Weapon Balance vs "Realism"

[gibonez 3633]

Depending on quality, a Mosin can range from pretty accurate to... not so much. They're pretty old rifles and they were built to outfit armies, not a handful of elite snipers. The Russians handpicked the most accurate of what they made for their snipers, but the vast majority were only battle rifles.

 

Absolutely right and even then those hand picked rifles shot accurately back in the 1940s if not earlier father time has taken its toll on the crowns and barrels and now they shoot poorly.

[Proper Gander 45]

So, I guess that the game is mostly about weapon balance at this point (seeing all of Gews' different analysis of the current state of ballistics).  If they start to take "realism" into account once the project moves past alpha, then the weapon choices will become much more self-evident.

 

On a side note, there is definitely a reason why armies no longer use the Mosin Nagant (or SKS) while the M4 is proliferating as the assault rifle of choice.

[Fear The Amish 40]

So, I guess that the game is mostly about weapon balance at this point (seeing all of Gews' different analysis of the current state of ballistics).  If they start to take "realism" into account once the project moves past alpha, then the weapon choices will become much more self-evident.

 

On a side note, there is definitely a reason why armies no longer use the Mosin Nagant (or SKS) while the M4 is proliferating as the assault rifle of choice.

 

Production time being one (anything that uses multiple materials like the SKS/Mosin) take longer to produce. Two a change in the distance of battle...

 

In World War 1 the average engagement range was 100-200 meters

in World war 2 this shortened to 75-150 meters

Currently engangement ranges are 25-75 meters

 

So a high rate of fire + smaller size = better designed weapon for modern battle. But there is a reason anyone that specializes in engaging at long distances (Sniper/Recon groups) use semi auto and bolt action rifles to this day, and that is simply because they will always be more accurate.

 

EDIT: also M4 is not the "assault rifle of choice" that falls to the AK-47 which is cheaper and more readily available. Also it can survive anything there is a reason it is on the flags of several countries and not the M16.

Edited February 10, 2014 by Fear The Amish

[rybo 171]

Well i own an SKS and my friend owns an M4 while. While he can put out more rounds down range then i can in a short period of time. My rounds will always hit almost exactly were i want them. For pure accuracy at medium range 200-300 meters the SKS is hands down a much better rifle. Also with the 7.62 x 39 is a MAN STOPING round, as opposed to the 5.56 which while yes will drop you takes a few more hits to take you completely out of a fight. This is exactly why we have these three guns in right now, each has a niche it excels at. If i am sitting on a hill providing overwatch i am going to want a Mosin with a LRS, and Bipod. If i am at Medium range covering a firing lane i want an SKS with a PU. If i am CQB i want an M4 with CQB settup. As you already pointed out your Remington is a much better choice for longer range fire in real life, just like the Mosin is a much better long range option in DayZ.

 

Jesus you need a new M4 type rifle if a crappy ass SKS is better...A $600 Delton AR shoots under MOA and anyone that has personaly shot the SKS more than once would know its MOM aka Minute of Man cause it a broad side barn hitter...Add into that crappy Surp ammo for any 7.62x39 and you really have a shitty ass SKS. I could go on and on. You all need to thank rocket for only adding the top feeder too. Cause if it was the magazine based SKS mag swaps are not quick by any means.

 

Also anyone haveing problems with a M4 type rifle in RL need to run it wet. This was made clear way, way, way back before any of us were born. NAM!

 

Add in that there are a shit ton of cars to find quality lube. M4 type all day er-day...

 

That is untill the AK comes around. But even then I'd take an M4 type cause it will hit what im aiming at..

 

 

 

Personaly own a 556/6.8/7.62x39/7.62x51 and more... I know what the fuck I'm talking about. I even shoot shot over 600m with my M4 type rifle known as a Robinson XCR and it's a piston rifle. Which is known for not being as accurate as direct impingement aka the "M4"..

