Battlefield 3 vs DayZ dispersion

[finnpalm 312]

Well within the weapons effective range.

 

I cannot consistently hit anything even at 100m with the m4.

 

While I'm not saying that the dispersion in DayZ is good, I would like to point out a couple of things.

 

I'm pretty sure "effective range" means the range at which the gun deals substantial damage to the target, and not the D-max. I can lob a bullet really far with a weapon, but at some point the air resistance will have taken away so much of the projectile's force that it will bounce of it's target. Try measuring what distance you can make out a human sized object at.

 

100 m is not as close a range as one would think. Shooting at 100 meters isn't necessarily going to net you 100% hit ratio. There are a lot of factors that matter here. A common rough estimate used in the military (and I might not have the numbers exactly right here but they are along these lines) is that it takes one 30 shot magazine to take out a standing opponent, two magazines to take out a crouching opponent and four magazines to take out a prone opponent. And that's for a trained person shooting.

Edited March 24, 2014 by Strawman

[Raptor05121 32]

The 1911 in game right now seriously needs work. I've shot plenty of sub-$300 over-seas made 1911s that have tighter grouping than DayZ's model. It should be good out to 25 yards, easily. 5" barrel is no joke.

[Weedz 1105]

I'm pretty sure "effective range" means the range at which the gun deals substantial damage to the target, and not the D-max. 

Effective range means range that it was found that the average shooter could consistently land 7-9/10 shots on a human sized target while maintaining enough velocity to be considered a lethal hit (this part doesn't really ever apply because the rounds remain lethal way past where you stop being able to hit the target every time) up to that range. An M4's effective range is 500M in real life. At 100M pretty much anyone will hit 100% of the time unless they have Parkinson's, there is an earthquake, or a hurricane force wind blows in mid shot. A human sized target is still bigger than your sight at 100M.

 

 

100 m is not as close a range as one would think. Shooting at 100 meters isn't necessarily going to net you 100% hit ratio. There are a lot of factors that matter here. A common rough estimate used in the military (and I might not have the numbers exactly right here but they are along these lines) is that it takes one 30 shot magazine to take out a standing opponent, two magazines to take out a crouching opponent and four magazines to take out a prone opponent. And that's for a trained person shooting.

What are you talking about here? A trained soldier needs 30 rounds to take out a standing person at 100M? 100M is close range for an assault rifle. Most trained shooters could headshot a standing person at 100M with 1-2 bullets. I can MLGPRO 360 noscope birds with an air rifle farther than 100M.

Edited March 25, 2014 by Weedz

[captain_finnish 134]

If you want to hit someone in DayZ, you need to stop for 30 minutes, deploy your bipod, eat 12 tactical bacons and zero your scope perfectly fine and even then you are lucky if you hit people that are more than 10 meters away from you. No but accuracy in DayZ is kinda horrible. Not that I have anything against it. I once runned zik zak in middle of the road while getting shot at by few m4 qvikscoop 360 mlg bandits. Didnt get hit after about 70 shots that they shooted at me :)

[Twixxer 159]

Battlefield is supposed to to simulate you as a combat-experienced and highly trained Marine. DayZ puts in your in the boots of a survivor who could have no knowledge of weapons.

[flygamer1 176]

In Battlefield you are a trained supersoldier, in DayZ you are an idiot who washed up on a shore who needs help eating and drinking.

this made me cry

[SerasVictoria (DayZ) 13]

Your stories about trained soldiers are hilarious.

 

In Dayz you already have your sights moving + the target might be moving AND THEN you get a 1m diameter random spread (at 200m) even by doing single shots with an SKS that is a quite accurate weapon?

 

So basically it's just luck if you are hitting your target

 

stop joking plz

[eleventhavenue 204]

We all know that ´´we haz no trainingz´´is the perfect argujment for stupid ballistics. Everyone who ever used a gun realizes that all guns have magical noob detection systems that makes bullets magically veer off course whenever someone inexperienced operates them. Aiming the gun itself is obviously very easy and anyone can do that perfectly.

