Only the default (TGN Light) theme for now. Dark them is also coming back soon. Then CSN. Then Wrestlin' Nation. A lot of WIP stuff right now. There are a couple of things still not working either. Sorry.
"Noob Toobing" isn't really a noob weapon. I can literally snipe people with my 203. I can kill Vodniks in 1 hit from 500+ meters away... If you emply it as Fallout was, were you bunny hop too, it is still easy to kill them. The Grenade launcher is only a noob toob when it is in the hands of a noob, otherwise, in the hands of a skilled soldier, it is a effective weapon that can be used to kill the noobs.
. We have NOTHING else to compare to the "Insane" accuracy of the carbines in this game. Our rifles are outclassed by all other classifications. Hell, even the shotgun has a better chance of netting a kill in a combat situation than the M16/Ak-101/Ak47/G3 in this game.
We lose in CQB to everything BUT the medics
You are joking right? You HAVE actually used the rifle bit attached to your grenade launcher, right? And by used I mean short controlled bursts, or single shot, not mash the trigger down and dump all 30 rounds downrange.
The AK is one of the superior weapons in the game. It hits nice and hard, it is accuracte enough if you know how to use it to snipe running people at like 200m with 5 shots, it works wickedly well up close and personal on full auto, and it has a very clear sight picture.
Incidently the G3 is only more accurate than the Ak after the first 3 rounds. For the first 3 the AK has superior accuracy. I often use the AK for counter-sniper fire and I will drop just about any kit to get my hands on it. The best thing about sniping with the AK is people are expecting something that says XXX[AK-47]YYY to be up close, and they don't even bother looking for snipers.
While the M16 isn't as good in close combat, the 3 round burst is effective, however it does sometimes take up to 4 bursts to drop someone. SO go single fire.
About the worst CQB grenade launcher is the new FN 2000, because on full auto it fires way wildly. It also makes a handly sniping tool on single fire though.
I've got most my kills from the AR's, second from shotguns, and the third from GL's, so I do sorta know what I'm talking about. While I do't have the world greatest kill/death, it is still positive.
UH 60 Pilot, : Using the GL to take out Vodniks or Hummers or even them and tank gunners isn't a bad thing. MY favourite trick is to run up gehind a Vodnik/hummer and throw a hand grenade inside them :) Neither is using it to bomb guys 300m away. Even using it up close against groups of people or even point targets like snipers/ gunners.
What grates people is when you run into CQB, jump, spin, dolphindive and lob a grenade to explode on the ground, killing then while you are almost directly above it, and you survive. That is just stupid. And not how it's meant to be used.
"Noob Toobing" isn't really a noob weapon. I can literally snipe people with my 203. I can kill Vodniks in 1 hit from 500+ meters away... If you emply it as Fallout was, were you bunny hop too, it is still easy to kill them. The Grenade launcher is only a noob toob when it is in the hands of a noob, otherwise, in the hands of a skilled soldier, it is a effective weapon that can be used to kill the noobs.
This one time I was on oman at a beach flag, i fired my GP-30 at the essex and it liek totaly blew up and i killed 31 out of 32 of the enemy (the last guy was in a jet, and i pwned him bad with my GP-30), they were liek OMG WTF!?!?!, and i was like HAHAHA PWNED nOObs. Some guys just liek need to learn to play and stop being noobs. Yeah, liek.
You are joking right? You HAVE actually used the rifle bit attached to your grenade launcher, right? And by used I mean short controlled bursts, or single shot, not mash the trigger down and dump all 30 rounds downrange.
Are you uninformed?
You do know that ALL assault rifles have greater deviation per shot than the carbines right? You do know that with the random bullet deviation, accuracy isn't truely measured by your abbilities but more so by your timing and acknowledgement of the deviation system in place? If you don't know any of this stop reading right now... at this point. Stop.
It's not even up for debate. Long barrel rifles in this game do get the short side of the stick in terms of accuracy vs. their carbine brothers. Sure, my M16/AK-101 is stable and decently accurate on single fire (Which is all I use, even in CQB, I don't bother with Burst or Automatic) but the carbines can produce the same accuracy on fully automatic if you have a semi-talented shooter.
I'm not saying I'm untalented with the weapon, or that I have a problem killing with it (Truth be told, if it comes down to a gun battle between me and a SF guy, I just run and try to get a better position on him). It's just, I'm not going to deny the obvious fact (Heck, if you search your game files you can find the deviation figures) that assault class rifles don't stack up well to the carbines.