 

 

I want realism so since we are all beach noobs with no gun experiance as far as we know they just need to add more weapon sway/shaking and totaly remove this magic random bullet crap. Lulz get a new stock and hand gaurd and your magicaly more accurate. It may help the shooter but no way in hell is it going to effect the rifles accuracy unless we get into the custom shit...

 

Last note of info about this "man killer round" aka the 7.62x39/51....Ive shot Coyote with a x51 and watched them run off into the sunset...Man killer my balls. More like shot placement. Noobzors..

 

The bullet with the most kills in the USA is the .22 Cal. It's the #1 murder caliber. That why all this talk about bigger=better is totaly laughable. Get outside and shoot something other than paper and yall might figure it out..

 

Last bit of info. Ive owned a Mosin and sold it. More than one of my buddys own one and everyone of them is far from an accurate rifle. Again another broad side barn hitter. Ive only seen one video on Youtube where the Mosin was accurate and his was custom.

 

The most accurate Mosins in the world came from the Fins. They took a bunch from the Russians and again did some custom work. This is where everyone thinks the Mosin is worth it weight in gold when in fact it was rebuilt and is truly worth it weight in lead.

 

Just my 2cents coming from a guy that shoots thousands of rounds a year....

Edited February 10, 2014 by RyBo

[soulfirez 901]

Production time being one (anything that uses multiple materials like the SKS/Mosin) take longer to produce. Two a change in the distance of battle...

 

In World War 1 the average engagement range was 100-200 meters

in World war 2 this shortened to 75-150 meters

Currently engangement ranges are 25-75 meters

 

So a high rate of fire + smaller size = better designed weapon for modern battle. But there is a reason anyone that specializes in engaging at long distances (Sniper/Recon groups) use semi auto and bolt action rifles to this day, and that is simply because they will always be more accurate.

 

EDIT: also M4 is not the "assault rifle of choice" that falls to the AK-47 which is cheaper and more readily available. Also it can survive anything there is a reason it is on the flags of several countries and not the M16.

Bang on if this was a zed apoc and i had the choice of an m4 or any m16 variant or one of the ak family id take the ak all day long is it a cheaper weapon yes is it as accurate no but good enough but it is way tougher more reliable in extreme conditions yes yes it is.. im not sure while i am fighting for my life for years if i last that long ill have time or the gear to properly maintain my nice american assualt rifle.. Now a weapon that can be stuck out in a desert or a jungle for years in the hands (sadly) children even and still be lethal and reliable.

 

AK winner winner

[Proper Gander 45]

Production time being one (anything that uses multiple materials like the SKS/Mosin) take longer to produce. Two a change in the distance of battle...

In World War 1 the average engagement range was 100-200 meters

in World war 2 this shortened to 75-150 meters

Currently engangement ranges are 25-75 meters

So a high rate of fire + smaller size = better designed weapon for modern battle. But there is a reason anyone that specializes in engaging at long distances (Sniper/Recon groups) use semi auto and bolt action rifles to this day, and that is simply because they will always be more accurate.

EDIT: also M4 is not the "assault rifle of choice" that falls to the AK-47 which is cheaper and more readily available. Also it can survive anything there is a reason it is on the flags of several countries and not the M16.

I would reckon that countries with the AK on their flag do so out of necessity rather than choice. And still neither the Mosin nor the SKS fits the bill when it comes to a modern assault rifle as neither are more accurate or precise than the M4, regardless of typical engagement ranges.

[sabaka (DayZ) 70]

I'm glad to see a good discussion here and there are several points that keep coming up over and over that I think bear responding to.

 

1- AK is a better end of the world weapon/AK makes more sense in this game.

Absolutely true. I'm not sure why you would implement an M4 and not either an AK 47 or 74 in a Russian state. Additionally the AK is the gold standard for assault rifle reliability. It may be less refined and less accurate than an M4 but when cleanings are few and far between and conditions are rough the AK is likely the go to weapon.

