The Battle Rifle Thread!

[igor-vk 909]

And you'll be shockingly bored with how the M16, the M4, G36, and the L85 all perform essentially the same when you remove all of the attachments. 

No I wont be, its my style of playing. Exploring for new locations and new items. Once the wehicles are here, I will try to colect them all.

[Etherimp 1323]

No I wont be, its my style of playing. Exploring for new locations and new items. Once the wehicles are here, I will try to colect them all.

 

 

Right.. but is it really worth it for the dev team to spend time making new weapon models for weapons which all have the same essential mechanics? 

 

IE - Muzzle velocity, damage, caliber? 

 

Obviously, there are subtle differences between these weapons in real life.. But in game they're practically the same and it's kind of pointless to add a bunch of samey stuff just for the sake of adding it. This isn't a military sim. I'd much prefer the weapons which are added to fit with the theme of the game, which so far (aside from the M4), the dev team has done a good job.

[igor-vk 909]

Right.. but is it really worth it for the dev team to spend time making new weapon models for weapons which all have the same essential mechanics? 

 

If they wont do it, modders will. 

[hannibaldaplaya 1095]

I would like to be able to mountmount scopes on more semi-auto, bolt action, lever action, and break action rifles.

The Blaze could use a scope, and I do not why the SKS does not have one.

I also would love to see the M14! My family is getting one, and I love to use guns in games I can shoot irl, to measure the realism of its implemtation.

[Katana67 2907]

The M14 is a very cool gun but very uncommon outside of America, and no longer in service in the military, so I don't think it would make sense in DayZ.

 

Sure it is! See the M39 EMR, and various M14 EBR variants being floated around. Even the SRSS Bulldog chassis saw some use in Afghanistan.

 

 

 

 

This is alpha. There are only a few weapons available and new clothing is being added all the time. Honestly, with every patch I'm seeing people using more and more variety in their outfits.. TTSKO will always be popular, as will ballistic helmets.. Because certain people attempt to optimize their look for PVP.

 

Adding more weapons than necessary will not really have any impact on people gearing up the same. The Mod had SEVERAL "samey" weapons, but most people carried a DMR. The MK Mod was also really popular, and sometimes you'd see people with a M16 ACOG. Having 100 weapons won't change peoples preferences.

 

There's really no point in having several weapons which all fill the same role or have similar mechanics.

 

For example.. Why have an M16 and an M4 when both weapons are effectively the same? Just have 1 in the game, and allow us to modify it with different attachments. Makes more sense.

 

I mean, there are myriad reasons. Chief amongst which, is that these weapons aren't all exactly the same. Rarity. Innate properties given by developers (which is controversial, see current M4A1). Happenstance in looting.

 

The only similar weapon to the DMR in the mod was the SVD camo. Which was significantly rarer. Not to mention it had a different scope (personal preference) reticle. Not to mention a smaller mag capacity. And rarer ammo.

 

In Overwatch, I carried a Mk 11. It was great. And the point of having multiple weapons with similar roles is variety. Pragmatism doesn't really factor in.

 

 

I would like to be able to mountmount scopes on more semi-auto, bolt action, lever action, and break action rifles.

The Blaze could use a scope, and I do not why the SKS does not have one.

I also would love to see the M14! My family is getting one, and I love to use guns in games I can shoot irl, to measure the realism of its implemtation.

 

The SKS can mount a PU right now.

Edited March 25, 2014 by Katana67

[hannibaldaplaya 1095]

Sure it is! See the M39 EMR, and various M14 EBR variants being floated around. Even the SRSS Bulldog chassis saw some use in Afghanistan.

 

 

 

 

 

I mean, there are myriad reasons. Chief amongst which, is that these weapons aren't all exactly the same. Rarity. Innate properties given by developers (which is controversial, see current M4A1). Happenstance in looting.

 

The only similar weapon to the DMR in the mod was the SVD camo. Which was significantly rarer. Not to mention it had a different scope (personal preference) reticle. Not to mention a smaller mag capacity. And rarer ammo.

 

In Overwatch, I carried a Mk 11. It was great. And the point of having multiple weapons with similar roles is variety. Pragmatism doesn't really factor in.

