Archaic weapons...

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Kylee!
    Member
    • Apr 2007
    • 4161

    #16
    Re: Archaic weapons...

    Originally posted by wolf106
    why does everyone say that? for me everytime i use the 1911 i fail with it. can barley get a kill. maybe that's just me...

    btw MG3 IS BEAST!!
    Because you can strafe and hip fire people from across the map all at once. I never use the iron sights for that gun.

    Comment

    • wolf106
      Member
      • Feb 2008
      • 452

      #17
      Re: Archaic weapons...

      Originally posted by Kylee!
      Because you can strafe and hip fire people from across the map all at once. I never use the iron sights for that gun.
      oh maybe that's why i fail with it.... iron sights

      Comment

      • -Shifty-
        Member
        • Sep 2007
        • 2525

        #18
        Re: Archaic weapons...

        Wolf, the M1911 gave you a better chance of survival than running around with your main weapon. Using the iron sights made it a rail gun. I'm just happy a game finally had the damage down right for an amazing gun like that.

        Then they nerfed it...

        Comment

        • Kylee!
          Member
          • Apr 2007
          • 4161

          #19
          Re: Archaic weapons...

          I loved it... but it was not done right. When a .45 pistol conceived in the early 1900s can beat out most modern assault rifles 1 on 1, then there's a problem.

          Comment

          • -Shifty-
            Member
            • Sep 2007
            • 2525

            #20
            Re: Archaic weapons...

            Originally posted by Kylee!
            I loved it... but it was not done right. When a .45 pistol conceived in the early 1900s can beat out most modern assault rifles 1 on 1, then there's a problem.
            In close quarters combat the M1911 had better beat an assault rifle in a 1 on one. That's what it's designed for. Now pistols aren't weapons in CQB they're used to finish off people when your main weapon is empty.

            Also, there's a reason that gun designed in the 1900s is still in use today.

            Comment

            • Kylee!
              Member
              • Apr 2007
              • 4161

              #21
              Re: Archaic weapons...

              Originally posted by -Shifty-
              In close quarters combat the M1911 had better beat an assault rifle in a 1 on one. That's what it's designed for. Now pistols aren't weapons in CQB they're used to finish off people when your main weapon is empty.

              Also, there's a reason that gun designed in the 1900s is still in use today.
              Had better? Not necessarily. Someone spraying an automatic weapon will logically > any semi automatic weapon, but of course its just a generalization.

              Comment

              • -Shifty-
                Member
                • Sep 2007
                • 2525

                #22
                Re: Archaic weapons...

                Originally posted by Kylee!
                Had better? Not necessarily. Someone spraying an automatic weapon will logically > any semi automatic weapon, but of course its just a generalization.
                Spraying an automatic weapon is very inaccurate, unlike one pistol shot to the chest. You know CQB isn't 1m it's 50m in.

                Comment

                • [Expletive Deleted]
                  The Penetrator
                  • Oct 2006
                  • 2855

                  #23
                  Re: Archaic weapons...

                  50m isn't exactly close for a pistol. Most qual ranges for the US Army pistols are 25m. The standard even says that for a combat pistol qualification none of the targets can be over 31m.

                  Also, assault rifles don't spray the way games show them to. Flexive fires at close range are trained quite a bit for MOUT, and the weapons are very accurate. An assault rifle on full-auto or burst is still going to be more effective than a pistol from ~1m out. A pistol would be best in extreme close range because of the ability to keep the muzzle of an assault rifle clear. Games don't consider things like that, though.

                  Comment

                  • -Shifty-
                    Member
                    • Sep 2007
                    • 2525

                    #24
                    Re: Archaic weapons...

                    Originally posted by [Expletive Deleted]
                    50m isn't exactly close for a pistol. Most qual ranges for the US Army pistols are 25m. The standard even says that for a combat pistol qualification none of the targets can be over 31m.

                    Also, assault rifles don't spray the way games show them to. Flexive fires at close range are trained quite a bit for MOUT, and the weapons are very accurate. An assault rifle on full-auto or burst is still going to be more effective than a pistol from ~1m out. A pistol would be best in extreme close range because of the ability to keep the muzzle of an assault rifle clear. Games don't consider things like that, though.
                    50m was CQB, it didn't have much to do with a pistol. More like 50ft would be more accurate though. I was exaggerating. 31m might be the effective accurate range in a fight but I assure you if you get hit even at 50m by a .45 APC it'll hurt.

                    Comment

                    • jimykx
                      No, I AM your father!
                      • Jan 2010
                      • 6640

                      #25
                      Re: Archaic weapons...

                      Actually in real life theres no "Sprayin" cause theres no respawning

                      Comment

                      • [Expletive Deleted]
                        The Penetrator
                        • Oct 2006
                        • 2855

                        #26
                        Re: Archaic weapons...

                        Originally posted by jimykx
                        Actually in real life theres no "Sprayin" cause theres no respawning
                        Shenanigans. What do you think "Suppressive fire" really is?
                        Spraying is MORE effective in real life because a random bullet kills people just as dead as the well-aimed variety. People know that, so they duck/get out of the way when bullets are flying.

                        Comment

                        • signa
                          CS-Nation / TGN Staff
                          • Dec 2004
                          • 4191

                          #27
                          Re: Archaic weapons...

                          I stopped using archaic weapons and now use the Cat Gun..

                          "Crunch's First Officer"
                          twitter: @signaprime

                          Comment

                          • Stev0esque
                            5t3v0 (I miss leetspeech)
                            • Feb 2008
                            • 6786

                            #28
                            Re: Archaic weapons...

                            Originally posted by signa
                            I stopped using archaic weapons and now use the Cat Gun..

                            Should we expect PETA to be at his door soon?

                            Comment

                            • jimykx
                              No, I AM your father!
                              • Jan 2010
                              • 6640

                              #29
                              Re: Archaic weapons...

                              When i was talking about spraying i was talking about shooting eapons like assault rifles spraying a whole mag. atleast from the videos i see from those soldiers shooting in auto , they allways go in burts or one bulet at the time, cause when they try full auto they allways lose control of the weapon

                              Comment

                              • -Shifty-
                                Member
                                • Sep 2007
                                • 2525

                                #30
                                Re: Archaic weapons...

                                Originally posted by [Expletive Deleted]
                                Shenanigans. What do you think "Suppressive fire" really is?
                                Spraying is MORE effective in real life because a random bullet kills people just as dead as the well-aimed variety. People know that, so they duck/get out of the way when bullets are flying.
                                Suppressive fire isn't designed to kill your enemy, it will, but the point is to get their heads down and keep them in place. Hence the "Assault" team of squads which flanks and tries to eliminate.

                                Comment

                                Working...