So if the M4 spawns are to be decreased dramatically as civilian weapons are added then...

[teufel937 49]

You can crank the ACOG up to 700 in the game. But it dosnt zoom like the long range scope does.

 

Yeah I know how an ACOG works xD

I was just saying the dispersion effects are stupid and the ACOG isn't 4x like it should be

[djporternz 644]

http://www.reddit.com/r/dayz/comments/1wkk96/opinion_balancing_is_for_cod_this_is_hardcore/

And opinions are like aresholes...

 

What's your point?

[doomdesire86 16]

Speaking of which is the FNX now worth having over the Magnum with it's bigger ammo capacity or is it still a bit of a no no?

 

Magnum is superior. Much higher damage(you can kill someone easily with a shot to the chest) and doesn't require a mag(although you can find speedloaders)

[-Gews- 7443]

And opinions are like aresholes...

 

What's your point?

 

Yeah, some of them need to be wiped.

 

Seriously, get a roll of Charmin Ultra Soft and flush away all the talk of nerfs, buffs, and balance patches... ugh.

[twingunz 308]

I like how people always argue calibres about what would and wouldn't kill a man, you get shot in the body with any calibre of bullet in an apocalypse you're a dead man (for obvious reasons).

Arma engines have always been based on bullet simulation (what makes them great) thus i feel that guns should behave like their real life counterparts. All guns should be lethal, no guns should be 'balanced'; that's my opinion on it.

[crazykage 1063]

I like all the new boots :D

And back to the topic, the M4 is fairly accurate in this game you guys just don't know how to handle it, have you ever handled one in real life? And shot hundreds of rounds from it? I had an M4 with a RIS and an ACOG and was knocking Zeds down from hundreds of meters away, you guys are too used to playing BF4 and CoD where you just mash on your left click button and something dies, there is a reason most military issue M4's (IRL) only come with two firing selectors, Semi and Burst, because you only have to place a few rounds where it counts, next time try going single action style with it or burst, you will be very surprised at the results.

Actually, I have. In my time in the Corps, I routinely put 10 out of 10 shots in the black at 500 yards, and with iron sights, not them easy mode ACOGS.

Whats more, I have also shot a civilian version, and found myself to be just as effective with it as with the military variants. I have ALSO shot the A4 version in burst fire mode. So I know that at 100 to 200 meters, it is still accurate in burst fire.

AND I have played arma 2.

So I can say, conclusively, that the M4 in DayZ SA is NOT as accurate as it's real life OR its arma 2 counterparts. Even when firing a single shot, I still find my groupings to be horrendously under par at relatively short ranges.

Be more careful in the future when throwing out the CoD or BF cards. Playing either of those games does not necessarily indicate a lack of knowledge, or misunderstanding thereof, of military life, tactics, equipment, or culture.

[crazykage 1063]

I like how people always argue calibres about what would and wouldn't kill a man, you get shot in the body with any calibre of bullet in an apocalypse you're a dead man (for obvious reasons).

Arma engines have always been based on bullet simulation (what makes them great) thus i feel that guns should behave like their real life counterparts. All guns should be lethal, no guns should be 'balanced'; that's my opinion on it.

Not necessarily. plenty of people have survived multiple gunshot wounds, and done so for long periods without serious medical aid.

its all very dependent on caliber and location. A 5.56 bullet lacks the FPS and stopping power of a 7.62, yes. But if I HAD to take a bullet, I would much prefer a 7.62. Why? a 7.62 is much more likely to punch a neat entry and exit hole, not stopping inside the body, which is far more survivable. A 5.56, on the other hand, could hit me in the shin, and wind up lodged in a lung due to the fact that the bullet has a tendency to tumble on impact, and in the human body, will bounce and ricochet off of bones. The sheer amount of massive internal damage from a single bullet could potentially cause a man to bleed out very quickly.

22. caliber bullets are so small as to be nearly useless for anything larger than small game. Some people have been shot at nearly point blank range multiple times in the head, and not one shot was able to penetrate the skull.

9mm has a tendency to not be able to efficiently DROP a target, but in the long term, tends to be lethal because the bullet has a nasty habit of not having enough velocity to exit, which in terms of gunshots, is very bad. Whereas 45s tend to do the same, with the added effect of causing a LOT more damage AND being able to DROP a target quickly, but also tends to be less accurate due to higher recoil (which is irrelevant to experienced shooters, of course).

