Pistols too inaccurate as well as m4?!

[gannon46 788]

As always, M4 accuracy is fine when you but magpull parts in it. Just go loot couple hangars or grap mosin you dumb fucks.

 

But pistols,yeah too unaccurate, but you shouldn't hit 100m bullseyes with it either. I just hate when you aim at zombie in chest 10m from you and the bullets goes like: "LoL nope, my people need me"

but I've hit bullseyes with pistols at 100M this shit is aggravating pistols are a waste of time Russian weapons are to the mosin and the M$ are the only tools worth a damn right now. and its dumb you have to go find parts for it. a foregrip isn't going to make it any more accurate the shooter/stance is the ultimate game changer. the human holdin it and in deans eyes I guess we all are dumbasses who have never shot these guns. come to ohio dean i'll show you how we roll. we can shoot any of these weapons your adding a lot more accurate than these toons prtray just because we didn't sign up for the military doesn't mean we can't shoot for fucks sake.

[GrappleX 354]

yes. pistols and m4 should be more accurate than a sniper rifle, because that's the reality. atleast here in Idreamalotterville. i couldn't shoot a butterfly at 800 meters with M4. totally unrealistic bullshit.

 

Yeah, an M4 shouldn't be able to hit a man sized target at 200 meters and a handgun shouldn't do the same at 30. 

 

/sarcasm.

Edited March 23, 2014 by GrappleX

[over9000nukez 199]

anytihng out side of 20M and the pistols have a hard time hitting anything and ive noticed the m4 with a pristine ris pristine oe buttstock and a worn red dot has trouble being ccurate with calm breath with anything outside of 40M?! totally unrealistic...... thoughts

 

ps- 9mm pistols recoil is insane!

don't use a ris, its been proven not to work well

[Sutinen 635]

But they do it in movies so it must be reality, rightttt??

 

 

Ok mate whatever you say lol.

"Mate" makes me think you're English so I'm gonna assume you don't know too much about guns. I can forgive you on that, but an M4 should be able to hit 300 meter targets with iron sights. Haven't seen many movies where they take long shots, so I can't confirm it yet. Maybe I'll watch Jarhead or sumn and come back with the proof. :D

[Etherimp 1323]

As always, M4 accuracy is fine when you but magpull parts in it. Just go loot couple hangars or grap mosin you dumb fucks.

 

But pistols,yeah too unaccurate, but you shouldn't hit 100m bullseyes with it either. I just hate when you aim at zombie in chest 10m from you and the bullets goes like: "LoL nope, my people need me"

 

 

You shouldn't need Magpul parts to hit the broad side of a barn at 100 meters with an M4. Stock M4 parts are made with precision engineering for a reason.

[GrappleX 354]

As always, M4 accuracy is fine when you but magpull parts in it

 

This is the problem. How in Lord Buddha's does a different hand guard make a gun, what, 42x more accurate?

[SFRGaming 718]

"Mate" makes me think you're English so I'm gonna assume you don't know too much about guns. I can forgive you on that, but an M4 should be able to hit 300 meter targets with iron sights. Haven't seen many movies where they take long shots, so I can't confirm it yet. Maybe I'll watch Jarhead or sumn and come back with the proof. :D

Yes, a stock M4A1 can hit a 300m target.

[Etherimp 1323]

But they do it in movies so it must be reality, rightttt??

 

 

Ok mate whatever you say lol.

 

 

Did you not read my post on page 1?

 

If not, I'll post it again for you...

 

How do you want to define max. effective range? 

A .45 (230gr HP @ 900fps) has a max point blank range (MPBR) on a 5" dia. vital zone target of 113 yards. At 100 yards it has 335 FPE. 

A 9mm (125gr HP @ 1200fps) has a max point blank range on a 5" dia. vital zone target of 139 yards. At 100 yards it has 269 FPE. 

A 9mm NATO load (115 FMJ @ 1300fps) bumps the MPBR zero out to 148 yards on a 5" dia. vital zone target. At 100 yards it has 283 FPE. 

They drop off very quickly after their MPBR zero. The .45 is -35.7" @200 yards, the 9mm is -29.6" @ 200 yards and the 9mm NATO is -23.6" @ 200 yards. 

Since the MPBR is so close and the energies are relatively similar I'd rate them as equivalent.

 

MPBR = Max Point Blank Range.. this is the maximum range you can fire a round before it begins to drop off/lose enough energy to make it non-lethal.

