-Gews-

And this proves the current values are appropriate how...?

If I buy a racing game and the Ferrari 599 GTO has a top speed of 140 mph and goes 0-60 mph in 5.5 seconds, I will complain. That car should have a top speed of 208 mph and it should reach 0-60 mph in 3.7 seconds. If someone says "it doesn't need to go faster! it's already the fastest car in the game!" that is meaningless to me. I don't care if the only other cars are Honda Accords and Toyota Corollas, and I don't care if the 599 GTO wins every race. The 599 GTO should have the correct values regardless. The same thing with DayZ. The M4A1 does not have the correct values. Capisce?

It's not about wanting "more" :rolleyes: the gun is not accurately portrayed.

Don't care who has it or how much better it is than your crossbow or SKS. I want the game's weapons to mimic their real life counterparts as close as possible. Anyways, who said it should be common? The best weapons in the game shouldn't be commonly seen.

This. It should be both more accurate and more powerful.

"Usual range was approx 150m and 1 bolt could penetrate a knight in FULL PLATE ARMOR and hit another one behind him. Death was totally instant - for both. The best crossbows could shot at 300m...now show me a 5.56 weapon that instantly kills 2 targets with 1 shot on range between 100-300 meters. 5.56 are weapons for raining bullets at short-medium range with chance to kill only on perfect shot. Crossbow didn't need that, u just hit and enjoy dead man." Shooting a bolt through two people is one thing... happens all the time and with bullets as well. Shooting through two people wearing plate armor is another, it's not happening except in the most exceptional cases. And 300 meters? That's like saying an M4 can be shot at 2000 meters. Death totally instant? Please. Did they get Merlin to put a curse on those bolts? Shot placement is not important with arrows? Gah. "There are plenty examples of people surviving getting shot with no problems only when bullets hit bones, arteries or organs do they do incapacitating damage [...] If a bullet doesn't hit anything important the only way people die is from shock or blood loss" Likewise for an arrow or bolt? How's it going to kill someone without hitting something vital and without blood loss? Infection? Poison? "An M4 is for soldiers that need to just fire a whole clip blindly to hit one guy they hardly compare to a sniper rifle or anything like that, or a bow. Bolts and arrows are designed to maim flesh completely bullets are to hopefully hit an organ, which they often don't." So the M4 Carbine is a bullet hose that doesn't "compare to" to a bow... sure it doesn't compare but not for the reasons implied. And bullets don't "maim flesh"? Seems logical. "Yeah you can hardly ever kill animals with a crossbow in one hit but that's because everything hunted with them has a thick hide, way thicker than a human obviously." Hardly ever? Thousands are killed every year in one shot. One shot is usually all anyone is going to get, that deer won't stand there and wait for the hunter to reload his crossbow. Lung-heart-lung, one shot and assured death.

Misinformation galore

Nope, that has no effect.

ca. 1.75m, 1.25m, 0.50m.

I agree with Rocket. If I were him I wouldn't want to neuter the game's potential just so it could be classified in Australia either. I don't think they should toss great ideas and features because certain governments have foolish rules. we're not trying to plaster the game with photos of the supreme ruler to try and appease that market" Hehe. But then again I'm not Australian.

If they had to go with a short verison, it should have been at least the MP5K-PDW. I just don't see any military or police force buying or issuing the old-school no-stock MP5Ks when the improved -PDW is available. There are very limited applications for a gun without a stock... search up pictures of almost any unit in the world using MP5s and they will not have the MP5K version. IMO it's a case of "looks cool" trampling "best choice".

^the last one down is a G3...

An SKS... riiiight... maybe you meant "SVD".

Yup. Even WITH the FoV slider all the way left, the ACOG still doesn't "magnify" as much as it should. Last time I checked it was 1.56x by default, using the slider that doubles to 3.12x, still much less than the 4x it should be at. Take a screenshot of 4x scopes ARMA 2 or 3 and compare to the ACOG and the difference is huge.

I think the tricked-out M4s should be end-game kinda gear... instead of being common peashooters. Only in a video game could weapons like this... be considered wholly inferior to weapons like this...