What really gets me is. People sit around and complain about assault's infantry dominace. Well, WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DOMINATE VERSUS INFANTRY! It's our job. It's what the class is designed for. EA attempted to give you all a break in that our rifles aren't the greatest things sinced sliced bread. But, the GL is a part of our ground pounding domination. It would be as silly as me complaining that a Medic can heal, and that an SF can run far, and that a sniper has camo, AR gunner has restocking abbilities, and a Engineer has a shotgun. Fact of the matter is you shouldn't stand a chance on the ground against assault at ranges under 50m. If you take away our ground dominance, what do we have left?
Yet, I'm willing to accept a charging distance on the M203, but, it has to come with other realistic balancing elements.
1. M16 needs to be more accurate than an M4 (Apply this to all Rifle vs. Carbine familes), and the M4 needs to have more recoil than the Mp5 when fired on fully automatic. Much more recoil. It's much harder to control a lighter weapon of the same caiber.
2. AR gunners accuracy needs to be comparable to the M16's. Because, it is. Most Support weapons (M249 as an example) are slightly less accurate than their rifle brethern. An M249 have a very high hit precentage at 600m with optics. I would guess around 400m without optics easily. Granted through, the M249 is best fired from a crouched position, but, even standing, the recoil is not so much more severe than an M16. IT's controllable for 20 rounds burst. Also, the weapon does NOT have a spread pattern the size of the human body at a measly 50m!
3. Body armor needs to stop bullets. Level 3 armor can stop about 3 rifle caliber rounds. This excludes the .338 and the .50. In addition to this, SF and other classed not outfitted with vest should go down with one hit from the Ak-47, and possibly 2 hits from the M16. Maybe more considering the lack of stopping power in the military grade 5.56 loads.
4. Sniper rifles need one hit kills to the chest and head (This excludes china's rifle. As I belevie it's an equal caliber to the M16. The human body can take a few of those. Might bleed to death, but it won't put you down kile a .308 will). Yet, to counter this, snipers need to be forced to take distance into account as well as weapon cant. Windage can be left out for the sake of game performance, but, cant and distance calculations would be a must. Oh yes, and the SVD, G3, and Ak-47 all his as hard as the M24 at ranges under 600m. After that, the M24 would have a leg up considering velocity.
6. Grenades are horrible in this game. The damage radius needs to be increased. And, grenades should roll a bit more when they hit a flat surface.
I don't even wana' divulge into vehicles. But! If EA changes the grenade arming distance on M203's in order to compensate realism. Then, other aspects of other classes should be modified as well to maintain a realistic balance. If realism is what we are aiming for here?
You do know that ALL assault rifles have greater deviation per shot than the carbines right?
You mean the carbines that are called "SPECIAL FORCES KIT" implying that the user is infact a SF operator? In other words more highly trained than the standard grunt. Those carbines?
Yes I GET the fact that the carbines shoot better. I wasn't debating that. I was debating the fact that the AK and M16 are useless. They aren't. They do very very good jobs, especially if you keep it on single fire.
Except for the G3. That just plain sucks.
The rifle part of the GL's do a very good job of shooting where youput the crosshairs. HOWEVER THIS ONLY WORKS WHEN YOU ARE STATIONARY AND CROUCHED. Especially well if prone. It does NOT work well when you are jumping around and sprinting.
While the cabines do have a suprisingly good accuracy, the AK's isn't far behind. Especially in CQB.
What really gets me is. People sit around and complain about assault's infantry dominace. Well, WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DOMINATE VERSUS INFANTRY! It's our job. It's what the class is designed for. EA attempted to give you all a break in that our rifles aren't the greatest things sinced sliced bread. But, the GL is a part of our ground pounding domination.
Again, this isn't what I'm complaining about. Use the GL, but as a grenade launcher. Not as an instakill shotgun. This is what we are complaining about. The up close sprint round corner, jump, shoot at feet. This is NOT how you are meant to dominate the infantry. You are supposed to shoot the grenades onto them from a reasonable distance out.
No on is saying remove the GL's, they are saying stop them killing the target when the shooter is safely 3' above the explosion.
It would be as silly as me complaining that a Medic can heal, and that an SF can run far, and that a sniper has camo, AR gunner has restocking abbilities, and a Engineer has a shotgun. Fact of the matter is you shouldn't stand a chance on the ground against assault at ranges under 50m. If you take away our ground dominance, what do we have left?
Wow. So taking away the ability to sprint, jump, blast would mean you have to sprint, crouch, shoot with rifle. Like the rest of us. This isn't UT where you can run and jump and blast. At least it shouldn't be. You can do this with the broken M203.
Broken? Yes, because my M4 only has 30 rounds in it, which is like IRL. The M203 doesn't work the way it is being used in BF2. If the M203 doesnt have a real world restriction, why shuld anything else?
