-Gews-

Gee Mister, if you say $1,500 suppressors provide the same effects as taping on a soda bottle, it must be true! I suppose they're just on there for looks. Someone needs to tell these guys to remove them!

It doesn't matter because [a] they wouldn't introduce some old carry handle mounted optic anyways if need or want to do attachment-ception they will go ahead and do attachment-ception As far as I'm concerned they just need to make the BUIS actually usable as BUIS... But to make that worthwile they need to prevent people from using just the front post, which works fine right now. They could do this by giving rear sights and optics dispersion modifiers, once you remove the rear sight or optic and only use the front post you couldn't fire with any accuracy. And also there's no point using BUIS when you can attach any optic or sight in a second, right now you could just have a carry handle or extra ACOG in your pack, making BUIS pointless...

They're wrong. Last time I checked. It did the same thing as a bipod except you didn't have to be prone. We already have a gun that does that with porting. Tells you right in the owner's manual: " ...we recommend for the best sound reduction, power & proper function the use of Remington or CCI high velocity 40gr or 36gr hollow point... ******DO NOT USE SUB-SONIC AMMUNITION****** " Useless? I wonder why you see militaries issuing suppressors with 5.56 and 7.62 rifles, even .338 Lapua Magnums and .50 BMGs? Since way back in Vietnam? Without any subsonic ammo? I guess all those companies advertising "30-35 dB suppression levels" are lying and the reviewers' decibel-meters are wrong. :rolleyes:

Have no fear, I'm sure all the necessary corrections would be on posted on Reddit and the forums the first day that was introduced...

T-55: 48 km/h T-72: 60 km/h BMP-2: 65 km/h BTR-80: 80 km/h BRDM-2: 100 km/h I remember the first time I played Wasteland I found a BRDM-2 with no ammo. I just drove along the road ramming passing cars which would instantly burst into flames. A couple people got out of one and I chased them around knocking down trees until I eventually ran them over, their AK-74s couldn't penetrate the armor or deflate the tires on the moving vehicle.

Keep in mind that for every bullet that whizzes past and improves your gameplay there is a player cursing on the other end. I hate the current dispersion mechanics. I don't like random dispersion once it gets past a reasonable level either. You didn't mention dispersion but I have to mention it. But making it harder to hit people is good. Placing the cursor and clicking is extremely easy. More advanced wounds are good. Sighting in rifles and barrels overheating are worthy if unlikely features. There is really nothing objectionable here.

Yup, they should change the "Blaze". Better one obscure rifle slightly incorrect than two well-known rifles obviously so... Mmm, look at the recent fate of the vz.58 >: ) I'm sure we'll have a few "hunting rifles". But I'm also sure they will all be substantially different from each other. We already have the Blaser. You can bet your hat we'll have a .357 lever-action. We'll have a bolt-action with 5 round magazine, maybe a CZ550. Perhaps we'll even get something like a Vepr or Benelli R1. Here's the problems I have with that. First off it means only one, maaaybe two bolt-actions. Most people would not appreciate the difference between bolt guns from Remington, CZ, SAKO, Tikka, Winchester, Ruger, Savage, Weatherby, Browning, et cetera, because like the poor vz.58 there wouldn't be any appreciable differences. Second they will all probably use the same caliber which is just BORING. They won't have anything truly different because that would mean a specific caliber for a specific gun, which the devs want to avoid, and they won't give us TWO 7x57s or .300 Win Mags. So say goodbye to dreams of 6.5 Swede or whatever your fetish is. Boring! Most hunting calibers would be proprietary too. Gibonez mentioned .243 for example: there wouldn't be multiple .243s made for the game, so that makes the .243 "proprietary" even though it's a very common round. Stuff like 7mm-08 or .30-06 has no appreciable difference to .308 Winchester and 7.62 NATO. At least 9x39 is substantially different from most if not all rounds in the game, and the VSS is a substantially different rifle from anything else. If the VSS is out, then I suspect most "different" calibers are. Nothing, copy-paste a few lines and there is your new ammo type. One hunting round makes sense if they want to limit people's access to military guns, and .30-06 makes sense as the most popular round for that purpose. However it would have no appreciable difference to 7.62x51mm, if they followed the old ARMA rules it would have either 3% or 10% more damage and an indistinguishable trajectory so I suspect players would lobby for .308 hunting rifles and I suspect the devs wouldn't want to give a new ammo type when they don't have to - they already have had people asking for 7.62x54mmR and haven't done it. It also doesn't solve the problem of "caliber boredom" but only a few people have that issue >: ) As far as hunting rifles looking the same, well, they do. But in terms of game function you have a bunch of fun calibers and a bunch of fun scopes, and one of those two fun features seems unlikely to be used much. And unrelated topic, as far as hunting ammunition goes it poses certain problems for logic, consistency, and game play in terms of expanding bullets vs military service ammunition. It's not good to ignore the difference but it's just as bad to have properties that don't make sense.

They are supposed to be a bit more accurate. They are popular here since Kalashnikovs are prohibited, used to be more popular since now many vz.58s are prohibited since CZ and others were using refurbished full-auto receivers to produce them which is a no-no. I always hear bad things about Century QC but AKs never have a reputation as tack drivers. But anyways something like 2-3 vs 3-4 MOA or 3-4 vs 4-5 MOA is not much difference in game, almost imperceptible. I've seen players swear the AKM was more accurate than the M14 AIM (it wasn't even close) and all sorts of odd things, people often don't notice such small differences so it makes sense the devs wouldn't prioritize such a similar weapon. Nobody produces match ammo because people don't pick 7.62x39 for match rifles. :P Not a large enough market to justify it otherwise it would be out there. There is some high-quality stuff like Lapua but for the most part one must roll their own.

