Weapon Balance vs "Realism"

[Valadain 270]

Lots of stuff which I'm too lazy to start listing: if rifles and ammunition were 100% precise and consistent no gun would be any more precise than another, which is an absurd concept.

 

 

You are right of course, somewhere I completely side-tracked from the point I was trying to get at, which is that the Mosin, being stock, shouldn't have optics. It shouldn't be the sniper rifle in the first place. It is great out to the effective range of the iron sights, but beyond that is a lot of customization that pretty well changes the rifle entirely. I think that's where my sleep deprived brain shut down at some point in this conversation, I just don't think of 800 yard shots with the Mosin. I think about iron sight shots, which pretty well limit effective range to the shooter.

 

Regardless, apologies for going off the reservation there. Same to Gibonez and anyone else I was frustrating!

[Valadain 270]

Weapons are situational. 

Your M4 may be a superior weapon platform. But ingame, i'm going to see you before you see me and at a range you won't be able to land shots accurately.

Nugget all the way baby. 

 

That's pretty well what people are taking issue with. A Mosin isn't more accurate than an M4. So right now, the situationality is completely manufactured.

[sabaka (DayZ) 70]

That's pretty well what people are taking issue with. A Mosin isn't more accurate than an M4. So right now, the situationality is completely manufactured.

 

Perfect 3 sentence summary of the entire point of this thread.

[gibonez 3633]

You are right of course, somewhere I completely side-tracked from the point I was trying to get at, which is that the Mosin, being stock, shouldn't have optics. It shouldn't be the sniper rifle in the first place. It is great out to the effective range of the iron sights, but beyond that is a lot of customization that pretty well changes the rifle entirely. I think that's where my sleep deprived brain shut down at some point in this conversation, I just don't think of 800 yard shots with the Mosin. I think about iron sight shots, which pretty well limit effective range to the shooter.

 

Regardless, apologies for going off the reservation there. Same to Gibonez and anyone else I was frustrating!

 

That is part of the problem that I see with the current weapon system.

 

The accessories for the weapons work on far too many weapons weapons they should not work on.

 

Nobody in their right mind would put a 2k dollar scope on a 100 dollar pos mosin.

 

No need to apologize also we are all just having a friendly discussion.

[HunterJay 81]

Good thing you are not buying those scopes. You are looting them, so yes you would put that scope onto your pos mosin if it was all you had.

[frosti 2165]

 

on a 100 dollar pos mosin.

[gibonez 3633]

 

 

 

The mosin is a terrific weapon for 100 dollars but when compared to any modern rifle or even budget civilian rifles it is a POS.

 

It is in accurate, has a sticky bolt, overly long, and not only that I have never shot a mosin that shot true meaning the non adjustable sights correctly hit where you aimed.

[HunterJay 81]

We'll like I said. Its not like you walk into a gun store and can carefully pick out what you want. Looters/beggars can't be choosers.

[gibonez 3633]

Good thing you are not buying those scopes. You are looting them, so yes you would put that scope onto your pos mosin if it was all you had.

 

Problem is you wouldn't even be able to since putting a LRS or a nightforce scope judging by the model would require extensive gunsmitthing and machining.

 

0 chance of a survivor mouting it on the field without any tools.

 

The LRs should simply not work for the mosin just like the Pu scope should not be compatible with the m4.

[frosti 2165]

Problem is you wouldn't even be able to since putting a LRS or a nightforce scope judging by the model would require extensive gunsmitthing and machining.

 

0 chance of a survivor mouting it on the field without any tools.

 

The LRs should simply not work for the mosin just like the Pu scope should not be compatible with the m4.

 

[HunterJay 81]

Well this isn't a real life simulator, this is a zombie apocalypse survival game based in Russia.

[gibonez 3633]

 

That would actually work .

 

Rifle would not keep zero after 2 shots though.

[Celt (DayZ) 30]

Another funny thing I keep seeing is people arguing over the lethality of .22 LR, due to the 10/22 that will be added soon. Some people say that it can and will kill at close range, others are arguing that it isn't powerful enough. Well, it can definitely be lethal... but when 5.56 takes 5 shots to the chest to kill, what's the point in arguing? The current ballistics and damage system makes no sense.

 

IMO, the game should have a sort of damage system similar to Red Orchestra, with vitals very vulnerable to damage. Not sure how hardcore this should be, there would likely be a lot of argument on that.

[DURRHUNTER 597]

this is realism btw: 

Edited February 12, 2014 by DURRHUNTER

[xRann 126]

Another funny thing I keep seeing is people arguing over the lethality of .22 LR, due to the 10/22 that will be added soon. Some people say that it can and will kill at close range, others are arguing that it isn't powerful enough. Well, it can definitely be lethal... but when 5.56 takes 5 shots to the chest to kill, what's the point in arguing? The current ballistics and damage system makes no sense.

