Page 4 of 5
Posted: 2006-05-31 15:41
by Stecher
the.ultimate.maverick wrote:In BF2 your range is < 300 metres (limited by draw distance) therefore in my mind, you are not using the rifle as a 'sniper' rifle per se, but more of a DM rifle. This is why I would argue there is not really a role for a 'sniper' class in BF2 but thats just my thoughts.
There isn't any one constant draw distance or visibility level throughout the game. Different maps have different levels of fog/haze/dust. It is dependent on this as well as your graphics settings. Obviously the setting called "draw distance" for world drawing (including vehicles), but in addition, one of the other settings (I don't know which one) controls at which distance a person is drawn, separately from the world. I have everything all the way up. On Gulf of Oman people appear at 400m while looking through the scope. On El Alamein XXL, the dust hides them before they stop being drawn. But this happens at about 550m. On that map I can not only see, but identify MEC or Marine at just over 500m. If your graphics are set up so that you can't see past 300m on any map, then that explains why you don't think the sniper is even worth a spot in the game. But it isn't the game, its your graphics. The sniper, on certain maps, has a very appropriate place.
Posted: 2006-05-31 15:48
by the.ultimate.maverick
Sorry mate - never gone sniper on EL AL - been a tanker
Posted: 2006-05-31 15:52
by Wraith
Good Point Stetcher.
Posted: 2006-05-31 19:23
by [T*Co]StudMuffin21
Malik wrote:I guess you've still not played PRMM 0.3 yet. That's what it's like.
The M14 is ancient, stick with the M24 and have the SPR as the DMR, but please take off the supressor.
What's wrong with the supressor?? I love it. Just last night I was playing (I forget what map) with my fellot Trust Co buddies. I was stationed on a mountian side, over looking enemy territory. Just 20 yards away (just beyone a rock) I heard sniper rifle shots. My squad was being taken out. I had neutralized 5 targets, and the enemy next to me didn't even know I was there. Then I saw him stand up, pulled out my pistol, and killed him. Especially in these close quarter areas, the silencer is VERY usefull.
Posted: 2006-05-31 20:05
by mavit
ditto i love the silencer. as above, it is great for getting right behind enemy lines in the littlebird then taking cover 100m away under some rocks or in a darkened bush then opening up on the sill people running around in the open....they got no idea...they turn around spraying their Ak's around like they were miniguns, end up stopping to reload and having thier head blown off....entertainment at its best
Posted: 2006-05-31 20:49
by [T*Co]StudMuffin21
mavit wrote:ditto i love the silencer. as above, it is great for getting right behind enemy lines in the littlebird then taking cover 100m away under some rocks or in a darkened bush then opening up on the sill people running around in the open....they got no idea...they turn around spraying their Ak's around like they were miniguns, end up stopping to reload and having thier head blown off....entertainment at its best
You read my mind. It's so much fun watching them scurry about like chickens with their heads cut off.
But on a little less graphic note. It's also very effective to have that suppressor for the more hidden reason. That way, if you take out a target, they have no idea where you are. And you can continue to spot out enemy troops and enemy armor so your fellow team mates and squad members aren't bombarded by a surprise convoey comming their way.
Posted: 2006-06-01 07:10
by Zaitzev-A-
If the dev's decide to change from sniper-class to a designated marksman-class the silencer would have to go. But as a sniper-class weapon attachment it is great.
Dev question: Have you changed/reduced the effektivenes on the silenced sniper rifle in game, since sub-sonic ammo has poorer performance than standard velocity ammo?
Posted: 2006-06-01 09:37
by the.ultimate.maverick
Zaitzev I presume you are not aware of this but the ammunition used in the SPR is a heavier (77gr) 5.56mm round (the Mk 262 Mk0 and Mk1) as a result its performance (in live field tests) beats that of 7.62 ammunition.
The issue is not as easy as you first thought...
Posted: 2006-06-01 11:28
by Tinkerbell
Burning Mustache wrote:<snip>
What I would REALLY, REALLY like to see are scopes which actually "work" like real life scopes in regards to range-adjustment.
First off, give the sniper class range-finder binoculars, like the spec-ops has, to determine the distance of the designated target from your own position.
Now modifiy the scopes of the rifles so that the horizontal "dashes" on your scope represent distances, kinda like that:
<snip>
Where each dash represents a certain distance that correlates with the bullet-drop of the rifle, so you can actually adjust your aiming to the real distance of your target, and you don't have to "guess" the bullet-drop with each new target.