 

 

 

The SKS can mount a PU right now.

I meant a more medium range / long range scope.

[Chaingunfighter 917]

The DMR is just an M14 with a long range optics and a bipod and after-market stock. 

For SA:

Add M14, make it capable of mounting RDS, LRS, and BiPod, and possibly a few different buttstocks... 

Personally, as far as SA goes, I would like them to streamline weapons.. There's no need to have 5 guns in the game that all serve the same purpose. For example, in the Mod there were a bunch of AK's, M16's, M4's, and a bunch of weapons which fired 5.56.. The practical differences between these weapons usually came down to what scope was mounted on it or whether it had a suppressor or not. 

 

1 or 2 AK's with a bunch of different attachments.

1 M4 with a bunch of different attachments.

1 Double Barrel shotgun

1 auto-shotgun

1 pump action shotgun.

the M14 with a bunch of attachments

SKS

Mosin

Blase

.22 sporter

 

The CZ550 is kind of redundant with the Mosin.. Both are bolt action sniper rifles. The Mosin is basically a defacto M24, at this point.. Maybe add 1 more military grade bolt action rifle, like the SVD..

 

Maybe a few Sub Machine guns, like the Mp5 or P90

Maybe a few niche assault rifles, like possibly a bullpup.

 

Think STREAMLINED.. too many people are pushing too many guns.. There's no reason to have 100 guns, when most of them are redundant in application.

This is alpha. There are only a few weapons available and new clothing is being added all the time. Honestly, with every patch I'm seeing people using more and more variety in their outfits.. TTSKO will always be popular, as will ballistic helmets.. Because certain people attempt to optimize their look for PVP.

 

Adding more weapons than necessary will not really have any impact on people gearing up the same. The Mod had SEVERAL "samey" weapons, but most people carried a DMR. The MK Mod was also really popular, and sometimes you'd see people with a M16 ACOG. Having 100 weapons won't change peoples preferences.

 

There's really no point in having several weapons which all fill the same role or have similar mechanics. Why have 10 different bolt action sniper rifles, when you can have 2 (A civilian and a military grade), and both of them can be heavily modified with attachments? What's the practical difference between two weapons which fire the same caliber, have the same scope, and the same rate of fire? It's not going to change the fact that people will hunt down the best weapons for whatever fits their playstyle.

 

For example.. Why have an M16 and an M4 when both weapons are effectively the same? Just have 1 in the game, and allow us to modify it with different attachments. Makes more sense.

 

Another example is the M1911 vs the FNX 45.

 

The M1911 has 7 round mag.

The FNX has 15.

The M1911 can mount a flashlight.

The FNX can mount a flashlight, a red dot, and a silencer.

The M1911 and FNX have similar rate of fire.

The M1911 and FNX fire the same ammo. (and thus, the same damage.)

The M1911 and FNX have similar accuracy.

 

So why would anyone ever use an M1911 over a FNX?

Why have two when you can have 10? The reason people always carried the same weapons was because the mod had bad shooting mechanics, way too common weapons, and limited spawning of types (The DMR spawned at barracks as well as crashsites, the M14 AIM only spawned at crashsites). The spawning was skewed.

The 1911 will probably be a bit more common than the FNX-45 later on, so it will obviously be harder to find one. Not all guns are created equal, though, and I don't think they should remove the 1911 just because the FNX-45 is a .45 with more ammo and attachments.

 

By your logic, we should only have around 20 guns because... actually, you're never quite clear on why you think limited arsenals are better. Is it because you think everyone will only use the "best" of each type, or do you have a pet peeve against weapons that have similar roles?

The game isn't done yet, neither are the weapon & shooting mechanics. I'm sure there'll be ways that (for lack of a better word) "balance" out the different guns, but I doubt a limited selection is what we'll get.

 

Sure, the G36, L85, M4, M16 & HK-416 all perform the same, and yes, it would make more sense for them to do other guns first before doing another 30 round 5.56 rifle, but things like durability and magazine/attachment compatibility will make quite a big difference later.

Edited March 25, 2014 by Chaingunfighter

[Etherimp 1323]

Firstly, the m14 spawned in more than just crash sites last I played the mod.