But ANY caliber is potentially lethal if it hits the right spot: the heart is near instantaneous. The spinal column, depending on how high up, is an obvious one, resulting in either incapacitation or death. The lungs, while very serious and not survivable without advanced medical aid, will not necessarily take someone out of the fight IMEADIATELY. And of course the brain is rarely survivable, even with modern medical advancements, however there have been reported cases wherein military personnel have been shot in the head (even so far as to have lost brain matter), yet been able to continue fighting for some time after. One of the men, I forget his name, on the seal team depicted in the movie "Lone Survivor" had this happen. Reading into it, it turns out he was shot 14 times, and once in the head. He continued to fight after all that before finally succumbing to enemy fire.

Point being, that surviving a gunshot is VERY possible. Even if you only survive for a short time, you are not necessarily immediately out of the fight.

[twingunz 308]

Not necessarily. plenty of people have survived multiple gunshot wounds, and done so for long periods without serious medical aid.

its all very dependent on caliber and location. A 5.56 bullet lacks the FPS and stopping power of a 7.62, yes. But if I HAD to take a bullet, I would much prefer a 7.62. Why? a 7.62 is much more likely to punch a neat entry and exit hole, not stopping inside the body, which is far more survivable. A 5.56, on the other hand, could hit me in the shin, and wind up lodged in a lung due to the fact that the bullet has a tendency to tumble on impact, and in the human body, will bounce and ricochet off of bones. The sheer amount of massive internal damage from a single bullet could potentially cause a man to bleed out very quickly.

22. caliber bullets are so small as to be nearly useless for anything larger than small game. Some people have been shot at nearly point blank range multiple times in the head, and not one shot was able to penetrate the skull.

9mm has a tendency to not be able to efficiently DROP a target, but in the long term, tends to be lethal because the bullet has a nasty habit of not having enough velocity to exit, which in terms of gunshots, is very bad. Whereas 45s tend to do the same, with the added effect of causing a LOT more damage AND being able to DROP a target quickly, but also tends to be less accurate due to higher recoil (which is irrelevant to experienced shooters, of course).

But ANY caliber is potentially lethal if it hits the right spot: the heart is near instantaneous. The spinal column, depending on how high up, is an obvious one, resulting in either incapacitation or death. The lungs, while very serious and not survivable without advanced medical aid, will not necessarily take someone out of the fight IMEADIATELY. And of course the brain is rarely survivable, even with modern medical advancements, however there have been reported cases wherein military personnel have been shot in the head (even so far as to have lost brain matter), yet been able to continue fighting for some time after. One of the men, I forget his name, on the seal team depicted in the movie "Lone Survivor" had this happen. Reading into it, it turns out he was shot 14 times, and once in the head. He continued to fight after all that before finally succumbing to enemy fire.

Point being, that surviving a gunshot is VERY possible. Even if you only survive for a short time, you are not necessarily immediately out of the fight.

I can agree to this, i probably oversimplified my point as i can be quite lazy lol.

I was just meaning all guns should be viable to kill someone, not balanced to the point it's a grade system for weapons like most games behave eg: lower tier weapons, medium tier weapons and higher tier weapons. instead i think a good shot with a 9mm should be just as effective for a kill as a good shot with a 50cal :P not have like a 9mm take 3 shots to the face because its a 'weaker' calibre. If they go down that balancing path i will be a sad tear filled man! I like the thought that firing a gun in game is almost the exact equivalent of firing it in real life.

[sanguinius51 13]

Not necessarily. plenty of people have survived multiple gunshot wounds, and done so for long periods without serious medical aid.

its all very dependent on caliber and location. A 5.56 bullet lacks the FPS and stopping power of a 7.62, yes. But if I HAD to take a bullet, I would much prefer a 7.62. Why? a 7.62 is much more likely to punch a neat entry and exit hole, not stopping inside the body, which is far more survivable. A 5.56, on the other hand, could hit me in the shin, and wind up lodged in a lung due to the fact that the bullet has a tendency to tumble on impact, and in the human body, will bounce and ricochet off of bones. The sheer amount of massive internal damage from a single bullet could potentially cause a man to bleed out very quickly.

22. caliber bullets are so small as to be nearly useless for anything larger than small game. Some people have been shot at nearly point blank range multiple times in the head, and not one shot was able to penetrate the skull.

9mm has a tendency to not be able to efficiently DROP a target, but in the long term, tends to be lethal because the bullet has a nasty habit of not having enough velocity to exit, which in terms of gunshots, is very bad. Whereas 45s tend to do the same, with the added effect of causing a LOT more damage AND being able to DROP a target quickly, but also tends to be less accurate due to higher recoil (which is irrelevant to experienced shooters, of course).