 

IMO, the game should have a sort of damage system similar to Red Orchestra, with vitals very vulnerable to damage. Not sure how hardcore this should be, there would likely be a lot of argument on that.

Not even going to get into the failings of the medical system the game has, suffice to say it needs major improvements along with ballistic damage/injury.

[Judopunch 523]

Not even going to get into the failings of the medical system the game has, suffice to say it needs major improvements along with ballistic damage/injury.

We can replace everything you just said with 'wait tell after alpha'.

[xRann 126]

We can replace everything you just said with 'wait tell after alpha'.

Dude, one word for you. Defibrillator.

[gibonez 3633]

Another funny thing I keep seeing is people arguing over the lethality of .22 LR, due to the 10/22 that will be added soon. Some people say that it can and will kill at close range, others are arguing that it isn't powerful enough. Well, it can definitely be lethal... but when 5.56 takes 5 shots to the chest to kill, what's the point in arguing? The current ballistics and damage system makes no sense.

 

IMO, the game should have a sort of damage system similar to Red Orchestra, with vitals very vulnerable to damage. Not sure how hardcore this should be, there would likely be a lot of argument on that.

 

Dayz could stand to take ALOT I mean Alot of things from Red orchestra 2.

 

Everything from weapon resting on objects to reduce sway, to realistic weapon handling and ballistics to attention to detail.

 

If the shooting was even half as good as it is in Red Orchestra I would be a happy man.

Attention to detail in Ro2 is insane here is a small example.

 

Mosin 100m zero and 100m set on the sight.

 

How it looks when aiming

 

Mosin nagant elevation sight set to 2000m

 

Here is how it looks when aiming

 

Everything in RO2 is impressive when it comes to gunplay and handling tiny things most people would not notice like the manual bolting mechanics actually increasing the bolting speed to the bayonet stabs doing damage depending on your run speed and body position hit.

[moxy (DayZ) 2]

http://www.colt.com/ColtLawEnforcement/Products/ColtAdvancedLawEnforcementCarbine.aspx

 

-So a weapon that weighs less than 7 pounds is too heavy to use standing without support? I think not.

 

-Red dot optic makes it harder to shoot while standing? Have you ever seen or used a red dot optic in real life? My r700 with a 4-16x scope is much more difficult to use standing, but that's a little different from a non-magnifying red dot.

 

- M4 needs constant cleaning? Here's a real life stress test thread: 

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=7&t=521547

It seems like a lot of these real life users can go through well over 1000 rounds of surplus ammo without a problem. Since the ammo in game is presumably quality ammo since it's found in military bases you should be good for several thousand rounds. Just require use of weapon cleaning kit every 2.5k rounds. I personally doubt that I've shot more than 500 rounds through one specific M4 in game, maybe your experience is different.

 

-M4 does not adequately incapacitate targets? That's complete drivel. If an unarmored human takes a center of mass (or certainly head) hit from a 5.56 round coming out of a rifle they're going down. Period. If you think otherwise it's time to stop watching movies and live in the real world. Did you even watch that ballistics gel video I posted earlier?

 

-Reliable bullseyes at 300m. On an official 100yrd rifle target the black is 6-3/8" diameter. Any practiced shooter, with proper optic and sling (which I realize is not in game but I have one in real life), while standing, should be able to hit a target that size at HALF of a rifle's effective range fairly reliably. If you look back at my gun porn picture, the three of us who own all those shoot most weekends. We'd be happy to have you along and demonstrate if you'd like. When we're shooting rifle we prop up clay pigeons (which are actually only 4.3" diameter) at a variety of ranges and fire away. After a few shots to get the zeroing fixed in our heads they go down pretty reliably. 

 

Now if you want to make the case that Joe Average sucks at shooting, so the M4 shouldn't be accurate past 50m that's fine. But if I can't hit a person sized target with an M4 at 100m in game then I shouldn't be able to hit a cow at 100m with the Mosin. Considering I've seen someone get sniped from 300m+ with the Mosin in game I'd say something is wrong.

 

 

edit: just for fun:

http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~loebinfo/loebinfo/Proportions/human1.gif

Here's a link to standard human dimensions. The torso target box is 1'-6" by 2'-4". Make a target that big and anyone who has ever shot a gun before should be able to hit it with a properly zeroed optic at <300m basically every time. As far as lethality a shoulder shot may not kill you outright but don't tell me you'd take a 5.56 round through the shoulder and then jump back up and fight. With the way the bullet yaws you'd almost certainly lose complete use of an arm and might go into shock.

I did not comment on the weight of the M4. I stated that shooting any rifle standing unnsuported with no sling is hard and hitting anything over 200m in stated position is rather questionable. Even for a trained individual.