 

2- Even in real life Mosin would win long range engagements. 

Maybe. Someone suggested that at 300m+ the mosin would win. Patently false. Standing still I may not be able to put every shot in the 10 ring at 300m with my M4 (although I probably could, my M4 in real life has a magpul handguard which as I'm sure you're aware increases accuracy by 100000%) but I could certainly hit a human sized target 100% of the time. In a realistic situation with both combatants moving the M4 has a massive advantage. Fire and miss? Just shoot again. No racking. Also in a run and gun fight at 300m you might well miss your first 5 shots. For that mosin that means you're in big trouble. The M4 has 25 shots left. Additionally 3 round burst is pretty critical if pinpoint accuracy isn't possible (firing while moving at moving target) and the M4 gives you TEN three round bursts in a normal mag vs only 5 shots for the mosin.

 

The mosin might win if the game was snipe the unsuspecting survivor at 600m or more. Be honest though, in this game how many people have you killed at 600 meters? Is that extra reach worth knowing that you're dead to rights if someone manages to get within 100m of you at any time? I love precision shooting, but if I need to live in dayz my Remington 700 (the base weapon for the M24 sniper weapon system) is staying home and my M4 is coming.

 

3- 5.56 lacks sufficient stopping power/7.62 is a better man stopper

What? The 5.56 round packs around 1500 ft-lb of force depending on the load. The 7.62x39 is around 1700 on average. This might be the stupidest argument against the M4. Do you have any idea what EITHER round would do against an unarmored target? 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOYPxiRldaE

 

Gun forums love to argue whether 9mm is enough for a self defense round or whether you need .357/.40/.45. There's generally good debate on both sides with the consensus that 9mm is plenty against an unarmored target. 5.56 from an M4 is ~5 times more powerful than a 9mm round coming from a pistol. To claim that 5.56 wouldn't stop someone dead in their tracks is asinine. Is one round more powerful? Yes. Does it make a difference? Only in weird bullet penetration, ricochet, armor piercing edge cases. For what we're dealing with here (rifle bullet hits person wearing regular clothing) the question of which caliber you'd rather take a hit from is like asking if you'd rather drown in a pool or a lake. Is a lake bigger? Yes. Does it matter even in the slightest? No. Would you rather be run over by an F-150 going 70 mph or an F-250 going 70 mph? Even though the F-250 is bigger you won't even notice the difference.

Edited February 10, 2014 by sabaka

[wuffi (DayZ) 18]

LOL firing an m4 at 500 meters...

Dude the standart assault rifle of today is build to hit a target up to 300 meters.

Some rifles will allso hit a traget at 400-500 meters if you have a nice optic.

But fact is the M4 is not one of them!

The M4 has a short barrel and fires a 5,56 mm bullet so believe it or not but in real life an old mosin

would have better accuracy at long range because it fires a larger calibre (7,62) and has a longer barrel.

[gibonez 3633]

LOL firing an m4 at 500 meters...

Dude the standart assault rifle of today is build to hit a target up to 300 meters.

Some rifles will allso hit a traget at 400-500 meters if you have a nice optic.

But fact is the M4 is not one of them!

The M4 has a short barrel and fires a 5,56 mm bullet so believe it or not but in real life an old mosin

would have better accuracy at long range because it fires a larger calibre (7,62) and has a longer barrel.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJWLP81qCAE

You can lob 5.56 at far greater than 500m m4 is perfectly fine past 500m problem with hitting things past 500m is the standard 62 grain ball ammo used on m4s has trouble bucking the wind so getting first round hits is hard.

 

5.56 travels far farther than people give it credit for.

 

Also no way in hell would a stock mosin have better accuracy than a m4.

 

Best you can hope for with a mosin is about 4 moa at 100m.

 

Barrel length does not mean anything when it comes accuracy why do people think that ?

