Vietnam

[Kylee!]

Re: Vietnam

Effective range is also about accuracy. As the rotation of a bullet decays, the bullet starts spiraling in bigger and bigger circles. At the maximum effective range to a point target, the circle is still small enough to be able to hit a man-sized target most of the time. There is also a maximum effective range to an area target. That's where the bullet-hose factor comes in.

The M60 was actually pretty accurate, though. I qualified with an M240B not too long ago, which is just the newer version of the M60, and I was able to hit 800m targets just fine with short bursts.
About ten years ago I qualified with an M60, it was the same. Just because it's automatic doesn't mean the first shot isn't accurate or that you can't walk a burst through a target.

But wouldn't it just be a rule of thumb that a bolt action would be more accurate? Or is it just more accurate within a closer range? and since they fire the same round and the rifle is made to shoot long distances... wouldn't it have a longer "range." It just doesn't make any sense.

[Vreki]

Re: Vietnam

I am not an firearms expert, but why do you assume that a MG must be inferior to a rifle? It is a rifle, with a full-length, rifled barrel.

Besides that, am I the only one disappointed by the music?
There are certain songs that instantly makes you think "Vietnam", but so far I have only heard some braying hippies.

[Kylee!]

Re: Vietnam

I am not an firearms expert, but why do you assume that a MG must be inferior to a rifle? It is a rifle, with a full-length, rifled barrel.

Besides that, am I the only one disappointed by the music?
There are certain songs that instantly makes you think "Vietnam", but so far I have only heard some braying hippies.

I agree with the music, but no, I'm almost 100% positive that bolt action is known for being more accurate then any kind of semi-automatic/automatic action.

[Vreki]

Re: Vietnam

I agree with the music, but no, I'm almost 100% positive that bolt action is known for being more accurate then any kind of semi-automatic/automatic action.

Well, yes, the operation of a self-loading weapon will of course drain some of the power from the shot.
But you dont need to shoot the button of the breast-pocket to take a man out, hitting him in the chest will do just fine.

Take a look at this definiton, it seems to disregard accuracy

Absolute maximum effective range: This the "this round is not considered lethal after crossing this threshold" distance. Neither of the other two common "maximum range" values will be greater than this. Purportedly, NATO defines this as the point at which the projectile's kinetic energy dips below 85 joules (62.7 foot-pounds). This is typically claimed when recounting that the P90's effective range is 400 meters on unarmored targets, as classified by NATO. It's worth noting that while the P90 looks neater than the civilian PS90, the extra barrel length increases the muzzle velocity and thus the civilian model actually has a longer absolute max effective range.

But there are other defintions, which adds to the confusion

http://gunwiki.net/Gunwiki/FactorsOfEffectiveRange

[Kylee!]

Re: Vietnam

Well, yes, the operation of a self-loading weapon will of course drain some of the power from the shot.
But you dont need to shoot the button of the breast-pocket to take a man out, hitting him in the chest will do just fine.

Well yes, thats true, but wouldn't a more accurate weapon at closer ranges be able to have a better accuracy at long ranges too? And then based on the fact that the bullet starts to spiral and become innaccurate before it slows down enough to not be lethal anymore.

[Vreki]

Re: Vietnam

Consider this from the link I posted previously

Effective range is not typically considered a one-shot determination. The US military is reputed (can't find a direct cite here) to consider the range at which an average shooter has a 50% hit/miss ratio on a target to be the maximum effective range for that weapon and target size.

and

Sniper rifle effective range: Sniper rifles are judged by entirely different criteria. A sniper rifle's effective range is judged based upon the range at which one shot, carefully fired by an expert marksman, is guaranteed to strike the target. Sniper weapons tend not to list point or area effective ranges, as sniper rifle effectiveness is not calculated with 50/50 hit ratios.

So the numbers from wiki may not be comparable.

Anyway, all this has no bearing at all on the game, since those weapons are made for balance and not realism .

[Kylee!]

Re: Vietnam

Yea, I know, just thought it was interesting, but thats a good point however.

Also, I would love to be able to record some of the stuff that happens to me, you can really lay down the law with an M60.

EDIT: Would also like to say that I actually really enjoy the game now, its much more fun when you play with less players and its not a constant bogged down fail storm. I also found that using the right weapons per whatever team you are on at the time makes the game more interesting and adds some variety.

[CptainCrunch]

Re: Vietnam

@prencher No probs. We've noticed a lot of topics on PBR glitch, Huey damage etc.. Don't worry. I'm bringing it all into the meetings.