In "just a few shots"? But taking "just a few shots" is what you were complaining about with the SKS. ^_^

It already got one. Your problems are due to the damage system and not that the weapon is weak. It could still use a buff. The M4 needs a huge buff.

You can't put a suppressor or a flash hider on an MP5K because the barrel is too short. You need the barrel with the 3 lug setup which is not on the game's model, it has the original barrel. It already has an "ergo grip". They obviously plan to give it a lootable railed forend for flashlights. The SVD has a flash suppressor that is one piece with the front sight. There is no need for a "compensator". Tripods are silly, there are bipods for SVDs but they are commercial products and not military issue. They wouldn't make an SVD and have it incompatible with the PSO-1. M4A1 already has a flash suppressor. They aren't adding thermal weapon sights. They won't let the Python use the Encore's scope and you would need a different mount besides.

The speed makes it more likely to fragment. Less speed = less fragmentation. However angle-of-attack variations can lead to failure in which case it would "drill through". Basically the bullet is wobbling in circles as it comes out of the barrel, if it hits at an unfortunate angle it can fail to fragment and this varies from bullet to bullet and rifle to rifle.

The 5.56 fragments and the 7.62x39 does not. Second you need to place your shots properly regardless of caliber.

How is the AMD-65 "better"? Some cons of the design are: -little to no cheek weld -very short sight radius -short 12.5" barrel with brake means less velocity and more noise and blast -forward grip can interfere with mag changes -sheet metal handguard gets very hot The gun was designed for paratroopers and mechanized infantry. It's only "better" if for some reason you need something more compact.

"Near threatened" status. From the story it doesn't seem like the gun was super effective but then again it's a damn bison. "We kept looking at the buffalo and Gary said “This is normal, A lot of times I have had them stand like that for 20-30 mins before they go down” After about 15min the buffalo fell."

Like gianni001 said the suppressor would only increase velocity and it wouldn't negatively affect accuracy, could even improve it a bit. It would probably change point of impact though. Old suppressors used wipes which also slowed the bullet and reduced accuracy. Some integrally-suppressed guns have ported barrels (ie: Amphibian, MP5SD) to reduce velocity. Anyways the suppressor increases accuracy by about 1/3 MOA and the bayonets decrease it by the same ~1/3 MOA. Neither is an appreciable change, you would never notice it in any circumstances in this game. The pistol suppressor has no effect.

I agree this kind of thing is needed, the current system sucks when people can absorb bullets with little or no apparent effects, sprint away to safety and even keep firing back with great accuracy. More wounding effects would improve the game and realism. This would also be better than those little dots of blood which tell players their shots have hit. However I wouldn't call it "kinetic" because none of the bullets has enough force to actually knock someone over. It's the person's response, nervous system, psychological, etc, which causes them to fall. Which also would be hard to take into account ie if they were shot while all full of adrenaline or sniped while having a picnic, etc. I also wouldn't like to see something where 9mm rounds are shrugged off while the .45 flattens people, or the same with 5.56 vs 7.62.

I'd rather have them do nothing Personal preference and too many factors, is the grip close to the receiver, is it in the middle, is it far forward, are you gripping it like a broomstick or using it as a handstop, what else is on the rifle, etc We've seen what happens when the devs decide to represent small ergonomic differences in-game... for example we have the "CQB" stock, which decreases your carbine's accuracy to the tune of an additional 17 MOA because it's slightly shorter when fully extended and is named "CQB" and therefore must be useless for long range (despite the fact all the stocks are collapsible and have multiple positions). Or for example the Magpul furniture which is aftermarket and therefore increases your chances of hitting certain targets by about 35 times. This stuff often happens in games... Merely saying something like "+15% speed" or "-10% muzzle climb" just does not sit well with me... it's not satisfactory. I'd rather they just leave this ergonomic stuff to personal preference unless it's something major, like a lack of any stock at all. I'd like it so someone could stick it on or leave it off their rifle and not be penalized either way. I don't see how they can do a good representation in-game and I doubt they would either.