Secondly, there are a lot of reasons for limited arsenal.

1. Aesthetics. Only weapons that fit with the theme of the game should be in. If the game was based in China then Chinese weapons would make sense. If in the US then US weapons make sense and add to the aesthetics. As much as I may like the FN2000, it do. n't really fit in dayz.

2. More dynamic weapon mechanics improve gameplay. What I mean by this is that there is a clear trade off if you choose an ak over an ?4 or vice versa. One is more powerful, while the other has tighter grouping. Why have 10 5.56 variants? Where's the tradeoff? Why should I carry a g36 over an m4 or an m4 over a l85? Why add stuff in the game just for the ILLUSION of variety?

3. The attachment system allows meaningful variety already. as touched on above, if i picked up a stock m14 i could carry it as a battle rifle or a sniper rifle depending on attachments.

Why make something like a g36 rare, when it wouldnt be any better than easier to find assault rifles which do the same thing?

If you want 100 unique weapon models that perform the same go play bf3 or arma3

[gibonez 3633]

And you'll be shockingly bored with how the M16, the M4, G36, and the L85 all perform essentially the same when you remove all of the attachments. 

 

You can get around this with weapon specific attachments.

 

L85 mounted with a susat scope.

g36 with its unique combination red dot and mag optic

 

m4 and m16 with its ability to take almost all attachments.

 

Even so they will be very similar though.

[Estyles 14]

I meant a more medium range / long range scope.

The 3.5 scope is medium range the zoom is just off.

[Katana67 2907]

Either way there's no HARM in having more weapons, especially if some of them are the same in terms of performance.

 

If the current lineup is anything to hold as an example, there will be lots of similar weapons.

[Etherimp 1323]

As long as they can keep each weapon unique and balanced in some way I don't care what they add. I'd just rather the guns in the game be interesting and aesthetic. Also, rarity is really no argument for or against guns. Random generation + enough time = any weapon you want.

[gibonez 3633]

As long as they can keep each weapon unique and balanced in some way I don't care what they add. I'd just rather the guns in the game be interesting and aesthetic. Also, rarity is really no argument for or against guns. Random generation + enough time = any weapon you want.

 

GTFO with that this so called uniqueness and balance is why we have m4s that are less accurate than 1776 muskets.

[Etherimp 1323]

GTFO with that this so called uniqueness and balance is why we have m4s that are less accurate than 1776 muskets.

You misinterpreted my point. I agree with you. The weapon mechanics in the game currently suck donkey dicks. which is why those should be addressed before they go adding a bunch of shit guns that nobody will use.

[Katana67 2907]

Also, rarity is really no argument for or against guns. Random generation + enough time = any weapon you want.

 

Rarity = less likely that any given player will have X at any given time. So yes, it is.

 

Not to mention that the loot isn't random, it is/will be controlled by the hive.

Edited March 26, 2014 by Katana67

[Chaingunfighter 917]

Firstly, the m14 spawned in more than just crash sites last I played the mod.

Secondly, there are a lot of reasons for limited arsenal.

1. Aesthetics. Only weapons that fit with the theme of the game should be in. If the game was based in China then Chinese weapons would make sense. If in the US then US weapons make sense and add to the aesthetics. As much as I may like the FN2000, it do. n't really fit in dayz.

2. More dynamic weapon mechanics improve gameplay. What I mean by this is that there is a clear trade off if you choose an ak over an ?4 or vice versa. One is more powerful, while the other has tighter grouping. Why have 10 5.56 variants? Where's the tradeoff? Why should I carry a g36 over an m4 or an m4 over a l85? Why add stuff in the game just for the ILLUSION of variety?

3. The attachment system allows meaningful variety already. as touched on above, if i picked up a stock m14 i could carry it as a battle rifle or a sniper rifle depending on attachments.

Why make something like a g36 rare, when it wouldnt be any better than easier to find assault rifles which do the same thing?

If you want 100 unique weapon models that perform the same go play bf3 or arma3

Arma 3 has a disappointingly low number of weapons (not that I'm mad about it, but it actually lacked guns more then it had them; no GPMGs, no shotguns, no grenade launchers, etc.)

