I Did Some Testing Regarding the M4 Accuracy

[7daniel7 8]

Hello, I had the idea to test the M4 after I saw how Sacriel was testing his in his stream.

Later I saw a guy running about 250 meters infront of me on an open field, I had my M4, and I wanted to test it, I was amazed how innacurate it is. I was shooting from a crouched position and most shots were way of target (after leading of course). So I wanted to test it out.

I picked up different buttstocks , attachments, different mags, handguards. (everything that I could find, that also involved server hopping for science). I tested from 3 different positions(prone,crouch,standing) again around 200 meters from my target (this time being that giant grey antenna like the one you see in stary).

I also tried testing different conditioned Item (One of my MP buttstock was badly damaged the other was pristine)

so tl:dr

Tested different scopes (all 5)

Tested different mags (all 5)

Tested different attachments, with or without(all except bayonet)

Tested different handguards

Tested different buttstocks

Tested how the bi-pod affects accuracy

The results:

-The only thing that changed the accuracy drastically was the buttstock.

-The deployed bi-pod doesn't reduce the accuracy of your weapon when you are in a standing or a crouched position. it does however greatly increases accuracy when prone, even with the CQB buttstock you get every shot on target.

-Having a damaged buttstock doesn't affect your weapons accuracy (haven't tested other things so can't say about every item)

Basically the buttstock you get with the M4 with is inaccurate(the OE), the CQB showed the same results, maybe slightly more inaccurate. The MP buttstock is much more accurate for some reason.

On a side note the scopes were hard to test, the 2 Iron sights that you can get seems to be less accurate than the ACOG, M2, RDS scopes. (but it might be false)

P.S: Yes I was zeroed in, Yes I was holding my breathe, Yes I can measure distances by eye sight.

Edited December 23, 2013 by 7daniel7

[Junos 57]

This is cool, thanks for sharing.  Must have taken you a while.  I was hoping for screenshots of groupings though.  :)

[ryzoh 44]

its funny cuz there is only m4 on the game, and its alpha.

[☣BioHaze☣ 7337]

Nice post.

 

Good to know I should be looking out for those MP buttstocks in particular (until something changes).

 

Thanks.

[7daniel7 8]

What's so funny? we are testing the game aren't we?

[Powell (DayZ) 734]

cool, wrong forum section

[franzuu 211]

I made a thread on the topic that covers this, I think its pretty indepth

 

Proposed changes to weapon handling, debuffs, accuracy, tradeoffs etc.

[leehwgoc@gmail.com 7]

 

I made a thread on the topic that covers this, I think its pretty indepth

 

All your thread does is make 'suggestions' for changes to the weapons.  You didn't do any objective testing on the existing weapon factors at all.  Quit reaching for an opportunity to plug your thread, you dork.

 

 

To the OP:

 

Thank you for posting this.  You answered two important questions for me which I could not find the answer to anywhere else on the net:

 

- A badly damaged / damaged / worn MP buttstock has no difference in dispersion decrease from a pristine MP buttstock, for the time being.

 

- A deployed bipod has no penalty to weapon performance when standing or crouching... so we should always just keep it deployed, saving potentially precious seconds during a firefight.

Edited December 29, 2013 by cogwheel

[Problematic 71]

Have my well deserved beans OP! Thanks for doing the research, some truly helpful information came out of it :)

[austen.fart@gmail.com 54]

My accuracy test -

 

precision aim 1 click First shot = miss....  die

 

rapidly click and empty the clip in the general direction of target = finding a dead body full of glorious loot