Yet, I'm willing to accept a charging distance on the M203, but, it has to come with other realistic balancing elements.
I disagree with this. The other weapons all work more or less on the principal they are fielded in. Carbines work in CQB, sniper rifles work at long ranges, anti tank missiles break open tanks, helicopters fly.
The M203 kills people on contact within it's IRL arming range. It would hurt as much as taking a baseball to the chest, not blow you up.
1. M16 needs to be more accurate than an M4
True. However the 5.56mm doesn't recoil that much anyway.
2. AR gunners accuracy needs to be comparable to the M16's. .....Also, the weapon does NOT have a spread pattern the size of the human body at a measly 50m!
True again. Make it a good supression weapon. However as it is now it can still do the same job it does IRL.
3. Body armor needs to stop bullets. Level 3 armor can stop about 3 rifle caliber rounds. This excludes the .338 and the .50.
True again, but you don't even have to go as high as a .338 Lap Mag round. A 300 Win Mag will punch Level III as well. As will .30-06 AP rounds. It also all depends on these being hard armour vests. Level IIIA, without rifle plates, won't stop the rifle rounds. The hard plates will, increasing the vest to level III+. However you can't jump 6" straight up wearing 5kg rifle plates. See bunnhopping M203 spammer comments.
Oh yes, and the SVD, G3, and Ak-47 all hit as hard as the M24 at ranges under 600m. After that, the M24 would have a leg up considering velocity.
Ummm, not really. The AK-47 uses 7.62x39mm ammunition. This is more on par with the M16's 5.56mm round, as it is an assault rifle round and not a full power rifle round. It is meant for close in work. It travels quite slow and has a heavy bullet.
The M24 and the G3 use the same, slightly more powerful 7.62x51mm Nato ammunition. This means they will travel the same distance, doing the same damage. However the M24 will launch the bullet more accurately.
The SVD actually fires the most powerful round in the list. The 7.62x54mm Russian is the fastest, longest ranged out this group. It just is. However the SVD isn't capable of the accuracy of te M24.
If realism is what we are aiming for here?
Not really. What we are aiming for here is to get the weapons to be used in a more or less realistic manner. Again, for the sake of repitition, unless the M203 is loaded with the M576 Buckshot or the M1001 Caniser round they are NOT giant shotguns for close up work. They are for fire support.
You do know that ALL assault rifles have greater deviation per shot than the carbines right? You do know that with the random bullet deviation, accuracy isn't truely measured by your abbilities but more so by your timing and acknowledgement of the deviation system in place? If you don't know any of this stop reading right now... at this point. Stop.
It's not even up for debate. Long barrel rifles in this game do get the short side of the stick in terms of accuracy vs. their carbine brothers. Sure, my M16/AK-101 is stable and decently accurate on single fire (Which is all I use, even in CQB, I don't bother with Burst or Automatic) but the carbines can produce the same accuracy on fully automatic if you have a semi-talented shooter.
I'm not saying I'm untalented with the weapon, or that I have a problem killing with it (Truth be told, if it comes down to a gun battle between me and a SF guy, I just run and try to get a better position on him). It's just, I'm not going to deny the obvious fact (Heck, if you search your game files you can find the deviation figures) that assault class rifles don't stack up well to the carbines.
What really gets me is. People sit around and complain about assault's infantry dominace. Well, WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DOMINATE VERSUS INFANTRY! It's our job. It's what the class is designed for. EA attempted to give you all a break in that our rifles aren't the greatest things sinced sliced bread. But, the GL is a part of our ground pounding domination. It would be as silly as me complaining that a Medic can heal, and that an SF can run far, and that a sniper has camo, AR gunner has restocking abbilities, and a Engineer has a shotgun. Fact of the matter is you shouldn't stand a chance on the ground against assault at ranges under 50m. If you take away our ground dominance, what do we have left?
Yet, I'm willing to accept a charging distance on the M203, but, it has to come with other realistic balancing elements.
1. M16 needs to be more accurate than an M4 (Apply this to all Rifle vs. Carbine familes), and the M4 needs to have more recoil than the Mp5 when fired on fully automatic. Much more recoil. It's much harder to control a lighter weapon of the same caiber.
2. AR gunners accuracy needs to be comparable to the M16's. Because, it is. Most Support weapons (M249 as an example) are slightly less accurate than their rifle brethern. An M249 have a very high hit precentage at 600m with optics. I would guess around 400m without optics easily. Granted through, the M249 is best fired from a crouched position, but, even standing, the recoil is not so much more severe than an M16. IT's controllable for 20 rounds burst. Also, the weapon does NOT have a spread pattern the size of the human body at a measly 50m!
