzle climb and are more accurate in real life, as well as firing heavier, more accurate rounds.

Also, you would do well to use the "EDIT" button. No one likes a double poster.

I speak from having personally carried an M249 "once or twice"...and with comm gear too! And if you dont think 2-4 lbs, coupled with an overall shorter barrel makes a difference...you are sadly misinformed. It IS easier to shoulder than its counter-parts. I'll take a friggin' pepsi challenge against another "equivalent" any day!

As to my double post.....I dont care what is "liked".
Look more closely...I was addressing two different posts.
Its not illegal.