[Etherious 907]

I'm sorry but you can't really compare the arcadey style BF3 with semi-realistic DayZ. Nope just Nope :3 

[eleventhavenue 204]

I'm sorry but you can't really compare the arcadey style BF3 with semi-realistic DayZ. Nope just Nope :3 

 

Well I'm sorry but this grinds my gears horribly. People say: ''You can't compare apples and oranges!'' But you can! And you can compare BF3 with DayZ! Sure they're different, but that is exactly why you can compare them! BF3 is more arcady, which is a good thing, because then we can reflect over how arcadyness changes gameplay, and that is nice.

 

Why are even discussing this question at all? I can empirically prove that it is possible to compare DayZ with BF3, because there's a comparison in the OP!

In fact, I would say that what we really should be discussing (and we did not) is whether or not this comparison has a conclusion that can be constructively discussed (which I think it has)

[SGT. Kalme 106]

I don't fully understand what the chart is about (I am rather stranger to BF3).

 

Would it be possible to measure the same weapons from same distances, say 25m, 50m, 75m for pistols and 100m, 300m and 500m for assault rifles/battle rifles (plus 750m for SKS) on horizontal ground in different positions?

 

If you could put the chart down to bullet-drop, bullet flight time with same amounts of bullets shot from both BF3 and DayZ weapons and then average accuracy.

 

is the effect of ADS and hip to spreading in percentages?

 

Also, hitting anything with 1911 from 350m ADS or SKS at 2200m ADS is pretty damn unrealistic. If you could describe what this graph represents in numbers then it would make more clarity for me.

 

Also, one thing is weapon accuracy. The ammunition makes a pretty damn big difference when shooting long range, especially to 2200m which is unreachable range for 7.62mm and unrealistic for 8.6mm. Make the competition with similar size targets and try to measure spreading over say 5 shots and make a comparison if you can, please.

 

Is there wind affection in BF3? If not then better make the test before they add it to DayZ. :)

Edited March 25, 2014 by SGT. Kalme

[Ozar 108]

lol, a comparisson with the worst Battlefield ever. no more words

Edited March 25, 2014 by Ozar

[finnpalm 312]

Are you following me? I can see that you have viewed my profile, and now you're suddenly replying to every post I make in every thread I post in, after we disagree in the "hate 3rd pp" thread? You're seriously creeping me out now. Especially since you accuse me of being the one that's throwing "hissy fits" while you're the calm and collected one. It's not hard to see that you're making that up completely by just reading your posts in the "hate 3rd pp" thread. Or maybe you've gone back and edited them to make it seem otherwise (good thing I have all replies forwarded to my inbox so I can read them there). I wouldn't put that past you considering your all over behavior.

 

 

Effective range means range that it was found that the average shooter could consistently land 7-9/10 shots on a human sized target while maintaining enough velocity to be considered a lethal hit (this part doesn't really ever apply because the rounds remain lethal way past where you stop being able to hit the target every time) up to that range. An M4's effective range is 500M in real life. At 100M pretty much anyone will hit 100% of the time unless they have Parkinson's, there is an earthquake, or a hurricane force wind blows in mid shot. A human sized target is still bigger than your sight at 100M.

 

Effective range for the M4 in DayZ is 400 m. That's very far. Without magnifying scopes it will be hard to hit a human size target at that range. And you say that's the average?  So assuming it's a flat curve there are people who consistently hits targets at 600 m with an M4? 700 m? I don't buy that. At 500 m irl you will of course be able to damage something, but you might not be able to hit it at all, assuming you can even make out the target at that distance.

 

Sure you'd be able to consistently hit a target at a 100 m while being still and taking your time with the shots. Try doing jumping jacks and push-ups for 20 to 30 seconds before taking three to four shots at 100 m in around 15 seconds. Done? Now try it at 200.