 

It's wholly possible for a trained marksman to hit targets with a pistol at 100m... In a "realistic" fire fight, 25-50m's is a challenge, but again.. when relaxed, focused, healthy, uninjured, and concentrating... there's nothing unrealistic about a 100m shot.

[hannibaldaplaya 1095]

The inaccuracy of these weapons is rather frustrating.

 

As an avid gun nut, I've fired my share of weapons- Pistols, AR-15's, shotguns, rifles, you name it. My family is a family of hunters, for one, and we also enjoy a good shoot at the range.

 

The AR-15 can easily nail targets from 200 meters away, as long as you have the gun steady. The bullets do not magically curve around in some bullshit dispersion thing-o. The only reason the gun would be "inaccurate" is to user error. By user error, I mean failure to hold the gun steady, failure to aim correctly, etc. Other then that, the AR-15, which is part of the same family of guns as the M4A1, can be accurate at 250 meters - 300 meters.

 

Pistols are a bit more difficult, but their range is not limited to 20 meters. I've hit targets from roughly 90 meters with a rather old .357 revolver, and I would not doubt that newer pistols would fair better.

 

Also, the .22's can be rather accurate, too. For some reason we had this big old scope on this teeny little .22, but the thing was dead-on at 50 meters, which was how long the indoor range we went to was. It was easy to hit the bullseye repeatedly, sometimes in the same spot your first shot hit.

 

Another thing that pisses me off is that the Mosin is more accurate then the M4A1. Sure, the Mosin has more potential as a long-range weapon, as it has a round that is fit for that and can have a scope mounted on it, but the gun is rather unreliable, which is why it is cheap. I'd much prefer my Bolt Action Mauser (I forget the specific details for the name of the gun), a rifle from the trenches of WW1 that was recalibered into .308, over the Mosin, when it comes to ironsights.

[TheWanderingMan 170]

"Mate" makes me think you're English so I'm gonna assume you don't know too much about guns. I can forgive you on that, but an M4 should be able to hit 300 meter targets with iron sights. Haven't seen many movies where they take long shots, so I can't confirm it yet. Maybe I'll watch Jarhead or sumn and come back with the proof. :D

 

I have as much experience of firearms that five years as an infantryman can give.

 

I'll make the assumption that as an American you're used to shooting targets in a nice calm environment, i'll forgive you for thinking that weapons function this way in all situations.

 

EDIT: I didn't say anything about m4's etc. A qualified rifleman wouldn't be employed if he couldn't hit a target at 400m with iron sights. I was eluding to the accuracy of pistols in this game and how certain people believe they should shoot accurately at 100m.

 

And yeah, Obviously I don't know anything about guns because I'm English and sorry that my culture doesn't revolve around the love of weapons.

Edited March 23, 2014 by TheWanderingMan

[korpisoturi (DayZ) 127]

but I've hit bullseyes with pistols at 100M this shit is aggravating pistols are a waste of time Russian weapons are to the mosin and the M$ are the only tools worth a damn right now. and its dumb you have to go find parts for it. a foregrip isn't going to make it any more accurate the shooter/stance is the ultimate game changer. the human holdin it and in deans eyes I guess we all are dumbasses who have never shot these guns. come to ohio dean i'll show you how we roll. we can shoot any of these weapons your adding a lot more accurate than these toons prtray just because we didn't sign up for the military doesn't mean we can't shoot for fucks sake.

 

You shouldn't need Magpul parts to hit the broad side of a barn at 100 meters with an M4. Stock M4 parts are made with precision engineering for a reason.

 

This is the problem. How in Lord Buddha's does a different hand guard make a gun, what, 42x more accurate?

 

Yes I know that changing parts IRL doesn't change accuracy unless its barrel. It can affect recoil and sway. Sway, which by the way doesn't exist in this game now. If you want realism, they should make hands shake,sway and move when you aim and when you press the trigger, the bullets goes where the aim was. Thats how it is, but even this would piss people off to say "bohohoo my hands move too much, shootings sux nao, change bäk plz"

Also this is a game. So always: Over realism<Gameplay

[Grimey Rick 3417]

if they are aware then why implement two new pistols cr75, and the 1911 and make them just as innaccurate? so maybe more discussion needs to happen to get a fix aye matey?!

 

The same reason they're aware of the horrible optimization that plagues, y'know, the entire game. Then they add new clothes.

 

Their priorities are straight.

[korpisoturi (DayZ) 127]

The same reason they're aware of the horrible optimization that plagues, y'know, the entire game. Then they add new clothes.

 

Their priorities are straight.

 

What point of multiple people working on this game don't you people understand.