 

Barrel Length = muzzle velocity

 

Heck in alot of new studies it has been shown that a shorter barrel tends to be more accurate than a longer one since it has less flex and is far more rigid.

[wuffi (DayZ) 18]

Sorry but did you ever fire a gun in real life?

Wow so barrel lenght does not effect accuracy?

I guess then the militarry is made out of idiots because snipers prever

heavy calibre and a long barrel.

But good to know that they are all wrong because all you need is a pistol

with a nice optic to hit targets 500 yads away /S

And sorry but your vid doesn´t show the target.

A hit at 1100 meters with a 5,56 mm standart assault rifle?

LOL dream on!

[gibonez 3633]

Sorry but did you ever fire a gun in real life?

Wow so barrel lenght does not effect accuracy?

I guess then the militarry is made out of idiots because snipers prever

heavy calibre and a long barrel.

But good to know that they are all wrong because all you need is a pistol

with a nice optic to hit targets 500 yads away /S

And sorry but your vid doesn´t show the target.

A hit at 1100 meters with a 5,56 mm standart assault rifle?

LOL dream on!

 

You have no idea what you are talking about. Do some research, have a little knowledge on weapons and then answer instead of pretending to know anything.

 

The only reason longer barrels exist is to give certain rounds enough room to fully burn its charge.

[wuffi (DayZ) 18]

Sorry but i have been in the military + i do own (and shoot guns)
But to even think that you can hit a target 1100 meters away
with a 5,56 assault rifle is just batshit crazy!
 

[Whyherro123 2283]

I live in the US, so I'd take an M4 over another weapon. Lightweight, little recoil, and the ammunition would be absolutely everywhere. The other members of my group could be long-range combatants.  From what I have heard from my friends in the military (deployed to Afghanistan, so I'd like to believe they have some idea of what their weapon is capable of), the M4 carbine is an accurate, solid rifle that is dependable so long as you clean it properly. They (I have no idea how they figured it out, but I'm assuming they had some familiarization with tribal weaponry) also stated that the AK is not some supermagical death machine that never has to be cleaned. They still had to clean it, it just doesn't have the tight tolerances like the M4.

[Chaingunfighter 917]

Gonna throw in a wildcard here and interject how I like the "Blaze 95" more than anything else all of the sudden. Seriously, it works so great in close quarters but is the (current) second-most accurate weapon in the game. Not to mention it uses 7.62x51 which is very powerful.

Edited February 10, 2014 by Chaingunfighter

[WastedSpaceman 65]

Mosins are fun to shoot but they are pieces of shit.  The barrels need replaced pretty regularly in terms of a prolonged conflict (or "zombie apocalypse").

 

M4's are fantastic weapons but they are prone to malfunctions.  They are also vulnerable to becoming inoperable due to heat in an extended firefight (just talk to the guys who saw action in the middle east recently).  Are they good guns?  Yeah, they're "good."  They aren't great.

 

On a side note, the primary reason 5.56 is used in armed conflict is because it is more likely to wound than kill, compared to other rounds.  This is not a fault, but was very intentional.  By wounding an adversary, you essentially take 3 people out of combat (the wounded man and the two that come to pull him behind cover and treat his wounds).  Obviously that doesn't happen every time, but that's one of the benefits of using a smaller FMJ round.  Food for thought.

 

I've never fired an SKS so I have nothing to say about it.  But nobody that "wakes up on a beach" in a zombie apocalypse is going to be proficient with any firearms.  So just forget all this crap about M4's being capable of accuracy at 500m.  What a gun is capable of does not equate to what the shooter is capable of.

Edited February 10, 2014 by WastedSpaceman

[Chaingunfighter 917]

 

I've never fired an SKS so I have nothing to say about it.  But nobody that "wakes up on a beach" in a zombie apocalypse is going to be proficient with any firearms.  So just forget all this crap about M4's being capable of accuracy at 500m.  What a gun is capable of does not equate to what the shooter is capable of.

