Project Reality Forums

Posted: **2007-04-19 16:38**

Actually, they are quiet the same

, its just you

again, read carefully.

"Of course I read your post and it didn't have much value originally,"

HAHAHA, as if any of your posts had any value.

Posted: **2007-04-19 16:43**

I agree, 5.56 should have decreased recoil, since it's weaker than the g3 in damage. IMO recoil for the g3 should even increase a little more on full auto, and/ or its accuracy should decrease a little bit. g3 is really powerful on PR, and, if it has a scope, it will be almost like a marksman rifle.

Posted: **2007-04-19 17:22**

Severloh wrote:I agree, 5.56 should have decreased recoil, since it's weaker than the g3 in damage. IMO recoil for the g3 should even increase a little more on full auto, and/ or its accuracy should decrease a little bit. g3 is really powerful on PR, and, if it has a scope, it will be almost like a marksman rifle.

You know that decreasing accuracy of G3 would be very unreal?
This isn't vanilla.

Posted: **2007-04-19 17:35**

I have shot a 5.56mm and a 7.62mm IRL but it was a long time ago. Some one who has real world experience with both the M16 and G3 could comment about the recoil comparison.

I don't remeber the recoil from the old versions, all I remeber is having to adjust to it

Cheers,

Posted: **2007-04-23 06:12**

I really am not familiarized with firearms, and many things I will write here may be (and probably will be) wrong, so PLEASE correct me, but don't a weapon with a heavier bullet like a G3 be a little less accurate than the 5.56 in greater distances? And for balancing issues, (and for realism too, I don't think that the better equiped army in the world would have an inferior weapon, but that is what it looks like when you play in china x US missions), I really think that the m16 should have a good recoil reduction and, who knows, a little more power. As for the G3, I heard that bullet weight thing somewhere, but I don't know if it was reliable so...

Posted: **2007-04-23 06:57**

SethLive! wrote:first, please read my whole post before calling down firey judment upon me.

I think all 5.56 guns should have a slight recoil reduction when firing on semi-auto. IRL, american soldiers 'double tap' enemys but in pr this is impossible, because of the high recoil of 5.56 guns on semi. The problem with this is that semi would be used as a full auto at medium ranges. one solution for this is to make the gun "go back down" after the shot. currently every time you fire, you have to re-aim your gun by dragging it down after every shot.

devs, is it possible to make 5.56 guns go back down after the first shot, but not go down all the way if you shoot too rapidly? GRAW has a dynamic recoil system that i really like. you can double tap easily enough, but the gun becomes uncontrollable when you shoot is full auto or too fast of semi.
dont get me wrong, i like the fact that the gun does not 're-aim' itsel for you when you shoot, but 5.56 guns should be able to double tap.

P.S. i think 7.62 recoil is perfect right now. I also think 5.56 full auto recoil is perfect to.

Apologies.. I have not read the entire thread.

I wanted to respond to the original post.

Reduced recoil... if anything it should be increased.
Guns don’t go back to their original position after firing.
Only the firing party will control this movement.

Double tapping is skill to be developed through practice and timing. Not by asking the gun dynamics to be changed to suit you.
Double tap, this is BF2 PR not Snake Pitkin (or whatever his name is).
I’m no solider, but whenever I’ve seen a fire-fight they don’t double tap, they unload entire magazines. (This especially includes Special Forces, they don’t mess around with ‘double tapping’, they unload.)

It is quite possible to fire off two accurate rounds of in quick succession, with all the rifles, as we stand now in PR.

Do you want the rifle to re-aim itself or not....?? You say you don’t but then you ask the devs: "devs, is it possible to make 5.56 guns go back down after the first shot"

Please let us make the mod a challenge... not have auto aiming guns so SethLive can double tap his victims.

Posted: **2007-04-23 07:14**

mammikoura wrote:btw, just interested.
How many of you guys who seem to know everything you need about recoil have actually fired a weapon before?

a really useful post...

Names.. Who do you disagree with? Why?

Don't be a tard! There is plenty of weapons experience on these forums.

Posted: **2007-04-23 07:53**

The m-16 is at a huge disadvantage. High recoil, no scope, small shell, low accuracy. Between the Chinese rifleman, and the G3, I don't think I'd be joining the Marines any time soon...

Posted: **2007-04-23 15:25**

caboose wrote:The m-16 is at a huge disadvantage. High recoil, no scope, small shell, low accuracy. Between the Chinese rifleman, and the G3, I don't think I'd be joining the Marines any time soon...

well, the m16 does have very good accuracy, but it is far worse than the g3. in .6 or .7 both will have scopes but i dont expect this to change anything. The real problem lies in the recoil to damage ratio. The g3 recoils about 50% more than the m16 but does double the damage. One way to make the m16 better is to make every gun have an actual camera jerk effect when you get shot. this would be a bigger advantage to 5.56 guns because they hit more often than the 7.62 guns(they have less recoil and can therefore maintain a higher rof). The real reason behind this thread is that 5.56 gun are at a huge disadvantage against 7.62 guns because bullets have no immediate effect against people and because the recoils are not that far apart. THe only place a m16 is better that a g3 is between 20 and 40 meters, where the g3 cant quite use full auto accuratly but the m16 can use burst. Everywhere else the g3 has as *huge* advantage.

Posted: **2007-04-23 16:13**

mammikoura wrote:btw, just interested.
How many of you guys who seem to know everything you need about recoil have actually fired a weapon before?

I own an Olympic Arms AR-15 chambered in 5.56 (.223 Cal.) among other weapons. The recoil def. sticks to high.

Posted: **2007-04-23 16:31**

MadTommy wrote:Apologies.. I have not read the entire thread.
Guns don’t go back to their original position after firing.
Only the firing party will control this movement.
QUOTE]

How often have you shot a gun??? If you are prone with a .223 cal rifle, it will most certainly go back to its original position...not EXACTLY but definitely close. As it is now, when you fire a gun, it just bumps your aim higher and sticks it there. That is FAR from how a real weapon feels. Your muscles are tensed and you take the recoil, and the weight of your gun+plus tensed muscle quickly brings the site picture back near its original location, ESP with a trained soldier. Even with larger caliber guns it will go back, the deviation with will be greater but it will still return.

Posted: **2007-04-23 19:29**

Ok kids I own quite a few guns a rock river ar 15 with a eotech/and I own and owned a socom 16 and the m14 the socom kicks like a mule but the m14 if doubled traped doesnt because it has a heavy barrel. Also Ar 15 doesnt kick nearly as bad as it does in game w/o iron/eotech. I am not companying just drop my 2 cents.

Posted: **2007-05-03 11:23**

caboose wrote:The m-16 is at a huge disadvantage. High recoil, no scope, small shell, low accuracy. Between the Chinese rifleman, and the G3, I don't think I'd be joining the Marines any time soon...

I've decided I'm absolutely **** with it, can't hit anything on single shot, I hate burst- even in close range.

Dunno if anyone realised as well but IMO the M4's recoils is much greater than the AK47. I know they had to increase the recoil due to gameplay issues, and rightly so, but would there be any way to decrease the recoil a BIT but make it even less effective at range?

Project Reality Forums

reduced recoil for 5.56 guns (semi only)