Looks like the nerfing is on the table now. Just a matter of time.

Crunch

[Amaranthuse]

Re: Vietnam

Well I got my air plat from flying Huey, boat gold 1 from PBR.

They'll nerf M40 for sure... Well there goes Vietnam assault recon.

[[Expletive Deleted]]

Re: Vietnam

I think they're more likely to fix the Huey on the consoles (it takes 7 times the damage from small arms, like 2 AK mags will kill it), reduce the splash damage on the PBR, and that's about it.

[Infernalis]

Re: Vietnam

I hope they don't nerf the M40 but instead buff some weaposn like the SVD/M21, I have gold on every weapons and I can tell the semi-auto sniper rifle are meh, you're better sniping with the AK/RPK. The PBR is ok, at least on PC considering how fast you die.

[idontcare]

Re: Vietnam

Seems pretty balanced to me.

[(BG)Patton]

Re: Vietnam

they need to reduce the hitboxes. i have killed enemies (and allies) even when i clearly shot about a foot away from them. also, the hitboxes make for insane kills from miles away. i went 42-4 on hamburger hill rush defense with my m16 sniping enemy snipers from very long range. ridiculous.

also, they should give the pbr driver and gunner some protection, the boat is useless becasue both driver and gunner can be killed by spraying the boat with one clip from any gun

the hitboxes should be removed from the huey rotar blades. i shoot down around 6 or 7 hueys with the t54 (hardcore mode no crosshairs) every round on phu bai, and that should not be. the huey is useless. the huey rockets should be much stronger against tanks. it takes 4 good passes to kill a tank and by that time i have shot it down 3 times.

the tanks should be givin more armor. it takes 2 or 3 rpg hits and on a map like phu bai there are enemies all around. you die if you leave your base.

on a side note, since playing vietnam, my kdr has skyrocketed from 1.5 to 1.6 in a week or so becasue it is sooooo easy to kill the enemy from any distance. the many headshots the game gives away is also way too hard.

i went from vietnam hardcore back to bfbc2 hardcore and the difference is like hardcore to softcore, the enemy on vietnam die very quickly compared to bc2. i think the hitbaoxes an headshots are to blame.

anyway, i love vietnam, but more maps are needed (more than just one more)

[[Expletive Deleted]]

Re: Vietnam

It takes two GOOD passes to kill a tank, not four. It takes three "okay" passes to kill it for sure. You want it to be worse than that?

The PBR has splash damage and can kill people through damn near anything in the maps. The balance to that is that the people in it are exposed. By covering up the occupants, you'd make what is already a weapon of mass destruction into a game breaker.

A tank round into the blades of a helicopter would certainly take it down. Why is that a problem?

It takes two hits to the rear of a tank to kill it with an RPG. It takes four to the front. If you have an engineer with you, tanks last a good long time.

A lot of your complaints look like you want invincible vehicles that instantly kill everything you want killed, but only when you're in them.

[Kylee!]

Re: Vietnam

they need to reduce the hitboxes. i have killed enemies (and allies) even when i clearly shot about a foot away from them. also, the hitboxes make for insane kills from miles away. i went 42-4 on hamburger hill rush defense with my m16 sniping enemy snipers from very long range. ridiculous.

also, they should give the pbr driver and gunner some protection, the boat is useless becasue both driver and gunner can be killed by spraying the boat with one clip from any gun

the hitboxes should be removed from the huey rotar blades. i shoot down around 6 or 7 hueys with the t54 (hardcore mode no crosshairs) every round on phu bai, and that should not be. the huey is useless. the huey rockets should be much stronger against tanks. it takes 4 good passes to kill a tank and by that time i have shot it down 3 times.

the tanks should be givin more armor. it takes 2 or 3 rpg hits and on a map like phu bai there are enemies all around. you die if you leave your base.

on a side note, since playing vietnam, my kdr has skyrocketed from 1.5 to 1.6 in a week or so becasue it is sooooo easy to kill the enemy from any distance. the many headshots the game gives away is also way too hard.

i went from vietnam hardcore back to bfbc2 hardcore and the difference is like hardcore to softcore, the enemy on vietnam die very quickly compared to bc2. i think the hitbaoxes an headshots are to blame.

anyway, i love vietnam, but more maps are needed (more than just one more)

Yeaa, but no.

Except for the hitboxes and such... and the headshots. That seems a little weird to me.