But intentionally forcing a poor gun accuracy to "simulate" untrained shooting is a bad mechanic. It should be realistic and left up to how you use it in the game, even if it is easier than real life, because it makes actual good shooting impossible.

[WastedSpaceman 65]

But intentionally forcing a poor gun accuracy to "simulate" untrained shooting is a bad mechanic. It should be realistic and left up to how you use it in the game, even if it is easier than real life, because it makes actual good shooting impossible.

 

I understand what you're saying but people are talking out of both sides of their mouths.  On the one hand they're screaming for what they perceive to be "realism," but on the other they want the game mechanics to carry them to a level of proficiency that very few people in the world actually possess (and they spend countless hours maintaining it every week).

 

But no, if you just pick up any old M4, whether it's a Colt or a Sig Sauer, or some cheap knock off brand, you are not going to be able to make a 500m shot no matter how good you are.  You have to spend time not just zeroing the weapon to a proper distance, but also learning the behavior of the barrel and whatnot.

[Chaingunfighter 917]

I understand what you're saying but people are talking out of both sides of their mouths.  On the one hand they're screaming for what they perceive to be "realism," but on the other they want the game mechanics to carry them to a level of proficiency that very few people in the world actually possess (and they spend countless hours maintaining it every week).

 

But no, if you just pick up any old M4, whether it's a Colt or a Sig Sauer, or some cheap knock off brand, you are not going to be able to make a 500m shot no matter how good you are.  You have to spend time not just zeroing the weapon to a proper distance, but also learning the behavior of the barrel and whatnot.

Yes, but I believe that should be the consideration for shooting, not just having some flimsy and gimmicky mechanic which essentially forces that behavior on those who actually could shoot that way. Obviously they can (and should) alter the shooting mechanics (Ammo quality affecting accuracy and degrading the weapon faster, better wind/environmental factor simulation, correct ballistic velocity, etc.) but to put an arbitrary value on the gun because not many people could shoot some way is quite annoying.

 

The M4 is probably only the way it is because of them messing around with values more than it being intentional. My statement mainly addresses people who think it should stay the same.

[Murdume 6]

A few things from my perspective. It's just my opinion, so take it with a salt if you so choose.

 

I own both an 91/30 Mosin Nagant and a 20" AR-15. Sure, it's not an m4 such as what is found in the game, it is however a similar weapon in design and parts. 

 

The 91/30 is a weapon that was largely mass-produced, regardless of quality, to give to the unfortunate Ivan that was being pointed in the direction of German lines and being told to run. It wasn't exactly and isn't exactly known for its ability to hit dead in as well as its contemporaries (K98 or Lee Enfield, for example). My 91/30 shoots to the left of wherever the sights are lined up, meaning you have to adjust your shot. Sure, once you learn your rifle it's not really a problem to get the round on target. What also amused me was that no one mentioned the "Sticky bolt" syndrome that Mosin's can get. Sticky bolt is a result of storage, and I doubt in a scenario such as the zombie apocalypse, that they took the time to remove the cosmoline from the weapons before putting them to use. I'd also like to know how if my character isn't trained in firearms and hence his accuracy should suffer, how he attaches after market optics to a mosin nagant without any kind of tools. 

 

Another thing about the talk of the adjustment from a full sized rifle round to the intermediate was for multiple reasons, aside from the fact that full sized rifle rounds were far more powerful than necessary and were often used by rifles larger than what was necessary for an urban environment. The reason I'd like to talk about though is the fact that intermediate rounds are far lighter than full sized rifle rounds. Carry 300 rounds of 5.56, then swap out and carry 300 rounds of nugget food, the difference becomes evident soon enough. 