3. Body armor needs to stop bullets. Level 3 armor can stop about 3 rifle caliber rounds. This excludes the .338 and the .50. In addition to this, SF and other classed not outfitted with vest should go down with one hit from the Ak-47, and possibly 2 hits from the M16. Maybe more considering the lack of stopping power in the military grade 5.56 loads.
4. Sniper rifles need one hit kills to the chest and head (This excludes china's rifle. As I belevie it's an equal caliber to the M16. The human body can take a few of those. Might bleed to death, but it won't put you down kile a .308 will). Yet, to counter this, snipers need to be forced to take distance into account as well as weapon cant. Windage can be left out for the sake of game performance, but, cant and distance calculations would be a must. Oh yes, and the SVD, G3, and Ak-47 all his as hard as the M24 at ranges under 600m. After that, the M24 would have a leg up considering velocity.
6. Grenades are horrible in this game. The damage radius needs to be increased. And, grenades should roll a bit more when they hit a flat surface.
I don't even wana' divulge into vehicles. But! If EA changes the grenade arming distance on M203's in order to compensate realism. Then, other aspects of other classes should be modified as well to maintain a realistic balance. If realism is what we are aiming for here?
I don't find anything that bad about noob tubing, I DO get ticked off when I'm constantly overkilled with it though. What's really concerning me the most though is that the real noobs miss there shot and chose to bunny hop around reloading their price and joy, while I pelt bullets into them, without success I might add, as most of the time I'm beating by lag. If not I catch them in the air with a headshot, swings ether way really...
1.) Again, this isn't what I'm complaining about. Use the GL, but as a grenade launcher. Not as an instakill shotgun. This is what we are complaining about. The up close sprint round corner, jump, shoot at feet. This is NOT how you are meant to dominate the infantry. You are supposed to shoot the grenades onto them from a reasonable distance out.
1 1/2.) No on is saying remove the GL's, they are saying stop them killing the target when the shooter is safely 3' above the explosion.
Hmmm.. Well, as true as this is. SF aren't meant to suicide bomb tanks. Suicide bomb Arty Assets. Snipers aren't meant to field snipe with M95's while standing, hell... period. Medic's aren't meant to dive INTO their teamates while trying to heal them. Engineers aren't meant to be doing barrell rolls mid-air while firing a Fully-Automaic shotgun at you. Anti-Tank operators aren't meant to snipe with AT Rockets (Although it's damn effective), and commanders aren't meant to Fly Jets and fight at an infantry level (Really, this doesn't help ANYTHING!)... Yet, all that happens, and no one starts a complain cabal about it... So. If we see some changes in these many regards. I'll concent to the M203 having an arming distance.
..and if you're 3 feet about a frag. You're still going to die. Hell, it's better to be prone in the blast area of a flag than hoveing about the "boom-rock".
2.) Wow. So taking away the ability to sprint, jump, blast would mean you have to sprint, crouch, shoot with rifle. Like the rest of us. This isn't UT where you can run and jump and blast. At least it shouldn't be. You can do this with the broken M203.
Broken? Yes, because my M4 only has 30 rounds in it, which is like IRL. The M203 doesn't work the way it is being used in BF2. If the M203 doesnt have a real world restriction, why shuld anything else?
Either you have never played against some of the... you know what. Never mind. See my first response. It pretty much covers this as well.
3.) I disagree with this. The other weapons all work more or less on the principal they are fielded in. Carbines work in CQB, sniper rifles work at long ranges, anti tank missiles break open tanks, helicopters fly.
The M203 kills people on contact within it's IRL arming range. It would hurt as much as taking a baseball to the chest, not blow you up.
No they don't. Hell, even you pointed out that the M4 is more effective at range than the M16. Which is not true.
You can fire a shotgun airborne. You can dive with an M249 while holding the trigger and maintain a proper sight picture. And! You can snipe with an AT rocket. Did I mention that the M9 has almost equal accuracy to the rifles? I didn't? Ok. Throw that into the fray... Oh! And the G36C can out-snipe the SVD, M95, and in some cases the M24. Yeeeeeeah... I think not.
Hell, there isn't a weapon in this game that opertates correctly, besides the Arty, well hell, it doesn't even operate correctly because we don't have dynamic enviroments in this game ( A fruit stand will NOT save you from Artillery). But, that would be a latency and performance issue from hell. Not that I care for the weapons to be fielded correctly anyways.
4.) True. However the 5.56mm doesn't recoil that much anyway.
True. In a heavier rifle. The M4 is a pretty lightweight weapon. Light variants of weapons have more felt recoil than their heavier brethern. This applies to the AR-15 family of rifles as well.