 

Again, I'm not saying the dispersion in DayZ is good, but an effective range of 400 or 500 m can't possibly be the distance at which you can consistently hit a target, unless you have magnifying optics.

 

 

 

What are you talking about here? A trained soldier needs 30 rounds to take out a standing person at 100M? 100M is close range for an assault rifle. Most trained shooters could headshot a standing person at 100M with 1-2 bullets. I can MLGPRO 360 noscope birds with an air rifle farther than 100M.

 

Yeah I'm sure you can no scope 360 a bird farther than 100 m. Don't tell me, the bird is in mid flight too, right? And you're doing it while drinking a beer and solving a rubik's cube with your toes at the same time, I'm sure.

 

To adress the point, I said I might not have the numbers exactly right, but they are along those lines. It takes a lot more bullets than you'd think to take out an enemy in real life combat.

 

EDIT: Actually, don't bother replying to me anymore. I've put you on ignore. You're creeping me out, stalking me around the forum and nitpicking about my posts, starting flame wars and whatnot. And you certainly don't have a clue what a strawman argument is.

Edited March 25, 2014 by Strawman

[DerrocK (DayZ) 39]

lol, a comparisson with the worst Battlefield ever. no more words

Not worst, that place is awarded to BF4

[doctorbadsign 645]

Ah one of those topics where DayZ players become military/weapons experts.

 

Such fun to watch.

[Judopunch 523]

Does that magically make the gun fire in a totally different direction of where its pointed at ?

In real life do snipers use a mouse and keybord to aim in an environment that doesnt take into account heartbeat, fatigue, eye dryness, atmospheric pressure, wind, distraction, twisting the trigger, bugs landing on your face, amo that has been sitting in a box for god knows how long of cheap civilian quality?

[SGT. Kalme 106]

In real life do snipers use a mouse and keybord to aim in an environment that doesnt take into account heartbeat, fatigue, eye dryness, atmospheric pressure, wind, distraction, twisting the trigger, bugs landing on your face, amo that has been sitting in a box for god knows how long of cheap civilian quality?

 

I had a hit of human head size target at 1360m distance with TRG-42. Light wind though, only 0,3m/s

 

Obviously I wasn't sitting in position for 24 hours to wait that shot but 1500m is a good hit with that rifle.

 

Can anyone make the comparison of these weapons accuracy in equal conditions and measuring at least bullet-drop?

[finalstraw 193]

This is that awkward thread where people seem to want a military shooter and completely disregard that the survivors are just civilians and not professional soldiers.

[Judopunch 523]

This is that awkward thread where people seem to want a military shooter and completely disregard that the survivors are just civilians and not professional soldiers.

They keep cropping up around here. My opinion is the game is a game first and it takes inspiration real life second.

[finnpalm 312]

I had a hit of human head size target at 1360m distance with TRG-42. Light wind though, only 0,3m/s

 

Obviously I wasn't sitting in position for 24 hours to wait that shot but 1500m is a good hit with that rifle.

 

Can anyone make the comparison of these weapons accuracy in equal conditions and measuring at least bullet-drop?

 

That's a very good shot. Had it been a person it would have been among the longest distance sniper kills in the world.

 

What's the recommended distance for the TRG-42?

 

EDIT: Just googled around for a bit and you would have taken thirteenth place for that distance (sorry for making it sound like a competition).

Edited March 25, 2014 by Strawman

[SGT. Kalme 106]

Effective range for the M4 in DayZ is 400 m. That's very far. Without magnifying scopes it will be hard to hit a human size target at that range. And you say that's the average?  So assuming it's a flat curve there are people who consistently hits targets at 600 m with an M4? 700 m? I don't buy that. At 500 m irl you will of course be able to damage something, but you might not be able to hit it at all, assuming you can even make out the target at that distance.

 

Sure you'd be able to consistently hit a target at a 100 m while being still and taking your time with the shots. Try doing jumping jacks and push-ups for 20 to 30 seconds before taking three to four shots at 100 m in around 15 seconds. Done? Now try it at 200.