 

Theres some guys working on bugs, and then theres OTHER GUYS working on stuff like clothes.

 

Bug guys have harder job, so they do more work and achieve less, Clothes guys make clothes, someone puts them in next patch.

 

And then people bitch about "WHY WE GET CLOTHES WHY NO SOLVE GAMEBREAKING BUGS"

Thats totally differend thing, shut up now.

[taco86 156]

yes. pistols and m4 should be more accurate than a sniper rifle, because that's the reality. atleast here in Idreamalotterville. i couldn't shoot a butterfly at 800 meters with M4. totally unrealistic bullshit.

WTF?  Nice straw man there chap...

 

FYI, in terms of the firearms available in .42, the m4a1 should be by far the most accurate...  Don't forget the mosin is "over performing" by some 200% or more in terms of groupings...  As it stands, accuracy across most of the firearms is nothing but comedy...  Stop pretending that people raising concerns about the current abysmal state of weapon performance is akin to these same people wanting the m4 to be able to hit a bug sized target at 800m...  What people want is realistic MOAs (realistically about 1.5-2 at 100m for m4a1), sway and breathing should be what makes placing shots more challenging, not fantasy land barrel bending.

Edited March 23, 2014 by taco86

[Grimey Rick 3417]

What point of multiple people working on this game don't you people understand?

 

There are some guys working on bugs, and then there are OTHER GUYS working on stuff like clothes.

 

Bug guys have a harder job, so they do more work and achieve less. Clothes guys make clothes. Someone puts them into the next patch.

 

And then people bitch about "WHY WE GET CLOTHES WHY NO SOLVE GAMEBREAKING BUGS?"

That's a totally different thing. shut up now I'm a rude little dipshit.

 

Yeah, I get "their reasoning". Do you work there? They can create a plethora of clothes and other useless items; that doesn't mean they have to be the highlight of every patch.

 

I'd like to see some actual optimizations, rather than game-breaking lag/rendering issues every patch day. If you don't have enough staff to keep the optimizations coming, then swap out some of the people creating clothes, sewing kits and nonsensically labeled cans of food and hire more programmers to deal with the influx of issues.

[korpisoturi (DayZ) 127]

Yeah, I get "their reasoning". Do you work there? They can create a plethora of clothes and other useless items; that doesn't mean they have to be the highlight of every patch.

 

I'd like to see some actual optimizations, rather than game-breaking lag/rendering issues every patch day. If you don't have enough staff to keep the optimizations coming, then swap out some of the people creating clothes, sewing kits and nonsensically labeled cans of food and hire more programmers to deal with the influx of issues.

 

Thank you for fixing my post grammar nazi. Not everyone speaks 'murica as their native language.

[Grimey Rick 3417]

Thank you for fixing my post grammar nazi. Not everyone speaks 'murica as their native language.

 

I was born in Québec. My native language is French.

[korpisoturi (DayZ) 127]

I was born in Québec. My native language is French.

 

Oh snap.

 

Wait, how's that actually any better?

[Katana67 2907]

This thread is proof that people are idiots. Not the OP, mind you, it's well that we discuss the inaccuracies of the weapons now. Not sure why people are so upset by it.

 

Yes, the M4 is laughably inaccurate. Especially given the fact that the ACOG is theoretically able to be used at 500m on an AR-15, yet my rounds just disappear when I try to engage a target at anything other than 50m.

 

The pistols, they're okay. I certainly think that they could get a minor bump in accuracy, especially given how incredibly hard it is to hit/bring down the average zombie with some. With the Amphibia S, if you're placing a premium on headshots, it has to be remarkably accurate to justify it.

 

Randomized "dispersion" values ruin shooting mechanics.

Edited March 23, 2014 by Katana67

[StoutAle 69]

  To the people saying it's perfectly logical to hit a target at 100m with a pistol I say show me. Stock pistol nothing changed or added to it and hit head shots at 100m.  CAN it be done? Sure, but given the fact that in DayZ they haven't designated any survivors as anything but Joe Average types that simply isn't happening.  Most people walking around without any real training would have issues hitting a human at 100m with a pistol let alone a head shot.  I'm talking just shooting targets mind you, lets not even get into a firefight where you are getting shot at and carrying a backpack full of gear maybe after running. 