5.) True again. Make it a good supression weapon. However as it is now it can still do the same job it does IRL.
No. It doesn't. People have no fear of the Support Weapons because frankly outa' 50 rounds. You would be unlucky if 5 hit you. On top of that, support has to be prone for any reasonable accuracy. So, if they aren't prone, you can pretty much safely fire back and win the gun battle.
6.) True again, but you don't even have to go as high as a .338 Lap Mag round. A 300 Win Mag will punch Level III as well. As will .30-06 AP rounds. It also all depends on these being hard armour vests. Level IIIA, without rifle plates, won't stop the rifle rounds. The hard plates will, increasing the vest to level III+. However you can't jump 6" straight up wearing 5kg rifle plates. See bunnhopping M203 spammer comments.
You can't jump 6 feet straight up peroid. I don't get where you're going with that.
Also, I agree. A .300Win. Mag, or any FMJ Mag, is gunna' give hell to body armor. But, that really doesn't have anything to do with anything. That's obvious. I just didn't want to list every known ammunition type in the world.
7.) Ummm, not really. The AK-47 uses 7.62x39mm ammunition. This is more on par with the M16's 5.56mm round, as it is an assault rifle round and not a full power rifle round. It is meant for close in work. It travels quite slow and has a heavy bullet.
The M24 and the G3 use the same, slightly more powerful 7.62x51mm Nato ammunition. This means they will travel the same distance, doing the same damage. However the M24 will launch the bullet more accurately.
The SVD actually fires the most powerful round in the list. The 7.62x54mm Russian is the fastest, longest ranged out this group. It just is. However the SVD isn't capable of the accuracy of the M24.
You're so wrong in this regard. The Ak-47 at ranges under 300m is going to actually cause more lethal damage than the M24. The Velocity of the M24 and the .308 works to a disadvntage at closer ranges. Sure, you're going to have very good penetration, but, that penetration doesn't lend well to doing the almost hollow point type damage the 7.62x33 of the Ak47 is capable of doing. The 5.56x45 is almost completely inferior to the 7.62x33 in regards to stopping power and maintaining shape while passing through urban enviroments.
Furthermore the SVD's 7.62x54 is a horrible round. While it's fun to shoot every now and then, the Russians where much better off changing their standard military loadout. The 7.62x54r has horrible ballistic ratings. Just horrible. Although, it does hit with decent stopping power. It doesn't really travel that fast, and not that accurately. Check out www.snipercentral.com to get some charts for comparison. But! I can tell you from limited hands on experience that even the G3 with optics outperforms the SVD. Which says a lot for the .308 NATO.
8.) Not really. What we are aiming for here is to get the weapons to be used in a more or less realistic manner. Again, for the sake of repitition, unless the M203 is loaded with the M576 Buckshot or the M1001 Caniser round they are NOT giant shotguns for close up work. They are for fire support.
KBK
Once again. If you want to gimp the M203 for realistic reason, and to portray the weapon correctly. Other things need to be changed. The air-dancing Engineers and SF needs to go. The sniper rifle'ish carbines need to be changed. The Support classification needs and accuracy boost from the gods. Etc. etc., I've already covered this before.
As if stands now, each class has it's advantage, and assault's is the dominating power of the M203 grenade. Adapt and overcome. But, eh... don't complain unless you're willing to admit other classifications uber abilities.
You can fire a shotgun airborne. You can dive with an M249 while holding the trigger and maintain a proper sight picture. And! You can snipe with an AT rocket.
The thing is, you actually CAN do all of these IRL. There is noting to say these things will be effective, but these things can be done. A M203's 40mm HEDP grenade will NOT explode inside of 14m. It simply won't. Unless you shoot it into a fire or something. I agree that diving prone while sighting your weapon is equally impossible, and I wouldn't object to having that taken out as well.
I do agree with you 100% that there are many many logical inconsistancies in the game, and they all get on my peck's in some form or another, however the fact that people use a high explosive grenade lancher in CQB is about the most glaring.
The M4 is a pretty lightweight weapon. Light variants of weapons have more felt recoil than their heavier brethern. This applies to the AR-15 family of rifles as well.
True. It applies to all weapns on the planet. Except for the few chances and improvements design features can induce, felt recoil will always be heavier in a lighter gun, all other things being the same. I agree.
No. It doesn't. People have no fear of the Support Weapons because frankly outa' 50 rounds. You would be unlucky if 5 hit you
You don't play support much do you? Fire in limited bursts of 10 is rounds and at least 4 will be on target, at least with the PKM and the RPK. The G36M is a little closer, but whoever modeled the M249 has obviously never shot one in his life before. (I haven't either, but I have used the South African SS-77 chambered in 5.56mm, and it is very similar)
You can't jump 6 feet straight up peroid. I don't get where you're going with that.