Yeah, well unfortunately they won't be adding them. Pick a few couple popular cartridges... .30-06: Too similar to the 7.62x51 be worth it. Nobody will notice +/- 100 ft/s. 7.62x54R: Same as above. 7x64: Same as above. .270: Same as above. 8x57 IS: Same as above. 7mm-08: Same as above. And pick any random hunting cartridges that are quite different. .300 WM: Would only be used in one, maybe two guns. Too weapon-specific. .243: Same as above. 6.5x55: Same as above. 7x57: Same as above. 9.3x62: Same as above. .22-250: Same as above. The VSS is a popular request and a unique weapon. Many gamers consider hunting rifles "boring" and think they all look pretty much the same. If they won't do 9x39mm for the VSS, AS, A-91, OTs-14, VSK-94 and other exotic weapons they won't do calibers that would be used in one maybe two "boring sniper rifles" for which there isn't much player demand, when they could just use their generic "7.62x51mm". Bah. Different calibers is fun, .308 everything is not. And I fully expect we will get a Dragunov that takes 7.62 NATO. <_<

Real life yes, but it's the same thing in game. Thirty rounds of 7.62x39. ARMA 2's SA58V and SA58P had no differences from ARMA 2's AKM and AKMS. They copy-pasted almost every single value. Different skin, same filling.

The devs will never introduce tanks or armored personnel carriers. Bookmark me. Anyways I'm sure they're oh-so-easy to kill. Just pop tires, shoot tracks and apply molotov. Oh wait. Nope. Take the old BTR-80 for example. Protestors in Ukraine threw a dozen molotovs right onto a BTR and the crew survived the incident and the vehicle was still operable. Most "survivors" aren't going to be carrying dozens o molotovs ready for use. BTR has run-flat tires so good luck shooting them out and a mobility kill with a Mosin is not happening. It has NBC protection, night vision capability, 4x gunners sight, 600 km range, is fully amphibious, protection against 7.62mm from all directions and stops 12.7mm over the frontal arc, 500 rounds of 14.5mm and 2000 7.62 with an effective range of 2 kilometers... If you wanted to troll in any of these vehicles you could button down the hatches, swim out into the ocean and fire at people from hundreds of meters with total impunity. Yep, sounds like something real beneficial to the game.

I'm confused. You want a Model 70?

Blasphemer!

Nope I mean all bullets should follow the rules of physics. I don't want them to say "hmm, let's give this round less wind drift to balance things out". All bullets should have wind drift proportional to their lag time. Giving each bullet a different "wind drift coefficient" is unnecessary and would allow the devs (or modders) to give projectiles unrealistic and impossible properties. It would be like having different gravitational pulls for each bullet. Right now gravity affects all bullets in the same way, as it should. Wind should affect all bullets in the same manner.

No they won't. 7.62x51mm M80 Drop 400m = 142.1 cm 800m = 813.6 cm Wind drift (10 mph 90 deg) 400m = 47.4 cm drift 800m = 243.6 cm drift Coriolis (firing due East) 400m = -1.2 cm drift / -1.0 cm drop 800m = -5.7 cm drift / -4.7 cm drop Makes very little difference. It would change the impact by about ¼ of a human head in vertical axis and ⅓ in the horizontal... at 800 meters. Waste of development time. At Rezzed they said "Ballistics affected by weather" is on the "roadmap". I doubt they're talking about things like temperature, altitude, pressure and humidity. I just hope they get the physics of wind drift correct and have all projectiles follow the same rules.

Yes that would be an issue for me. I'd rather have no more guns added, ever, than have them be incorrect.

What? No 7mm Mashburn Super Magnum? I'm out.

Heh, I agree with cuddly_rabbit there. I would delete that shit regardless of time spent on it. Damnatio memoriae. From the moment I saw it in the pre-alpha devblogs I never liked it. Not happening but one can dream. My opinions remain the same, except it's much worse than I had imagined because it gives arcade-like buffs to the weapon.

Got reminded: no parachuting from helicopters. Your heli gets shot down, YOU get shot down. You want to drop people off, you have to get down to ground level, not fly over while they all bail out. Adding parachutes isn't necessary and wouldn't be beneficial.

Most helicopters would use a different type of fuel and they do use a lot of it. However... ...they have large tanks to compensate. Mi-17-1V can go around 465 km without being refueled and with no extra tanks, that's like looping the entire map 12 times and staying in the air well over 2 hours. Can't reduce fuel tank size so it depletes in a few minutes of flight because that's not "authentic". Helicopters are loud so that makes sense. There is a skybox. I assume you mean adding invisible boundaries which would be pointless and unrealistic. Cars should be way more "viable". The majority of the map is contained within a 10 x 10 km square. Few people would start up helicopters to fly 10 kilometers, they get in a car, it's a 10-15 minute drive and without speed limits way less...

I usually like to shoot people without interaction but on very rare occasions I might ask someone a question like "what's the capital of Botswana?" "tell me about the .243 Winchester" and when they can't answer I get to break their legs or kill them.

Seems intended to be 27.5 MOA but looks like it has no dispersion right now. Haven't tried it.