The Battle Rifle Thread!

[agouti 105]

$1500.

 

Kimbers can approach that, which we have. Browning Hi-Powers too, which as rocket is a fan of, we'll have. So it's not too crazy. I love my little ruger ingame.

[Katana67 2907]

Kimbers can approach that, which we have. Browning Hi-Powers too, which as rocket is a fan of, we'll have. So it's not too crazy. I love my little ruger ingame.

 

As do I! But I have no qualms about including weaponry that's expensive/rare/regulated in DayZ.

[Katana67 2907]

Woa woa woa. I do like this idea of LRS on mosins because it is realistic. I'd also like to see super slick aftermarket stocks and those mag systems which give you detachable mags. Honestly, I laugh at most of the world and their gun laws. Smell that free air? You don't. Czechoslovakia knows what I'm talking about.

 

Also, is the Amphibia S really that expensive? I mean, aside from the cost that the mystique and gun laws have brought, is it that expensive? It's just a modified Ruger Mark II. Rugers are like $600 tops. How much can a can cost?

 

On that note, I'd like to see optics for every rifle without fail. It's a rifle? It gets optics. Smgs/pistols/shotguns not so much.

 

Edit: Actually, I'd like to see optics for carbines/smgs too. The ruger 10/22 should get optics, and maybe even some for the mp5. If it can hit a man at 100 yards, it gets optics!

 

I don't really mind any optics for the Mosin, but there are a lot of very vocal folk who are interested in different approaches (like emulating pure reality in terms of weaponry available in Chernarus without fail). Some believe a rail attachment is somehow implausible, unreasonable, or unrealistic. I don't. But at the same time, I wouldn't mind if the Mosin was limited to the PU scope just to justify how common it is.

 

Nothing wrong with it, but it seems I spend a lot of time in arguments with these folks instead of actually discussing things that are relevant to DayZ.

Edited April 11, 2014 by Katana67

[Franchi (DayZ) 146]

Give me this battle rifle and no one gets hurt.

[agouti 105]

I'm more for emulating reality as far as what's physically possible, not what's the norm. Personally, I think nearly all the rifles should be one hit kills without medical treatment, and tearing your shirt into rags does not count as this. I'd like to see machine shops and gunsmiths be random building spawns that are required to attach certain optics, and others require special tools. Also, I'd like to see certain types of optics on certain weapons possible, but pose a risk of damaging the optics, for instance a .22 scope on the mosin. Mounting any optics on the mosin should require tools. It needs a sideplate, and it needs to be drilled and tapped for this. Yet all of the rifles floating around all have bent handles, maybe they have sideplates too? Bubba has been hard at work in Chernarus.

 

I'd like to see this absolutely pedantic.

 

Edit: The PU scope makes fine sense on the SKS as longer scopes get dinged up by shell casing. Plus good luck loading stripper clips with a long scope or especially a long scope and a shell deflector.

Edited April 11, 2014 by agouti

[Franchi (DayZ) 146]

I'm more for emulating reality as far as what's physically possible, not what's the norm. Personally, I think nearly all the rifles should be one hit kills without medical treatment, and tearing your shirt into rags does not count as this. I'd like to see machine shops and gunsmiths be random building spawns that are required to attach certain optics, and others require special tools. Also, I'd like to see certain types of optics on certain weapons possible, but pose a risk of damaging the optics, for instance a .22 scope on the mosin. Mounting any optics on the mosin should require tools. It needs a sideplate, and it needs to be drilled and tapped for this. Yet all of the rifles floating around all have bent handles, maybe they have sideplates too? Bubba has been hard at work in Chernarus.

 

I'd like to see this absolutely pedantic.

 

Edit: The PU scope makes fine sense on the SKS as longer scopes get dinged up by shell casing. Plus good luck loading stripper clips with a long scope or especially a long scope and a shell deflector.

Machine shops can be found in Grishino, Berezino and Vybor that I can remember. Realistically a military airfield would have a well equipped machine shop.

Edited April 11, 2014 by Franchi

[igor-vk 909]

Woa woa woa. I do like this idea of LRS on mosins because it is realistic. 

It is OK now, when there in no other sniper/hunting rifles in game. But in finished game Id like to see Mosin as starting, low tear weapon. Or make LRS (that fits only on Mosin) as rare as posible. Mosin is weapon made in quantities 10s of milions in WW2, and quality was not so high as life time of soviet infantry was not so long. I guess in arma/dayz universe they would be sold on civilian market as surplus, as they are out of serius use since 1950s (SKS was introduced at end of WW2). There should be balance with weapon spawns, low quality weapons should be more comon. The more quality weapon is - its harder to find. Yesterday I found fully atached M4 and two 60rd mags in civilian buildings, I guess someone droped it.