Close enough. Start up a server. Walk up to your friend. Ask him to jump. His feet are almost parralell with your head. Close enough to 6' as damnit is to swearing.
You're so wrong in this regard. The Ak-47 at ranges under 300m is going to actually cause more lethal damage than the M24. The Velocity of the M24 and the .308 works to a disadvntage at closer ranges. Sure, you're going to have very good penetration, but, that penetration doesn't lend well to doing the almost hollow point type damage the 7.62x33 of the Ak47 is capable of doing. The 5.56x45 is almost completely inferior to the 7.62x33 in regards to stopping power and maintaining shape while passing through urban enviroments.
Ummm, maybe we use a different measuring system as we are from different countries and all, but the AK-47 uses 7.62x39mm ammunition.
And the Russians don't use hollow point 7.62x39mm ammo. You are thinking of the 5.45x39mm ammo the AK-74 uses. The most common 7.62x39mm ammo is the copper jacketed lead core, followed by the copper jacket steel core AP rounds.
The .308 is a better killer than the 7.62x39mmR. Even up close and personal. While the .308 will generally blow through the target, it does dump enough energy and it does cause enough damage to disable almost any target with a single shot to the upper abdomen.
The AK's round is definately a good round, however it doesn't even compare to the lethality of the .308. The AK's round is good hitting power with controlability. Something the .308 lacks. It simply kicks too hard.
The current crop of 5.56mm 65grain Mil Spec rounds, the "Greenies" is definately an inferior round when compared to the original 55grain 5.56mm. However it also has semi AP qualities. Up close and personal, and I'm talking inside of 20m here, the 5.56mm is a devastating round, even when fired from a shorty barrel (Read M4, G36C). It does work as advertised and the round does almost explosively deconstruct. (see your point about obstacle penetration in urban settings)
Furthermore the SVD's 7.62x54 is a horrible round. ...The 7.62x54r has horrible ballistic ratings. Just horrible. Although, it does hit with decent stopping power. It doesn't really travel that fast, and not that accurately.
From your own source, Snipercentral.com.
7.62X51mm Nato - 175grain 2600fps.
7.62x54mmR - 185grain 2700fps
So it is 10 grains heavier and running 100fps faster. It will hit harder than the .308. There is no denying the physics there. At the 600m mark you suggested the 7.62R will have about 50% more energy than the 7.62Nato.
I conceeded the M24 will do a better job of putting the rounds on target. There is no doubt about that. One is a bolt action, custom built sniper rifle, the other is a semi auto mass produced designated marksman rifle.
A scope equipped semi auto 7.62NATO like the G3sg/1 or the R1DMR or the M14DMR will outshoot the SVD, but those aren't in the game, and the SVD will still hit harder.
As if stands now, each class has it's advantage, and assault's is the dominating power of the M203 grenade. Adapt and overcome. But, eh... don't complain unless you're willing to admit other classifications uber abilities.
{WP}Paas
But I AM willing to admit the others also need tweaking. They do. I've said it before. I AGREE with you there.
The Assault's advantage however doesn't lie in using their weapon as it is used IRL or using it fairly.
The close range exploding 40mm is fiction that, IMHO, spoils the game WHEN IT IS USED AS AN INSTAGIB CQB WEAPON.
For fire support it works OK and should infact have its explosive area increased so you can use it PROPERLY. It has too much of a disadvantage when used as it would be, so people prefer to whore it.
I do use the GL's quite often. However, and I realise this is just one of my personal quirks, I use the rifle to shoot people and the grenade launcher to shoot groups or vehicles. This might be why I have such a low K/D ratio, but it makes it more fun IMHO. I _do_ realise I have no right to impart my wishes on you. However all I am saying is the instagib M203 ruins the realistic aspects of the game.
I also agree that other bits need tweaking for realism's sake. I aso agree that true realism isn't what we are going for here. What I AM saying is there could be some small changes made that would increase playability and enjoyment for all.
While you might enjoy the UT bouncing instagib bomb launchingness, I feel that having this happen spoils the effect of the game.
But so does the bunnyhopping full auto 12 guage Mk3A1's and the rest. The GL is just so anoying because you don't even need to aim AT me, you just aim at the ground NEAR me. Giving you an advantage over the other weapons that need to actually HIT their targets.
The thing is, you actually CAN do all of these IRL. There is noting to say these things will be effective, but these things can be done. A M203's 40mm HEDP grenade will NOT explode inside of 14m. It simply won't. Unless you shoot it into a fire or something. I agree that diving prone while sighting your weapon is equally impossible, and I wouldn't object to having that taken out as well.
