Reflex sights better???

[Ramjali]

When i was playing at server with the map "Fallujah West", i noticed that the reflex sight is superior to the ACOG M16 becuase everyone else was using ACOG while i was only using Reflex M16 and squadless (becuase everyone else was in clan squad, vechile squad or full) but still managed to get 18 kills with 3 deaths within 30 minutes and 1 cache (had to leave server due to dinner). Sometimes i was literally in insurgent area with the whole of enemy team buzzing in the area and still mangaged to kill alot without getting hit alot (notice all alone due to no squads available) and even managed to kill drivers in SPG and gary. Thus me coming to the conclusion that Reflex sights are better.

I also noticed that crewmen kits were VERY good ie US and especially British Crewman, shortened L85 with 4x acog scope and could hit medium range targets as soon as sights were brought up unlike the riflemen.

Thus my question being is it that the Reflex sight or the carbine versions are better weapons than 4x scope weapon??? And are the unscoped weapons equally better because they dont have 4x scopes???

Someone explain because arent scoped weapons are meant to have better accuracy than reflex or non scoped ones???

[Rudd]

<300m I would want a reflex/irons, >300m I want a x4 scope

or, I'd want a ironsight grenadier, <300m = bullets, >300m = grenades

The actual weapons are physically the same accuracy ingame, just one gets a better picture on the enemy

[KiloJules]

When I first started playing:

"I want a scope on my gun...how am I supposed to hit anything?"

After a while I realized:

"Even though I might not really see my target...my bullet is still going there!"

Today as a SL:

"Guys, take Ami-Point/Reflex/Iron-sights on your guns...AR, you have the choice!"

-----------------

And I know what OP is referring to. I think it goes like this:

Since you can see the enemy better with the 4x you think you will be able to headshoot a guy on 250 m with the first shot but it rarely kills him. Since you can see him so clearly you think "wtf, why am I not hitting him!". Without the zoom you are aware of your chances not hitting and therefore more likely to go a bit closer, wait a second longer and therefore hit the guys more often. Hard to describe but I too have the feeling the scoped weapons have no real advantage over the others even though or because their accuracy is the same.

It is almost the other way around: Because of the "not getting the tunnel-vision" and the "faster bringing up of the sights" the non-scoped weapons are superior in game in the average situation.

-----------------

"You can still kill him without seeing him" was the thing I had to learn.

[Brainlaag]

I mostly use iron sights, or the alternative sights without magnification. Iron sights are for me best, because they don't clutter the screen and sight in way faster, which is a crucial factor in CQB (cough Fallujah cough). Scopes are most of the time just a penalty, as you can perform much better with the regular sights, only in special cases and over looong distances I'd recommend scopes (Quinling/Silent/Iron Eagle/...).

Never had any problems dropping hostiles well over 300+ with ironsights and what Rudd said.

[Ramjali]

I feel that iron sights are hard to aim with, becuase you have to put your aiming sight over the enemy blocking the view and making it hard to see where you are aiming (AK is notorious for this, probably why the enemy couldnt hit me). Thus i like Reflex sights more, due to the neat clean view it gives of the enemy with peripiral vision.

Also, i hate the fact that there is a standard that squads must be together at all times, becuase I seem to work at best when i am away from the squad but helping independantly and reporting positions enemy and also following enemies to cache locations (i know ninja) or listening in on gunfire and motorbike positions. And when i do this, i get kicked even though i usally have got more kills than the squad becuase i have been helping them by flanking enemy positions while they are too busy enganing my squad or following enemy to cache.

[Brainlaag]

It's always easier on your own, yet I dislike ninjas. Especially on Insurgency it's not about the kills, you can have hundreds of them and yet contribute very little to your team's effort.

The best thing about the iron sight is, it doesn't block half of your screen, leaving you quite aware of your surounding, while the Eotech for example, blocks great part of your screen center, leaving you vulnerable and unaware of enemies moving just around you. It is easier to aim with reflex sights tho, no doubt about that.

[ShockUnitBlack]

I got a 750m or so kill once with a C8 Eotech.

I'd say go ironsights/reflex sights on everything except AR, Marksman, and possibly Officer.

[Mikemonster]

Personally I always take scope, and try and always headshot.

Although as mentioned going from scope to ironsights/unmagnified can make your gun feel so much faster and easier.