 

  If you want to understand a real shootout with weapons close to what you use in this game (9mm and .357's were used prominently) some 100 rounds fired at distances MUCH closer then 100m and 18 rounds hit the suspects.  18% of the rounds fired by FBI agents actually hit the targets, not the targets heads, the targets entire body.  As this shootout was initiated with an FBI agent spinning the suspects car around most rounds were shot from closer then 50m and honestly probably closer then 20m.  The shootout was 1986 FBI Miami shootout.  So we can talk about accuracy and what someone who's not being shot at can hit with his dads best friends pistol at 100m all we want, when most shoot outs have happened in real life it works more like this games mechanics do.

 

  Now you can say "when I shoot at a wall without a back pack on and kneeling the weapon is still not accurate!@!!@".  To that I say .. ok?  The game mechanics work pretty well with pistols during the actual firefights.  So they don't have mechanics in game to make the difference between shooting at a wall or in a firefight, that's ok.  Understand that even if you have the "drop" on someone your adrenaline is flowing before you pull that trigger and you'd be shocked at how many people miss a "dead to rights" shot at close distances.   This isn't speculation it's simply facts at that NYPD and LAPD did studies over years and realize that the trained officers on duty have missed about 70% (depending on the year) of the shots they fired at a target.  This is talking about trained (how well we can dispute, but trained none the less) police forces hitting targets at a rate of roughly 30%, oh and officers are usually shooting at targets under 10 yards, also a statistical fact. 

 

  I honestly think of people would do a little research on how things ACTUALLY happen in firefights instead of what they can do to a target or a deer or a whatever at ABC distances they would realize that the devs have firefights with pistols in this game down pretty well, can they be tweeked some? Sure.  Are they as unrealistic as people want you to think?  Based on actual shoot outs that happen?  No.  Don't let the facts get in the way of things though.

[Daemonkid 493]

Oh snap.

 

Wait, how's that actually any better?

Be quiet. Your ignorance is showing.

 

On topic: People need to stop accepting these gamey "features" they are just that, gamey.

Attachments affecting the accuracy of the weapon? What the fuck? We need actual weapon sway, where a MP part would actually reduce the sway due to better control over the weapon, while the buttstock should dampen the recoil compared to a standard stock. These parts DO NOT AFFECT the accuracy of weapon. You could say they increase it due to better control of the weapon, but we need handling mechanics such as sway then these parts would inpart reduce the effect, thus increasing the USERS accuracy, not the weapons natural accuracy. 

Stop accepting bullshit mechanics.

[Iezza 108]

you really need an easier to understand poll, something like 

 

 

[a] is the M4A1's accuracy too low?

[yes]

[no]

 

B) are the pistols too inaccurate? 

[yes]

[no]

[korpisoturi (DayZ) 127]

Be quiet. Your ignorance is showing.

 

On topic: People need to stop accepting these gamey "features" they are just that, gamey.

Attachments affecting the accuracy of the weapon? What the fuck? We need actual weapon sway, where a MP part would actually reduce the sway due to better control over the weapon, while the buttstock should dampen the recoil compared to a standard stock. These parts DO NOT AFFECT the accuracy of weapon. You could say they increase it due to better control of the weapon, but we need handling mechanics such as sway then these parts would inpart reduce the effect, thus increasing the USERS accuracy, not the weapons natural accuracy. 

Stop accepting bullshit mechanics.

 

Yes...ignorance...

 

But yes, this is exacly what I said earlier. Make hands shake, aim sway etc. and bullet go where the aim was at the time you pull the trigger.

 

But on the other hand this is game so "gamey" features are okay.

 

Be or not to be?

[Daemonkid 493]

Yes...ignorance...

 

But yes, this is exacly what I said earlier. Make hands shake, aim sway etc. and bullet go where the aim was at the time you pull the trigger.

 

But on the other hand this is game so "gamey" features are okay.

 

Be or not to be?

Gamey features like this are not okay. 

You're a part of the problem.

These weapons do not handle in a realistic manner, at all.

A rifle design made before the 1900's shoots more accurately than a weapon made in the 1990's.

No. Just fuckin' no. The M4 SHOULD be ALL players choices of primary weapon at this point in time. It's the superior weapon system compared to the weapons we have in game already.

It's a fuckin' modern automatic rifle. If all weapons were implemented correctly, it would all come down to preference. You'll have players who enjoy using the older weapons, but due to the age and design of the weapon, they would have significant drawbacks compared to the new more modern design. 

[Whyherro123 2283]

The M4 sprays bullets like a drunk hobo taking a piss, while the Mosin-Nagant is capable of making in-game shots fully 2-3x more accurately than the real-life rifle is. 

Stupid game mechanics detract from realism, and I'm sure for many players, fun.

But, I am sure we all need some wool-fucking coats and driving caps, while the M4 and Mosin have been fucked up since December...