CQB/C M14

[mrnothing]

Before i say anything, i checked for this and there's nothing about this - yet.

But anyways, through my own experience in PR, and maybe other's, I find it difficult to use the M14 when your with your squad in a CQB/C MAP because I find the magnification too be too much for a small area. I know the point of the marksmen rifle or kit is to be the role of a infantry/riflemen, but have the capability to take shot at longer ranges then the conventional M4/M16. That's true, but it's not like all of the enemy targets are going to be at a distance a M4 can't touch. The marksmen is probably going to end up in a situation where there's a target in a CQB area where the high powered scope is of no use because its just too powerful to zoom in onto the target.

MY suggestion is FIRST OFF ALL - not to replace the marksmen rifle (M14) but to change it up for a more suited CQB map. The main change really is to change the high powered scope to something more of an optic/scope that can zoom in at long ranges, but can still be used in a CQB situation. One example could be a more powerful acog scope, because Trijicon does have many types of acog, all with different magnification, but in general, can still be used a in CQC area. Another could be using the default aimpoint sights, but adding a 3x or less magnifier sight. The aimpoint optic is already a cqb optic, but adding a magnifier just gives it a bit of a boost in magnification, yet still maintaining it's role as a cqb optic. Another could be the S&B short dot, which is great for long range, but still useable in cqb area's.

Now I could go on suggesting more sights, but Im not going to, because I think i've stated my point well enough. Again, Im not saying to change the whole kit, but just to change the weapon (M14) so it can be more suited for a CQB area.

[gclark03]

I know it's been suggested already, but why aren't the Americans using the M16 marksman rifles (SAM-R and SDM-R)? I don't even understand why the M14 is being used in real life, let alone in PR, for that role.

As for this idea, I completely agree. An ACOG, in fact, would be perfect - it's the ACOG that makes any M16 in PR almost a DMR in its own right.

[master of the templars]

if you want range use the marksman rifle
if you are involved in CQB then don't request it.

[gclark03]

The phrasing of this thread title isn't helping.

You are right, but an ACOG does the same job and gives the marksman a better short-range sight picture.

At the same time, if the M14 were given an ACOG in PR, the only advantage a marksman would have over the average optics rifleman would be actual effective range and stopping power.

[Blakeman]

I know it's been suggested already, but why aren't the Americans using the M16 marksman rifles (SAM-R and SDM-R)? I don't even understand why the M14 is being used in real life, let alone in PR, for that role.

As for this idea, I completely agree. An ACOG, in fact, would be perfect - it's the ACOG that makes any M16 in PR almost a DMR in its own right.

First, there are several different types of 'Americans'. If you are talking about the US Army then your statement is correct and I believe that is what they are using.

If you are talking about the USMC then you are incorrect. The USMC is actually changing all of its standard M14 DMRs and converting them on a one for one basis with the M39 enhanced marksman rifle. The USMC, always devoted to the individual marksman skill selected this because it provides greater hitting power and penetration at range. Every Marine being a rifleman (from the desk clerk to the cook to the infantry grunt) this provides another tool in which the Corps can achieve victory over its enemies abroad.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M39_Enhanced_Marksman_Rifle

[ostupidman]

I don't think he needs a different scope, would rather see the marksman get a pistol. If he's in a CQB environment with his squad, he can change to the sidearm at the cost of his ability to reach out and touch someone.

[nedlands1]

People make do with firing the scoped G3A3 from the hip, why not the M14? The only real difference is that the G3A3 can be fired in a fully automatic mode, which is arguably useless unless you're at point blank range. Even with the tunnel vision from the magnification, you still aren't really disadvantaged. The fact that the crosshairs line with the centre of the screen makes it easy to pre-align the weapon before you bring the sights up.

If you are working closely together with your squad then you should rarely be getting into a CQB situation where your rifle is required. The marksmen can be the guy that throws the grenade or takes the rear whilst the aptly equipped riflemen take point. When the situation requires some long range work then the marksmen can take the lead.

[Seiran]

Just to interject here - US Forces in PR are using the M14 because they're using it now in Afghanistan and Iraq as I type this. The Marines have several variants, some as simple a new stock, but they also have their SAM-R and SDM-R rifles. The US Army uses M4's and M16A4's with ACOG 4x scopes on them, as well as M14's because the M14's have a bit more knockdown power. As for why it has the larger optic, well because most users have that on their rifle. I've only seen two M14's with an ACOG, and I'm assuming they were for what the OP is asking. I do however agree with those that are saying if you know, or even think you'll be going into a CQC situation, leave the DMR kit at home. You'll just hurt your squad and your own abilities.