 

I did also not make any comments about red dot optics. I was commenting on the use of (magnifying)scopes in a standing, unsupported position with no sling which  will only magnify your instability, make you lose any situational awareness you may have had, force you to close one eye and use valuable time to locate your target within the scope. All negative factors.

 

Some guy shooting 1200 rounds over the course of 18 months does not warrant the label real life stress test. There have been 2 major M4 studies conducted by the US Army. The dust test and the comparison test. Look them up. iirc i think 1 mis per 1100 is about what they concluded with. 10riflesx6000 rounds each. Oh but that isnt much you say. Well, how many M4 shots have been fired in Dayz total and how many misfires/jams?

 

As for the incapacitation issues they are related to fragmentation. M193/M855 needs to be travelling at 2700 fps to reliable fragment(in human tissue). Fired from a 14.5" M4 they lose their ability to fragment at 50m. For comparison same ammo in a M16 has a higher velocity and doesnt drop below 2700 until 150m. That being said, being shot by anything isnt particularly fun, but being shot by something that fragments is a hell of a lot less fun.

---

The disturbing failure of the 5.56x45mm caliber to consistently offer adequate incapacitation has been known for nearly 20 years.  Dr. Martin Fackler’s seminal research at the Letterman Army Institute of Research Wound Ballistic Laboratory during the 1980s illuminated the yaw and fragmentation mechanism by which 5.56x45mm FMJ bullets create wounds in tissue.  “If 5.56mm bullets fail to upset (yaw, fragment, or deform) within tissue, the results are relatively insignificant wounds, similar to those produced by .22 long rifle bullets – this is true for all 5.56x45mm bullets, including both military FMJ and OTM (open tip match) and civilian JHP/JSP designs used in law enforcement.  As expected, with decreased wounding effects, rapid incapacitation is unlikely: enemy soldiers may continue to pose a threat to friendly forces and violent suspects can remain a danger to law enforcement personnel and the public.  This failure of 5.56x45mm bullets to yaw and fragment can be caused by reduced impact velocities as when fired from short-barreled weapons or when the range to the target increases.  Failure to yaw and fragment can also occur when the bullets pass through only minimal tissue, such as a limb or the chest of a thin, small statured individual, as the bullet may exit the body before it has a chance to yaw and fragment.  Two other yaw issues: Angle-of-Attack (AOA) variations between different projectiles, even within the same lot of ammo, as well as Fleet Yaw variations between different rifles, were elucidated in 2006 by the Joint Service Wound Ballistic Integrated Product Team (JSWB-IPT), which included experts from the military law enforcement user community, trauma surgeons, aero ballisticians, weapon and munitions engineers, and other scientific specialists.  These yaw issues were most noticeable at close ranges and were more prevalent with certain calibers and bullet styles — the most susceptible being 5.56x45mm FMJ ammunition like M855 and M193.”

 

from: http://sadefensejournal.com/wp/?p=778

--

 

I comment on bullseyes(inner10) at 300m standing and you continue to talk about 100yard(93ish meters) shots in the black. I fail to see the connection.

 

My point is that you should spawn into the game as Joe Average, with average shooting capabilities. After all you are just some random survivor with a flashlight in your pocket. For the M4 i have no problems with it being pin point accurate up to 500m or whatever as long as you are in a prone position, with support(bipod/log or any other object to rest it on), in breath, level with target and ignore climatic effects alltogheter.

 

What I have a problem with is connecting realism to sprinting madmen, totally out of breath, with a gasmask on, 600 rounds of ammo and numerous cans of beans in the backpack stopping to take 300+m standing headshots in a split second. 

[excitable1 156]

There is absolutely no situation where I would want a mosin nagant over an ar15 in real life.

 

If anyone has shot a mosin they would know its not the most accurate weapon out there my ar is far more accurate.

 

The only reason anyone would ever get a mosin is for the sheer amount of cheap ammo.

taken from wiki:

 

The sniper version of the Mosin-Nagant rifle was used before, during, and after World War II

 

The second version of the Mosin-Nagant sniper rifle, known as the PU, began production late in 1942. This rifle included a simpler scope design, which was incorporated from the short-lived SVT-40, and was far easier to mass-produce. To this day, it remains the most widely produced and longest serving sniper rifle in the world

[msy 11]

There is no jam to M4 how dare you can say it is realistic?

Edited February 13, 2014 by msy

[Rudette 435]

The mosin is a terrific weapon for 100 dollars but when compared to any modern rifle or even budget civilian rifles it is a POS.

 

It is in accurate, has a sticky bolt, overly long, and not only that I have never shot a mosin that shot true meaning the non adjustable sights correctly hit where you aimed.