 

Then there's this argument about M4 reliability vs AK reliability. Sure, you could argue this for days but it mostly comes down to the eyes of the beholder. An M4 isn't as unreliable as it's portrayed, this is just a stereotype that has been perpetuated since Vietnam because of a screw up on the government's part. It just boils down to whatever you feel more comfortable. In a place like, say a former communist country with a particular zombie infestation, an AK style weapon would likely be ideal, both for the common ammunition and spare parts. 

[alldaypk 63]

People use the SKS or the Mosin Nagant for the same reason the military uses snipers or DMRs. But it's still unwise to arm an army with snipers.

[Judopunch 523]

How about we take mosin and ar15 on the trip to forest with rain and mud for few months, then we smash drop those weapons on the ground couple of times and then we try shooting?

Can I use my mouse to aim?

 

*trollface*

[Rudette 435]

There is something intimate about a bolt action rifle. The interaction between yourself and the round, your body feels more like an articulation within the involvement of the death of your prey, a part of the killing mechanism as a whole.

Bolt actions are easy to use. Easy to teach someone use, and a very familiar type of firearm to many people. Being comfortable with a weapon is important, the right amount of confidence at the right time to take a shot and be certain you'll hit is the quintessential 'life or death' situation.

Something can be said about the raw effectiveness of different firearms, but I still feel 90% of any gunfight is positioning. Play to the strengths of your own weapon and to the flaws of your enemy's weapon. I don't think there should be too big of a disparity between the damage firearms do, not to the point that we have certain arms just don't feel worth carrying based on stats alone! As it is now, all of our current primary weapons fill a role or cater to a certain style of shootist. Me? I don't touch M4s. Not a question of it's effectiveness, just doesn't play to my strengths as a player and I think it's ugly ;p

Melee weapons, however, suffer from a huge disparity in damage. I shouldn't have to stab someone 24 times before they feel it, and I have no reason to when two punches to the head will suffice.

 

Edited February 10, 2014 by Rudette

[DrSubs 18]

 

I doubt in a scenario such as the zombie apocalypse, that they took the time to remove the cosmoline from the weapons before putting them to use. I'd also like to know how if my character isn't trained in firearms and hence his accuracy should suffer, how he attaches after market optics to a mosin nagant without any kind of tools. 

 

 

Your right getting the cosmoline off and getting your rifle nice and clean isn't the easiest task and putting attachments on is pretty far fetched especially the PU scope they have in game that has to be drilled and mounted right on to the receiver. There are other mounts that attach to the back sight but for the most part your not going to be putting on bipods and scopes and what not even a muzzle brake (compensator) will require at least a screwdriver. But hey it would be kinda boring not having these attachments in game to play with 

[gibonez 3633]

 

I've never fired an SKS so I have nothing to say about it.  But nobody that "wakes up on a beach" in a zombie apocalypse is going to be proficient with any firearms.  So just forget all this crap about M4's being capable of accuracy at 500m.  What a gun is capable of does not equate to what the shooter is capable of.

 

The problem is how the game represents that.

 

Instead of making the gun fire in an unrealistic inaccurate cone make the gun handle how an untrained person would handle it.

 

Make the weapon sway high, make the sight alinement not always perfect make the player not control recoil as efficiently as it is in game.

 

All these things achieve the same result but without sacricing the in games authenticity.

 

You can have your cake and eat it too.

 

ACE mod has no problems incorporating realistic gun mechanics will straying true to the real life characteristics of the weapons.

[gibonez 3633]

 

 

Your right getting the cosmoline off and getting your rifle nice and clean isn't the easiest task and putting attachments on is pretty far fetched especially the PU scope they have in game that has to be drilled and mounted right on to the receiver. There are other mounts that attach to the back sight but for the most part your not going to be putting on bipods and scopes and what not even a muzzle brake (compensator) will require at least a screwdriver. But hey it would be kinda boring not having these attachments in game to play with 

 

 

Hopefully once more weapons are put in the ability to attach unrealistic attachments on the mosin is removed.

 

Long range optics, the bipod should not be on the mosin it requires some serious gunsmithing to attach.