This would actually enable you to make one-shot kills without alerting the enemy with a "test" shot as to where you bullet lands.
It's the entire point of a sniper to take out unsuspecting targets with a snigle shot.
If I'd have to make a few "test" shots to determine where my bullets would land, I could just aswell take an assault rifle.
<snip>
the SVD scope already has this. the First chevron in the middle is the bullet at, iirc, 200 meters, the one below it is 400, the one below that at 600. this is, of course, if it actually works. im just saying how the POSP 4x24M works.
the SVD scope also has a range finder. crude and lo-tech, but it still works.
the wierd bit in tyhe bottom left corner of the scope is the range finder, the bottom line is the constant. you line the target up with the bottom line, and then the top line. that top line, and the distance between that and the bottom line is a 1.8meter/1.7 meter tall man's height at X many meters, as indicated along the top line.
If the PRMM team could make this actually work, along with realistic capabilities of the SVD ( accurate to less than 2 MOA at 600 meters) then i wouldn't play anything else.
Posted: 2006-06-01 11:47
by Dandy
I dont think military uses adjustable magnification on the Sniper Scope. If im right the standard magnification is X10
Posted: 2006-06-01 12:52
by Stecher
Posted: 2006-06-01 17:01
by Zaitzev-A-
Zaitzev I presume you are not aware of this but the ammunition used in the SPR is a heavier (77gr) 5.56mm round (the Mk 262 Mk0 and Mk1) as a result its performance (in live field tests) beats that of 7.62 ammunition
I am aware of the 77grain 5,56 bullet but find it hard to believe that it will beat the 185 grain 7,62mm NATO round in damage. Especially if the 5,56mm is a sub-sonic round.
The way it was explained to me was: the heavier 5,56 mm round will equal the lighter 5,56mm round when you use a shorter barrel like 10,5 inches or give the standard M-16 a bit more punch, but no way near that of 7,62 NATO round.
If it exists testing of this round compared to the 7,62mm NATO round, please point me in the right direction!
Posted: 2006-06-01 17:05
by the.ultimate.maverick
It won't beat it but it is less of a defecit than the lighter 5.56 round - thats all I was saying
!
Posted: 2006-06-01 17:08
by Wraith
I don't mean to be a jerk here but just because one unit tested it doesn't make it SOP for all Corps Snipers.
Posted: 2006-06-01 17:36
by Major Ursa Norte
Go to any ammunitionor re-loading company website and play with their ballistics tables. Guys, F=MA where F is force, M is mass and A is accelloration. You can do the math. Assuming that both of the 5.56mm projectiles are standard mil grade and NOT frangible, the only way a heavier 5.56mm round will pack more punch is IF its velocity is not reduced too much. Which means, a sub-sonic 5.56mm round will NOT pack more of a punch than standard issue 5.56mm rounds. Sub-sonic would roughly remove 1200 - 1500 feet per second (maybe even more as I can't remember what the standard round's fps is at the moment) from the standerd round. 77 grain bullet at sub 1000 fps would all but bounce off of your vest.
Think about it. A big ole .45 auto "screams" out a 230 grain slug at around 850 fps. 230 - 77 = 153 grains OVER the "heavy" 5.56mm round. The standard 5.56 round gets its lethality from its velocity. .45 gets its lethality from its weight.
Posted: 2006-06-01 17:47
by the.ultimate.maverick
We know - chill out!!
And I'd also say - remember that number of other factors are very important to, profile of the round, distance etc
Posted: 2006-06-01 18:03
by Major Ursa Norte
I am chilly. One more point though, as a rule of thumb, for every inch you remove from a barrell, you lose approx. 100 fps. Most ammunition is test fired from a standard 22" barrell. There is not much you can do to stabilize a round fired from a short barrell. You can only increase the twist rate so much before you build in flight instability. Short barrelled weapons are simply not practical for any type of "sniping".
Posted: 2006-06-01 18:05
by Wraith
Tumble of the round, wind, air pressure, humidity, how many bugs it hits in flight and many other factors.
We could also get TOTALLY off topic and talk about the effects of CAOS THEARY on the projectile as it goes from what type of molecules the rounds consists of to the amount per billion of oxygen particles it must touch in order to meet the target..
Posted: 2006-06-01 18:05
by the.ultimate.maverick
Yes - to make the really obvious point for you, a shorter barrell also reduces accuracy.
Posted: 2006-06-01 18:20
by Major Ursa Norte
Such hostility. there were people posting in this thread that admitted to not knowing a whole bunch about this subject. I was only trying to educate. I will relenquish the floor.