And Blakeman, while solid info - Take everything you read on Wiki, unless you have firsthand knowledge and are writing it yourself, with a grain of salt.

[Maxfragg]

well the m-14 is fine as it is on most of the maps, but it replaces not the wide varing rifles used by marines and army for this purpose, and in aditon the m14 is also used not only as marksman rifle but also as aditonal battlerifle (especially by the army) in cqb, so i would suggest that the DMR are mapspecific m-14 or m-16/ar-10 marksmen variants and in aditon the army gets on maps like ramiel 2 m14 without scope or with a lower magnificion as requestable rifleman kit and looses therefore one sniper and one marksman

[Eddie Baker]

A change in optic will not be needed for the M14, as it has a variable magnification scope modeled onto it. For the next patch it will have two modes of magnification (3x and 9x); this needed fix was pointed out (by me) back when .8 first came out.

Both M14s and M16 / M4 SDMRs (which, from what I understand, are for the most part just M16A4s and M4s with bipods and 4x ACOGs, with not many having match/accurized barrels or more powerful optics) are being used at the squad level at the moment in the US Army. The M14 is being used in real life (and in PR) since it is something that is on-hand and will do the job; I have seen some with the Sage/Crane EBR stock and some with composite traditional stocks.

In the Marines at the squad level there are three types of M16 based DMR floating around. West coast units have (had?) M16A4s with bipods and ACOGs. East coast units have/had the SAM-R, which features a more powerful, variable magnification optic and match barrels with floating rails. And Mk-12 rifles have been coming into service for the line rifle companies for about a year or more, so the status of the other variants I am unsure of.

With regards to the M39, it seems to be intended for the Security Forces/FAST, MSG, MP SRT and EOD units. However, the USMC also started fielding Mk-11 rifles a few years ago and those have replaced the M14 DMR, too. So I am not sure which is going to be the dominant semi-auto rifle.

Again, the M14 is in PR since it will do the job, and modeling yet another cool toy takes resources. And also since every time we make a cool new toy one group of players is happy, the other half are accusing us of factional favoritism, no matter how the weapon actually performs in-game.

[mrnothing]

A change in optic will not be needed for the M14, as it has a variable magnification scope modeled onto it. For the next patch it will have two modes of magnification (3x and 9x); this needed fix was pointed out (by me) back when .8 first came out.

Both M14s and M16 / M4 SDMRs (which, from what I understand, are for the most part just M16A4s and M4s with bipods and 4x ACOGs, with not many having match/accurized barrels or more powerful optics) are being used at the squad level at the moment in the US Army. The M14 is being used in real life (and in PR) since it is something that is on-hand and will do the job; I have seen some with the Sage/Crane EBR stock and some with composite traditional stocks.

In the Marines at the squad level there are three types of M16 based DMR floating around. West coast units have (had?) M16A4s with bipods and ACOGs. East coast units have/had the SAM-R, which features a more powerful, variable magnification optic and match barrels with floating rails. And Mk-12 rifles have been coming into service for the line rifle companies for about a year or more, so the status of the other variants I am unsure of.

With regards to the M39, it seems to be intended for the Security Forces/FAST, MSG, MP SRT and EOD units. However, the USMC also started fielding Mk-11 rifles a few years ago and those have replaced the M14 DMR, too. So I am not sure which is going to be the dominant semi-auto rifle.

Again, the M14 is in PR since it will do the job, and modeling yet another cool toy takes resources. And also since every time we make a cool new toy one group of players is happy, the other half are accusing us of factional favoritism, no matter how the weapon actually performs in-game.

FIrst, its good to hear that in the next patch they'll be putting 2 different magnifications for the M14, but I kind of find that a bit not touching base of realism. In reality, it's not like with the touch of a button, its going to automatically change your magnification. It requires the soldier to have to take a few seconds to adjust the magnification of the scope, and the soldier probably won't get it in one shot. With a high powered rifle optic (like the acog scope) it doesn't require as much adjustment as a high powered sniper scope because it's already set to magnify for long ranges, but still suitable at close-mid ranges. The acog scope on the M4 in PR has a good long range magnification where you can hit targets or at least see the target, but still suitable when in closed in area's.