I do agree with you 100% that there are many many logical inconsistancies in the game, and they all get on my peck's in some form or another, however the fact that people use a high explosive grenade lancher in CQB is about the most glaring.
Hmmm... I'm gunna' say the diving while maintaining sighting picture and firing is the most glaring. The M203 is avoidable, you just have to look at it as a threat and not as direct competition, because you can't compete with it. Heck, in terms of this game NO ONE but ASSUALT should be competing with ASSAULT when it comes down to ASSAULTING. This is rock, paper, scissors gameplay afterall.
True. It applies to all weapns on the planet. Except for the few chances and improvements design features can induce, felt recoil will always be heavier in a lighter gun, all other things being the same. I agree.
It's a start.
You don't play support much do you? Fire in limited bursts of 10 is rounds and at least 4 will be on target, at least with the PKM and the RPK. The G36M is a little closer, but whoever modeled the M249 has obviously never shot one in his life before. (I haven't either, but I have used the South African SS-77 chambered in 5.56mm, and it is very similar)
I do play support some. I play mostly assault. About 90% of my time in game is assault because I'm generally squad leader and rather than calling for M203 support I would rather apply it myself while I give my squad other directions.
I don't personally own an M249, but, I have had access to one. I have not had extensive time with it, but I have watch others toy around with the weapon. Truth be told, you're reasonably accurate for about the first 50 rounds, or further (Size and power is a factor here), if fatigue does not begin to destroy your ability to maintain sight picture.
Close enough. Start up a server. Walk up to your friend. Ask him to jump. His feet are almost parralell with your head. Close enough to 6' as damnit is to swearing.
Figured you were throwing in the direction of reality on this one. In the game, you're right. You can. Shouldn't be able too.. but, that's why I play PRMM.
Misunderstand here.
Ummm, maybe we use a different measuring system as we are from different countries and all, but the AK-47 uses 7.62x39mm ammunition.
And the Russians don't use hollow point 7.62x39mm ammo. You are thinking of the 5.45x39mm ammo the AK-74 uses. The most common 7.62x39mm ammo is the copper jacketed lead core, followed by the copper jacket steel core AP rounds.
The .308 is a better killer than the 7.62x39mmR. Even up close and personal. While the .308 will generally blow through the target, it does dump enough energy and it does cause enough damage to disable almost any target with a single shot to the upper abdomen.
The AK's round is definately a good round, however it doesn't even compare to the lethality of the .308. The AK's round is good hitting power with controlability. Something the .308 lacks. It simply kicks too hard.
The current crop of 5.56mm 65grain Mil Spec rounds, the "Greenies" is definately an inferior round when compared to the original 55grain 5.56mm. However it also has semi AP qualities. Up close and personal, and I'm talking inside of 20m here, the 5.56mm is a devastating round, even when fired from a shorty barrel (Read M4, G36C). It does work as advertised and the round does almost explosively deconstruct. (see your point about obstacle penetration in urban settings)
Eh, I stated the round measurements wrong. My bad, sorry to anyone I confused.
I know the russians don't use hollow point ammunition. It was for comparison specifications. If you have any time to see any gell testings, you will notice that the 7.62x39 with direct contact to flesh, or light clothing, leaves a NASTY exit would. Hollow-Point'esque. The 5.56x45, greenies or not, does not even compare. (77gr HP rounds do, but, military doesn't use those)
And in closer ranges, 300m or so. The AK-47 stacks up well against the .308. It's once you move further out and the lower muzzle velocities begin to show their faces, that's when you see the .308 maintain it's leathality. Higher muzzle velocity is not always better as you get closer seeing as some rounds are not designed to expand at their maximum velocities. And thus you run into overpenetration problems. This is kinda' the reason most law-enforcement prefers HP ammo. If a round leaves a hole, but doesn't inflict the leathal damasge needed, you're put at a huge risk.
From your own source, Snipercentral.com.
7.62X51mm Nato - 175grain 2600fps.
7.62x54mmR - 185grain 2700fps
So it is 10 grains heavier and running 100fps faster. It will hit harder than the .308. There is no denying the physics there. At the 600m mark you suggested the 7.62R will have about 50% more energy than the 7.62Nato.
I conceeded the M24 will do a better job of putting the rounds on target. There is no doubt about that. One is a bolt action, custom built sniper rifle, the other is a semi auto mass produced designated marksman rifle.
A scope equipped semi auto 7.62NATO like the G3sg/1 or the R1DMR or the M14DMR will outshoot the SVD, but those aren't in the game, and the SVD will still hit harder.