 

Again, I'm not saying the dispersion in DayZ is good, but an effective range of 400 or 500 m can't possibly be the distance at which you can consistently hit a target, unless you have magnifying optics.

 

In reality, effective range for M4 would be 300m to 350m, 600m would be effective for squad focused fire.

 

Without scope, hitting anything over 600m without magnifier would be pure luck and nothing to do with accuracy of weapon. At 800m distance, the bullet drop would be so excessive that you should aim into the space and that would be considered as IDF already  :rolleyes:

 

Weapon accuracy can't be measured in such way in practical shooting. If weapon is zeroed properly, it is 99% dependent of shooter. Shooting target at 300m takes bunch of aiming. I was able to hit human-sized target 12 times out of 15 from 365m with iron sights and took quite a bit of time for each shot.

 

Sense of depth in computer game is misleading and many people consider 300m-500m distance as CQC. Not every weapon is made for sharpshooting.

 

5.56mm bullet loses its energy too fast, due to being so light weight, to be able to hit targets that far. 800m is optimal limit for M14 (due to the characteristics of bullet) with optics already, not total limit thou.

 

Different ammunition can improve or decrease accuracy. 

 

 

That's a very good shot. Had it been a person it would have been among the longest distance sniper kills in the world.

 

What's the recommended distance for the TRG-42?

 

Depends of the shooter but usually a man with proper training can hit human size target at 1500m in combat situation. Anything further is considered medal worthy :)

 

I have little to none training in that matter, though.

Edited March 25, 2014 by SGT. Kalme

[BeefBacon 1185]

So everyone wants perfectly accurate weapons.

 

Why not cut out the middle man and make all the weapons hitscan too?

 

I've never fired a weapon before, and I probably never will, but I get the impression that if I was half-starving in the middle of a zombie apocalypse in clothes that haven't been washed in 3 months I probably wouldn't be able to shoot the balls off a fly.

 

If you want all weapons to be as accurate as their real-world counterparts when they're fired by trained soldiers then fine, but please look up "balance in videogames" before you suggest it.

[blaf 63]

In Battlefield you are a trained supersoldier, in DayZ you are an idiot who washed up on a shore who needs help eating and drinking.

As im an washed up idiot IRL, i may confirm the spread in DayZ is pretty much in line with my dispersion when im trying to shoot a military rifle on the shooting range.

[Judopunch 523]

 

 

In reality, effective range for M4 would be 300m to 350m, 600m would be effective for squad focused fire.

 

Without scope, hitting anything over 600m without magnifier would be pure luck and nothing to do with accuracy of weapon. At 800m distance, the bullet drop would be so excessive that you should aim into the space and that would be considered as IDF already  :rolleyes:

 

Weapon accuracy can't be measured in such way in practical shooting. If weapon is zeroed properly, it is 99% dependent of shooter. Shooting target at 300m takes bunch of aiming. I was able to hit human-sized target 12 times out of 15 from 365m with iron sights and took quite a bit of time for each shot.

 

Sense of depth in computer game is misleading and many people consider 300m-500m distance as CQC. Not every weapon is made for sharpshooting.

 

5.56mm bullet loses its energy too fast, due to being so light weight, to be able to hit targets that far. 800m is optimal limit for M14 (due to the characteristics of bullet) with optics already, not total limit thou.

 

Different ammunition can improve or decrease accuracy. 

 

 

 

Depends of the shooter but usually a man with proper training can hit human size target at 1500m in combat situation. Anything further is considered medal worthy :)

 

I have little to none training in that matter, though.

 

Seems about where the M4 is dialed in now if you are using all mag-pull.

[SGT. Kalme 106]

Seems about where the M4 is dialed in now if you are using all mag-pull.

 

Exactly. Now I don't want to be a party pooper but comparison of weapon accuracy with tests that are done at distance of 870m, is not a weighting one.

 

Hence, I would like to see the comparison done as it would be done in reality.