As for the factional favortism, it's arguable because yes, I did suggest it. But already in reality, you can see a lot of solider already with M14's with acog scopes or other optics beside the high powered sniper scope. Just look at how many soldier's in the US army have EBR's now because of the problem with CQB area's.

I understand that it does take time and recourses to get things done, but in my POV, i believe its for the good and its worth giving a shot for. It's not like your breaking the laws of reality, because we or i've seen people already done this, where they have but optics like the acog or other optics on to their M14.

[M.Warren]

Like most people have already stated, it's not worthwhile to try and adapt an M14 or any marksman varient rifle to be primarily suited for Close Quarters Combat. This simply just defeats the purpose, as the marksman should be trying to find a vantage point to provide overwatch. Similar to a sniper, but instead staying in close proximity with friendly units.

Besides, I would never emphasize CQB in PR as it simply lacks in that department. No matter what is done, you'll never have a sufficient weapon accuracy level while aiming and moving with the WASD keys.

Personally PR should stick to Long and Medium range combat. Of course CQC will happen, but it shouldn't never be emphasized that much. Afterall there is already enough games out there with spray and pray tactics. Besides, almost anyone in good sense wont aim and clear a building in PR. They'll simply switch the gun on auto/burst and fire from the hip everytime.

[Eddie Baker]

FIrst, its good to hear that in the next patch they'll be putting 2 different magnifications for the M14, but I kind of find that a bit not touching base of realism. In reality, it's not like with the touch of a button, its going to automatically change your magnification. It requires the soldier to have to take a few seconds to adjust the magnification of the scope, and the soldier probably won't get it in one shot.

There may not be a button, but there is a dial that allows you to cycle to each level of magnification offered by the scope. It may not be through the entire numerical range of the magnification, it skips steps. Some variable scopes only have two levels. And this is what this wonderful engine allows us to do.

[Gaz]

In reality, it's not like with the touch of a button, its going to automatically change your magnification. It requires the soldier to have to take a few seconds to adjust the magnification of the scope, and the soldier probably won't get it in one shot. With a high powered rifle optic (like the acog scope) it doesn't require as much adjustment as a high powered sniper scope because it's already set to magnify for long ranges, but still suitable at close-mid ranges.

The vast majority of optics on DMR and sniper rifles are variable dialled, as Eddie has alluded to. I can go from min to max zoom on my Schmidt & Bender PM2 in, oh, about 1/4 a second? Have a look at my sig and ask yourself who you think it is

No one with a DMR/Sniper rifle would even THINK about building clearance in real life, if they didn't have a sidearm/alt weapon, like they are portrayed for gameplay and teamwork reasons ingame. If this was the case, your no.2 is dead and you're saving that last round for yourself.

In truth and in reality, only a stupid and impatient sniper would not maximise HIS chances of survival by utilising his long range weapon and take on the en forces on his terms, at range.

The team will not waste resources on something that has minimal gameplay impact.

[gclark03]

Well, you could give the marksman kit a unique version of the faction iron sights assault rifle that has low ammo and a different item index...

[Blakeman]

And Blakeman, while solid info - Take everything you read on Wiki, unless you have firsthand knowledge and are writing it yourself, with a grain of salt.

Just used that as reference as I have friends still in and using the M14.

Wiki was just to give a bit of info to those not in the loop.

[Seiran]

Just used that as reference as I have friends still in and using the M14.

Wiki was just to give a bit of info to those not in the loop.

Oh so do I, but as I said I don't trust Wiki unless I'm writing it and know it's 100% accurate, because there are too many internet commando's out there with no knowledge at all typing up entrys.

@Mrnothing - It's not because of CQB reasons they are changing out to the Crane/Sage stock - It's weight and modularity. The fact it's a more compact chassis is a very small part, in terms that it makes it easier to move in and out of vehicles, not clear rooms and fight in alleyways.

[ReadMenace]

Oh so do I, but as I said I don't trust Wiki unless I'm writing it and know it's 100% accurate, because there are too many internet commando's out there with no knowledge at all typing up entrys.

@Mrnothing - It's not because of CQB reasons they are changing out to the Crane/Sage stock - It's weight and modularity. The fact it's a more compact chassis is a very small part, in terms that it makes it easier to move in and out of vehicles, not clear rooms and fight in alleyways.

To add to this, collapsable stocks aid in the use of the rifle w/ body armor, and allow the end-user to achieve propper eye-relief with optics.

If they were going for increased CQB functionality, they'd employ a shorter barrel.

-REad