No. The 7.62x54r won't hit much harder than the .308. Not to mention it's a very unpredictable round (which is probably due with the noticeable increase in round size, and not so much in muzzle velocity). Although, I'm sure if loaded with a lighter round, it would be a exceptional performer. Maybe even go the route of a 7mm and try around a 150gr load?
The 7.62x54r notices some serious drop over the .308, and considering it's supposed to compete more-so with the 30-06 than the .308 that's saying a lot. It's not very flat shooting, and tends to drift at ranges. Go back to snipercentral.com and check out the charts in regards to zeroing (Although, I'll admit, a lot of this has to do with the round beind fired from the SVD; limitation in optics. But, what other platforms besides the SVD and Mosin are there?)
But I AM willing to admit the others also need tweaking. They do. I've said it before. I AGREE with you there.
The Assault's advantage however doesn't lie in using their weapon as it is used IRL or using it fairly.
The close range exploding 40mm is fiction that, IMHO, spoils the game WHEN IT IS USED AS AN INSTAGIB CQB WEAPON.
For fire support it works OK and should infact have its explosive area increased so you can use it PROPERLY. It has too much of a disadvantage when used as it would be, so people prefer to whore it.
I do use the GL's quite often. However, and I realise this is just one of my personal quirks, I use the rifle to shoot people and the grenade launcher to shoot groups or vehicles. This might be why I have such a low K/D ratio, but it makes it more fun IMHO. I _do_ realise I have no right to impart my wishes on you. However all I am saying is the instagib M203 ruins the realistic aspects of the game.
I also agree that other bits need tweaking for realism's sake. I aso agree that true realism isn't what we are going for here. What I AM saying is there could be some small changes made that would increase playability and enjoyment for all.
While you might enjoy the UT bouncing instagib bomb launchingness, I feel that having this happen spoils the effect of the game,...
...would like to go on record of saying I NEVER stated I enjoy the concept of people bouncing around like idiots and firing m203's. I just understand the balance in place and how it would seriously be shafting assault if the weapon was to do otherwise and other classifications stay the same.
...but so does the bunnyhopping full auto 12 guage Mk3A1's and the rest. The GL is just so anoying because you don't even need to aim AT me, you just aim at the ground NEAR me. Giving you an advantage over the other weapons that need to actually HIT their targets.
KBK
Hmmm.. That's odd, cause even at close ranges I find myself having to aim the M203. I mean, I don't have to be as precise as a rifle, but, it's a grenade. Shouldn't need to be as precise as a rifle. But it's not as if it has the most effective splash damage. I have put M203's within' feet of people and they walk away just fine. Usually you have to put it within' inches to get the desired result; kill, not injury.
Saying that we don't have to Aim the GL is very wrong. We do, and the results are usually in our favor if we aim well. Although, most people can only count the times where the M203 has hit them, and never take the time to notice that we are capable of missing as well as hitting. And miss we do (Although, truth be told, I rarely miss anymore vs. infantry...)
I think it's safe to see this debate as been settled. You're annoyed by the M203 and feel that's the single most blatant balancing issue, yet, I think you're failing to see that in adusting the properties of the M203 to better emulate its real life couterpart you're gimping Assault; big time. So, I agree with you in a way. If EA edjust everything to emulate the real weapon... I'm all over that. YET! If EA was to just change the arming distance of the M203, that makes no sense. And it would make assault almost pointless to play because when ASSAULTING you would be beat out by all other classifications in CQB. Heck, you wouldn't be much more effective in a gunfight than a medic.
{WP}Paas
p.s. - I proof read but, excuse any typos I missed anyway.
I know the russians don't use hollow point ammunition. It was for comparison specifications. If you have any time to see any gell testings, you will notice that the 7.62x39 with direct contact to flesh, or light clothing, leaves a NASTY exit would. Hollow-Point'esque. The 5.56x45, greenies or not, does not even compare. (77gr HP rounds do, but, military doesn't use those)
And if you've seen close combat hits with the older 5.56mm you will know it causes some seriously mean wounds as well. I've seen the results of such hits. Within around 20m the 5.56mm works wonders. But this isthe original 55grain, as I said before. The SAPS doesn't use greenies. All our ammo is 55grainers.
No. The 7.62x54r won't hit much harder than the .308. .
50% more kinetic energy at 600m strikes me as hitting MUCH harder. What's your definition of much harder?
At the barrel it is also hitting harder.
But maybe we should take this conversatoin into the PM?
True about the HP LEO ammo. However a 7.62NATO will knock down any target it over penetrates in CQB. Almost guarenteed. The only problem is it will knock down the next 3 people it hits as well.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Comment