But the reality is, if you're going to hit the target with ironsights you might as well have had a scope and taken a better placed shot (in my opinion). Personally it makes me a slower and more deliberate player to have a scope.

Also, it's really easy and fun to lonewolf on insurgency (or any) maps. But it's not really what the game is about (even though we all do it). Congratulations on getting the cache, it's a cheap tactic though. Like lonewolfing FOB's on Muttrah.


Edit: Rudd, over 300m i'll take a HAT please! Or a Tomahawk missile! Not a 5.56 peashooter!

[Portable.Cougar]

non scoped = higher volume of fire.

Always a good thing.

[Mikemonster]

Depends on your outlook. I think firing accurate shots infrequently beats the enemy running off to fight another day after being intimidated by lots of whild shooting..

One thing missing in PR are people that are good shots. For the amount of bullets a full squad spams out it's hard enough to kill someone without the AR.. Realistic in all likelihood, but considering you need 3x shots to kill someone it means half of your squad need to hit the target. Personally I think that usually one squad member gets two of these hits all to himself (with slow, aimed shots a second apart), and the other 4 (excluding AR) only manage one other between them (with lots of impulsive 'bang bang bang' shots).

Quality versus quantity again I suppose. Although I appreciate that quantity has a quality all of it's own.

Funnily enough when a squad is lined up and fires all at once they usually manage to take a target down. Because the first shot from each squad member usually hits.

[Spec]

That's the way it should be. An ambush results in a few people going down initially, while an open firefight takes a long time and results in people withdrawing due to wounds rather than falling like flies. That is the intention of the deviation and health system.

[Mikemonster]

With that in mind though, i'd rather have a scope. If i'm gonna shoot someone ineffectually i'd prefer to do it in the head

Mind you, like I said it's null and void as even people with scopes don't use 'em. So I suppose Reflex is best as default in a squad unless the player wanting a scope can actually shoot well.. # strokes chin #

[Brainlaag]

With that in mind though, i'd rather have a scope. If i'm gonna shoot someone ineffectually i'd prefer to do it in the head

Mind you, like I said it's null and void as even people with scopes don't use 'em. So I suppose Reflex is best as default in a squad unless the player wanting a scope can actually shoot well.. # strokes chin #

ACTUALLY Mike, people who have a rather bad *points finger at you* aim use scopes, so they get a magnified view of the target in order to hit it.

TL;DR Scops are for zem noobzors

[Rudd]

the maps with longer view distances certainly do change teh balance of scope vs irons, but only if the situation permits, e.g. when Jabal was updated, alot of very long range fights started, especially at the dam, that cross canyon fire needs to be accurate or you might as well go home.

[Mikemonster]

ACTUALLY Mike, people who have a rather bad *points finger at you* aim use scopes, so they get a magnified view of the target in order to hit it.

TL;DR Scops are for zem noobzors

Nonono because a scope makes you a l33t marksman Brain, headshots from 1500m on burst.

Rudd, small arms on Jabal might as well have no scopes for all the chance there is of most people hitting anything at range reliably. AR aside.

[saXoni]

I got a 750m or so kill once with a C8 Eotech.

Pics or it didn't happen.

[pr_profile]

Reflex sights are really cool! Especially on GB shotgun.

PS: Why do Russian army has alternative marksman kit - unscoped SVD?! For the lol? Has anybody used it in PR?

[saXoni]

Why do Russian army has alternative marksman kit - unscoped SVD?! For the lol? Has anybody used it in PR?

The fact that a marksman is supposed to take out long-range targets, it's kind of silly. However, it's quite useful when it comes to CQB; it gives you a bit better accuracy than firing from the hip, and scoping in before shooting will most likely get you killed.

[Brainlaag]

Reflex sights are really cool! Especially on GB shotgun.

PS: Why do Russian army has alternative marksman kit - unscoped SVD?! For the lol? Has anybody used it in PR?

Because iron sight DMRs are the shit dude. I remember how much I owned in CQBs with the unscoped M14/21, that thing was beast.

[Agemman]

Because iron sight DMRs are the shit dude. I remember how much I owned in CQBs with the unscoped M14/21, that thing was beast.

True story. I remember some round during C9 when Mahis got his hands on a SVD. Holy crapping K/D that round.