 

Battlefield 4 (and most other arcade FPS games) follow the exact "streamlined" approach you want; limited guns but somewhat different stats, instead of a huge ton of guns.

 

And what I meant by "attachments" was not the "variety" but the "compatibility". Guns with built in rails (like the M4) accept attachments much easier than the AK, that's what I implied, even though it isn't specifically a counter to your posts. 

I'm not specifically advocating for a G36, or L85, or FAMAS (none of them fit the scenario and I do agree that they aren't different enough) but something like a Galil, or Ruger Mini-14, or another 5.56 that does fit shouldn't be kept out because there already is one.

 

And explain to me how it's only an "illusion" because they are similar. Even if they aren't entirely different, it is still variety, by definition.

 

 

As long as they can keep each weapon unique and balanced in some way I don't care what they add. I'd just rather the guns in the game be interesting and aesthetic. Also, rarity is really no argument for or against guns. Random generation + enough time = any weapon you want.

 

Still takes more time, so an overall lower number of people will have them and less people will want to spend the time doing it. Not everyone wants to sit around for hours camping loot spawns for guns.

Edited March 26, 2014 by Chaingunfighter

[Etherimp 1323]

Arma 3 has a disappointingly low nbloated f weapons (not that I'm mad about it, but it actually lacked guns more then it had them; no GPMGs, no shotguns, no grenade launchers, etc.)

 

Battlefield 4 (and most other arcade FPS games) follow the exact "streamlined" approach you want; limited guns but somewhat different stats, instead of a huge ton of guns.

 

And what I meant by "attachments" was not the "variety" but the "compatibility". Guns withopportunity ails (like the M4) accept attachments much easier than the AK, that's what I implied, even though it isn't specifically a counter to your posts. 

I'm not specifically advocating for a G36, or L85, or FAMAS (none of them fit the scenario and I do agree that they aren't different enough) but something like a Galil, or Ruger Mini AAA, or another 5.56 that does fit shouldn't be kept out because there already is one.

 

And explain to me how it's only an "illusion" because they are similar. Even if they aren't entirely different, it is still variety, by definition.

 

 

 

Still takes more time, so an overall lower number of people will have them and less people will want to spend the time doing it. Not everyone wants to sit around for hours camping loot spawns for guns.

Actually, bf3 has way too many guns and there's no fucking point in using the majority of them. its a bloated system rather than streamlined. By illusion of variety I mean that if 2 guns fire the same rounds from the same mag and have the same attachments then they are essentially a reskin of the same gun so why pick one over another? On the other hand if one gun can fit all attachments and another can only fit SOME attachments, then why pick the inferior gun? That's not presenting a 'choice' to the player. Given the opportunity the player will always pick the same gun instead of weighing his options.

[Chaingunfighter 917]

Actually, bf3 has way too many guns and there's no fucking point in using the majority of them. its a bloated system rather than streamlined. By illusion of variety I mean that if 2 guns fire the same rounds from the same mag and have the same attachments then they are essentially a reskin of the same gun so why pick one over another? On the other hand if one gun can fit all attachments and another can only fit SOME attachments, then why pick the inferior gun? That's not presenting a 'choice' to the player. Given the opportunity the player will always pick the same gun instead of weighing his options.

That's true, but that's why some guns are rarer than the others. Yes, the 1911 is generally inferior to the FNX-45 but if someone wanted a .45 gun and couldn't find the FNX, then they'd have to make do with the 1911. As I've said before, making the guns rarer will be the way to stop it, and the people that are willing to take ages to server hop/wait around forever to get a specific gun do not seem like a huge barrier from making similar weapons.

The Blaze 95 is pretty much inferior to the Mosin in every way, save for accuracy and fire rate (which hardly matters with only two rounds), but it makes a good addition to the game for variety. Practically any player will take a Mosin over the Blaze, but I've seen plenty of people who have not found a Mosin using one. 

Having every gun be useful til the end-game is not a concept that DayZ is (or seems to be) going for. There should be weapon choices that are clearly better than others, even if said weapons are harder to find.