But ANY caliber is potentially lethal if it hits the right spot: the heart is near instantaneous. The spinal column, depending on how high up, is an obvious one, resulting in either incapacitation or death. The lungs, while very serious and not survivable without advanced medical aid, will not necessarily take someone out of the fight IMEADIATELY. And of course the brain is rarely survivable, even with modern medical advancements, however there have been reported cases wherein military personnel have been shot in the head (even so far as to have lost brain matter), yet been able to continue fighting for some time after. One of the men, I forget his name, on the seal team depicted in the movie "Lone Survivor" had this happen. Reading into it, it turns out he was shot 14 times, and once in the head. He continued to fight after all that before finally succumbing to enemy fire.

Point being, that surviving a gunshot is VERY possible. Even if you only survive for a short time, you are not necessarily immediately out of the fight.

 

^

This, wise words. Wise words indeed.

 

I would love to see bullet wounds get infected, and if you haven't bandaged, especially if you do a lot of prone crawling which happens a lot in DayZ firefights. Could add a whole new medical dimension to the game.

 

The simple answer is, M4 needs realistic accuracy, realistic muzzle velocity, realistic power, and working attachments for me to truly enjoy it. Same goes for every gun in this game. Same goes for the melee weapons.

 

People loved the DayZ mod so much because it was based off a military simulator, thus, the aspects of shooting were realistic, and made it seem hardcore.

[twingunz 308]

^

This, wise words. Wise words indeed.

 

I would love to see bullet wounds get infected, and if you haven't bandaged, especially if you do a lot of prone crawling which happens a lot in DayZ firefights. Could add a whole new medical dimension to the game.

 

The simple answer is, M4 needs realistic accuracy, realistic muzzle velocity, realistic power, and working attachments for me to truly enjoy it. Same goes for every gun in this game. Same goes for the melee weapons.

 

People loved the DayZ mod so much because it was based off a military simulator, thus, the aspects of shooting were realistic, and made it seem hardcore.

Someone had a post ages ago about having a bullet removal system (for ones that don't punch through) where you would have to use surgical tools (or small sharp object) to remove the bullet or you get an infection was a good idea i liked it.

I tried to find the post but failed.

 

Edited February 3, 2014 by twingunz

[rickenbacker 190]

Then will the M4 recieve the buff it realistically needs, threads in this forum have conclusively proven that it is much less accurate than it should be, they have also shown that the ACOG is only half the magnification it should be.

 

Probably not going to be buffed, at least not anywhere near realistic levels. DayZ simulates the human factor by making the gun itself more inaccurate, giving it a "cone of fire" (oh, how I hate that expression), rather than by making your aim shake or move. Yes, this is a very unrealistic way to do it, and it makes the guns spray bullets all over the place like firehoses, where in real life the same gun could easily put two bullets in the same hole at 100m. This makes it impossible to have accurate weapons in the game, unless you want people to snipe each other from across the map with shotguns. 

Edited February 3, 2014 by Rickenbacker

[eleventhavenue 204]

Probably not going to be buffed, at least not anywhere near realistic levels. DayZ simulates the human factor by making the gun itself more inaccurate, giving it a "cone of fire" (oh, how I hate that expression), rather than by making your aim shake or move. Yes, this is a very unrealistic way to do it, and it makes the guns spray bullets all over the place like firehoses, where in real life the same gun could easily put two bullets in the same hole at 100m. This makes it impossible to have accurate weapons in the game, unless you want people to snipe each other from across the map with shotguns. 

 

This is exactly why we need this removed. Guns should be inaccurate because they are hard to aim, not because the bullet magically veers off course...

[SFRGaming 718]

I like all the new boots :D

And back to the topic, the M4 is fairly accurate in this game you guys just don't know how to handle it, have you ever handled one in real life? And shot hundreds of rounds from it? I had an M4 with a RIS and an ACOG and was knocking Zeds down from hundreds of meters away, you guys are too used to playing BF4 and CoD where you just mash on your left click button and something dies, there is a reason most military issue M4's (IRL) only come with two firing selectors, Semi and Burst, because you only have to place a few rounds where it counts, next time try going single action style with it or burst, you will be very surprised at the results.