Truth. (To a degree, not all have sticky bolts or are terribly inaccurate) But. There is something so sexy about the Mosin. All that history. Reliability. Durability. And they make good 'project guns' if you're willing to kit em out! :o

Edited February 13, 2014 by Rudette

[moxy (DayZ) 2]

I couldn't resist commenting on a couple of the things you stated

 

You really believe that adding a flashlight/bipod to your weapon renders it useless unless you're prone? Ah yes... That makes complete since... Now i know why I'm such a terrible shot when I'm standing... Come on... That's complete BS

 

Also, adding a scope to your AR would make it almost impossible to shoot, i'm assuming you mean useless prone? Then why does almost every one that owns an AR have optics on their rifle. In addition to my bipod, I have a 1-4x optic on mine and I have no issue shooting standing. Have you ever shot a firearm?

 

"The M4 does not adequatly incapacitate targets, according to US military." - I would love to see your source for that. If the 5.56/M4 Carbine didn't adequately incapacitate targets, the US Military would not issue it. 

 

Maybe useless is a overstatement, allow me moderate myself. Adding 400grams(bipod) of weight to the end of the barrel will greatly reduce your ability to accurately deliver rounds on targets from any position in which the bipod is not in use.

 

As for the flashlight point, it was a point in the direction that why would anyone have a bipod AND a flashlight at the same time? Why would you have a bipod AND a bayonet ? Are you hoping someone will run into your stationary position effectively impaling himself on the bayonet? Usually less is more in a combat situation. Dragging along a M4 kitted out with anything you can fit on it would just make it bad at everything.

 

For the scope. Did I say impossible, no I said harder with the mentioned stance in mind. And why do you ask me why everyone else has optics on their AR's. Shouldnt you be asking them that? As for why the army has transitioned to mostly scoped M4's, it is in my opinion just an effect of them realizing that the warfare they experience today isnt what the M4 was designed to deal with.

 

Read my above post/link about M4's incapacitating abilities.

 

Have I shot a firearm? Yes.

[sabaka (DayZ) 70]

...

 

My point is that you should spawn into the game as Joe Average, with average shooting capabilities. After all you are just some random survivor with a flashlight in your pocket. For the M4 i have no problems with it being pin point accurate up to 500m or whatever as long as you are in a prone position, with support(bipod/log or any other object to rest it on), in breath, level with target and ignore climatic effects alltogheter.

 

What I have a problem with is connecting realism to sprinting madmen, totally out of breath, with a gasmask on, 600 rounds of ammo and numerous cans of beans in the backpack stopping to take 300+m standing headshots in a split second. 

 

That's fine. The thing is that if this is the case then the M4 has acceptable accuracy right now but the Mosin is outrageously too accurate. The whole point from the beginning was that if I go pick up people randomly off the street and give them a Mosin and an M4 and ask them to shoot targets at varying distances they will fare better with the M4. 

 

I'm perfectly fine if my character can't sprint 10km and then turn and blow someone away at 200m 10 seconds later with an M4 from standing. I'm not fine with that being the case BUT somehow the Mosin is magically different.

 

Last week (right before I started this thread) I was playing with a friend. We were entering Stary from the north at the same time as a group of 3 came in from the east. M4/Mosin vs M4/SKS/Mosin. We saw each other at about the same time right by the grocery store. The M4s traded fire, and we took off up the hill into the bushes while 2 of them used the store and the other stuff around there for cover. I had an M4 with pristine everything + acog and we traded fire at around 100m for a few seconds. Neither their M4 guy or I could hit anything. Meanwhile my friend headed up the hill to try to get an angle on them. Their Mosin guy sprints fists up from the store to the green house on the west side of town, sprints upstairs, gets the gun out, and standing (because he was in the window) lands a headshot on my friend. Literally 10 seconds after he entered the house. I watched him enter (not even bothering to shoot because at that distance what's the point?) and 10 seconds later my friend is screaming that they shot him.

 

If I'm not even bothering to take shots with an M4 because there is ostensibly 0 chance to hit then the Mosin should also have ostensibly 0 chance to hit, but that isn't the case. Watch youtube dayz sniper videos. I don't care if we spawn as Craig Harrison or if we spawn as a New England liberal who thinks guns are the devil's work, I just don't want to be an elite sniper while holding a Mosin but an average Joe while holding the M4, or alternatively, I don't want EVERY Mosin to be a supremely accurate sniper quality specimen and every M4 a surplus junk rifle.

 

Like someone said earlier, guns in this game are situational and that's stupid, especially considering that reliability and cleaning haven't even been incorporated yet.

[PhillyT 554]

The guns are a bit off, but I will comment mostly on the OP.

 

The M4 is not automatically better than the Mosin, and I am not even sure at 400 - 500m it out performs the SKS in terms of power.  M4 is a better pure weapon, but the SKS has similar energy.  The Mosin is more powerful at all ranges, and is actually lethal at 500m whereas the M4 really isn't without multiple shots or serious luck.  At 200m, the Mosin is carrying nearly 3 times the energy.  At 500 it is an even greater difference.