 

 

I still fail to see how having similar guns for variety is bad, so long as they make sense. If anything, it would get boring seeing everyone in the same role using the same gun. I'm not suggesting adding an L85/Famas/G36, because they aren't realistic nor authentic, but there are other 5.56 guns that make sense. M16s do make enough difference; for being clearly better in open areas, while sacrificing the usefulness indoors and in urban areas. The M16 would also give versatility to most M4 parts (the stocks, sights and mags could be inter-changed completely.)

[Katana67 2907]

Yes but the issue is that in DayZ, you don't have ACCESS to weapons all of the time. Hence why rarity is indeed relevant. You have to find/loot weapons, so it might not be an option of picking between the superior/inferior choices all of the time.

 

I think y'all might just have to agree to disagree at this point, as we've gotten side-tracked a bit.

Edited March 26, 2014 by Katana67

[tgmoore 31]

The Mk17 with the SpectreDr you pictured isn't set up as a DMR. It is set up as a general purpose battle rifle.

A DMR conceptually is used to give an infantry squad the organic ability to put down aimed rifle fire beyond the reach of its standard long arms.

[lipemr 160]

So, having 10 different assault rifles which all fire 5.56 will do what, exactly?

 

You find an assault rifle...You hunt down 5.56 mags, or vice versa. 

 

See FNX vs 1911 argument from above. Except the difference between pistols is even greater than the difference between Assault Rifles, because most assault rifles can use the same mags.

we're not talking about 5.56 guns here, they're the only ones that have a universal standart magazine. all 7.62x51 and AK-type weapons use different magazines. You cant fit a g3 mag into a FAL, nor can you fit a AKM mag into a SKS.

 

5.56mm guns shouldnt even be on the game, they're totally out of place, as by looking at the map, no operation harvest red or whatever happened at all, there's no remains of it.

 

It's just weird how the AK will appear only in the 3rd month of development and the m4 was there since the beginning.

[Katana67 2907]

The Mk17 with the SpectreDr you pictured isn't set up as a DMR. It is set up as a general purpose battle rifle.

A DMR conceptually is used to give an infantry squad the organic ability to put down aimed rifle fire beyond the reach of its standard long arms.

 

Yes, hence why this thread covers battle rifles and DMRs (see the OP where I say, "However, the distinction between a battle rifle and a designated marksman rifle is often dependent on the use intended for a given weapon [rather than the weapon itself]"). For the purposes of this thread, they're one in the same. As they're often the same weapon, just configured differently. With the advent of configurable attachments, the distinction focuses less on the weapons themselves and more on how they're configured.

 

Succinctly, DMRs are often re-purposed battle rifles (although sometimes not, in the case of the Mk 12/SAM/SDM-R and perhaps the SVD)... or battle rifles with suitable optics attached. But ultimately, they're battle rifles nonetheless.

Edited March 26, 2014 by Katana67

[lipemr 160]

Actually, bf3 has way too many guns and there's no fucking point in using the majority of them. its a bloated system rather than streamlined. By illusion of variety I mean that if 2 guns fire the same rounds from the same mag and have the same attachments then they are essentially a reskin of the same gun so why pick one over another? On the other hand if one gun can fit all attachments and another can only fit SOME attachments, then why pick the inferior gun? That's not presenting a 'choice' to the player. Given the opportunity the player will always pick the same gun instead of weighing his options.

 

are you seriously comparing BF3 with dayz?

[Etherimp 1323]

are you seriously comparing BF3 with dayz?

Game design is game design. While an SUV is completely. ifferent from a performance sports car, designing both of them requires application of mechanical engineering.

[lipemr 160]

Game design is game design. While an SUV is completely. ifferent from a performance sports car, designing both of them requires application of mechanical engineering.

 

dayz have a totally different concept dude, starting by the fact that in dayz you have to find a weapon, that is supposed to be rare, in battlefield you just choose a weapon and go pew pew.

 

just this fact alone makes this discussion useless.

 

in dayz we need as much variety as we can get, as it makes getting attachments for a specific weapon more difficult and adds to the atmosphere of the game.

 

If we would follow your idea, we should only have the shotgun, mosin, sks and m4 in game, as any other weapon than these would be redundant.

Edited March 26, 2014 by lipemr