There's a difference between how the character handles a weapon, and the weapon's base accuracy. The game currently edits your gun's dispersion values depending on certain attachments. This means a FULL pristine M4 with no added attachments may have a dispersion of 0.5 and when you add, say an ACOG sight, the dispersion changes from 0.5 to 0.3. This is a very bad way to handle weapon accuracy. The attachments should only change the avatars ability to handle the weapon. The only thing they can add that would affect the weapon's base accuracy would be different barrel types. (i.e.: fluted, comp, octagonal, heavy, etc..)

Edited February 3, 2014 by Shadow134

[Element47 2480]

There's a difference between how the character handles a weapon, and the weapon's base accuracy.

 

ok i am honestly confused. where is the difference within the game mechanics of dayz?

 

in dayz, we always have the avatar and the weapon together as a system. we dont have skills, so we can remove diversity on the avatars part. we dont mount weapons in perfectly aligned fixtures. if an attachment - for example a grip - affects how the avatar handles the weapon, and thus changes the avatars accuracy, then it affects the accuracy of the whole system, doesnt it? so if the end result of the whole system is an increased accuracy, then its working as intended?

 

i dont understand why there is a distinction made between the base accuracy of the gun and the percieved accuracy of the avatar, since in the game we only have situations where both work together. whether the gun has a high dispersion or the person is a poor shot, the end result is the same, right?

[DeatHTaX 1217]

You don't care about what it does in real life xdxdxdxd well too bad for you, this is a simulator. There's other games out there that care more about 'balance' than simulation, go play those.

 

Lol you do realize that there are elements in this game that can't be simulated perfectly because of in-game balancing right? 

 

So according to your logic, you should starve in a week to two weeks and die of thirst in a week of gameplay? Thats adjusted for balance and you're not stamping your feet about it.

 

if you think you can make a game that simulates real life 100% of the time and then make a game out of it without everyone bitching, you're an idiot.

 

There are elements of the game that need to be adjusted for balancing purposes. You can argue whether or not what I'm saying about the M4 applies or not, but you're absolutely mistaken for thinking that this game is going to be a "omg super realistic simulator" lol

[gibonez 3633]

Use the M4 with Buttstock MP + Handguard MP and you will be surprised by how accurate the M4 already is.

The fact that you even need a particular type of plastic on the weapon and it affects accuracy is insanely stupid.

 

That is like saying here let me attach these new grips on my 1911 it makes it a tack driver.

[Bits (DayZ) 3]

Basic physics tells us that making a small bullet that travels faster gives you more bang than making a bullet larger.  F=m*v^2 and all that.

 

It's much more complicated than that.  Larger (heavier) bullets retain energy much better than lighter bullets, and deliver much greater energy downrange.  Just as an example: IIRC, at 1,000 yds a .50 cal from an M2 has double the energy of a .30 cal from an M1919.

 

Bullets that go through a target do not transfer as much energy as bullets that stay in a target.  Different bullet designs (ex: JHP vs FMJ) can generate very different types of wounds (ex: temporary wound cavity, hydrostatic shock).

 

I've shot deer at 100-200 yds with a 7mag (small and fast, exited) and a .50cal muzzle loader (big and slow, no exit); I'll give you three guesses as to which dropped the dear faster, and the first two don't count.

 

If interetested, read up on ballistic coefficient and cross sectional density.

 

 

No, they most certainly fucking aren't. Civilians in the US are disbarred from owning fully automatic weapons, unless you own a relatively hard-to-get license and are willing to spend a good amount of cash. Most people aren't.

 

If you aren't from the US, then you have an excuse, but if you are, do some goddamn research. Those "military/SWAT" weapons are single-shot semiautomatic firearms, styled in a certain physical sense that makes certain people along the US political system quiver in their boots because they look "scary".

 

Civilians in the US are NOT barred from owning fully automatic weapons (or SBRs, or suppressors, or sawed-off shotguns).  You just have to file a form with the BATFE and pay a tax (few hundred dollars).  The problem is finding a fully-automatic firearm that is legally transferable.  They can be found, but they are outrageously expensive (buy-in starts at about $10,000 for something worthwhile).

 

The license you refer to is required to MANUFACTURE.  Manufacture and importation of fully-automatic firearms is very tightly controlled.  Manufacture of SBRs, suppressors, and AOWs does not require a license, just the form and the tax.

 

Single-shot is not the same as semiautomatic. You can buy an AR that is one or the other (strange but true).

 

Please do some research yourself (you can start by googling "ATF form-1 form-4 07/02 SOT" and "gca 1986") and watch your language.