[gibonez 3633]

It is OK now, when there in no other sniper/hunting rifles in game. But in finished game Id like to see Mosin as starting, low tear weapon. Or make LRS (that fits only on Mosin) as rare as posible. Mosin is weapon made in quantities 10s of milions in WW2, and quality was not so high as life time of soviet infantry was not so long. I guess in arma/dayz universe they would be sold on civilian market as surplus, as they are out of serius use since 1950s (SKS was introduced at end of WW2). There should be balance with weapon spawns, low quality weapons should be more comon. The more quality weapon is - its harder to find. Yesterday I found fully atached M4 and two 60rd mags in civilian buildings, I guess someone droped it.

 

Let's not forget how overly accurate the in game mosin is compared to a real life stock mosin with surplus ammo is.

 

A LRS would be useless with a real life mosin at anything past 400m.

[Katana67 2907]

It is OK now, when there in no other sniper/hunting rifles in game. But in finished game Id like to see Mosin as starting, low tear weapon. Or make LRS (that fits only on Mosin) as rare as posible. Mosin is weapon made in quantities 10s of milions in WW2, and quality was not so high as life time of soviet infantry was not so long. I guess in arma/dayz universe they would be sold on civilian market as surplus, as they are out of serius use since 1950s (SKS was introduced at end of WW2). There should be balance with weapon spawns, low quality weapons should be more comon. The more quality weapon is - its harder to find. Yesterday I found fully atached M4 and two 60rd mags in civilian buildings, I guess someone droped it.

 

Agreed.

 

I'm sort of wondering how they plan on tiering the weapons. If I had my way, at least in terms of battle rifles, I'd order them as follows (by rarity and attachments available)

 

M1 Garand/SVT-40 (Uncommon) [NO ATTACHMENTS AVAILABLE] [uSE COMMON AMMO 7.62x54R AND .30-06]

 

 

H&K HK91/FN FAL (Rare) [WEAPON-SPECIFIC ATTACHMENTS OR LOOTED RAIL SYSTEM TO MOUNT ATTACHMENTS] [uSE UNCOMMON/RARE AMMO 7.62x51]

 

 

SVD/FN SCAR/M14 Modular Variant (Very Rare) [CAN MOUNT A VARIETY OF ATTACHMENTS INNATELY]

 

*SVD included in the "Very Rare" category because it uses common (7.62x54R) ammunition, not because it's wholly modular

 

Would've thrown an AR-10 variant in there (SR-25/M110/HK417) but they seemed too aesthetically similar to the SCAR. Wouldn't mind one of them replacing the SCAR on the list.

Edited April 11, 2014 by Katana67

[igor-vk 909]

Rail system than scope - that would be awesome!! Imagine you find HK or FAL and scope, but no rails for them. You would play day and night scavanging every tent to find it.

[agouti 105]

Agreed.

 

I'm sort of wondering how they plan on tiering the weapons. If I had my way, at least in terms of battle rifles, I'd order them as follows (by rarity and attachments available)

 

M1 Garand/SVT-40 (Uncommon) [NO ATTACHMENTS AVAILABLE] [uSE COMMON AMMO 7.62x54R AND .30-06]

 

 

 

 

The tokarev can take the PU scope. I mean, why not? There's a bajillion PUs laying around Chernarus. Also, Russia is still selling off it's stockpiles. Still. To this day. $300 for a brilliant looking one in Canada. Also, there's scopes for the garand. Why not scope these beautiful rifles? I'm not a big fan of the idea of "tiers". I see guns as each a work of art in its own right.

[gibonez 3633]

Rail system than scope - that would be awesome!! Imagine you find HK or FAL and scope, but no rails for them. You would play day and night scavanging every tent to find it.

 

 

Not if you are me.

 

I prefer a good set of irons and iron sights really should be the main armament in the game.

 

Iron sights do not break or go back.

 

Scopes and aimpoints and optics do and after years the number of working optics in chenarus would be few.

 

Optics are quite fragile in real life heck alot of optics break simply from the recoil of the weapon alone internals get shifted then the scope does not track correctly.

 

The heavy recoil impulse is one of the main reasons it is not adviced to put glass on heavy recoiling riflles such as g3s or aks.

 

I really wish iron sights make up the bulk of the weapons in stand alone with optics being found on sub 5 percent of the players in the game.

 

Irons really give us that low tech survival vibe the game seems to be aiming for.

[agouti 105]

A proper set of optics can take a lot of rounds. Don't put a tasco on a .308. You get what you pay for, and real authentic PUs are the beeknees, and still work after 80 years today.

Edited April 11, 2014 by agouti

[maka (DayZ) 4]

Im all for a G3 and a FAL i guess you can argue their pressence in Chernarus. But a G3 or Fal covered in rails is just a no the only attachments that should be availible to them should be the issued ones but they should be extremly rare like .22 pistol magazines rare..

In my opinion for whats its worth it should be 70% Civillian eastern/soviet rifles. 26% Russian/Eastern Mil Weapons. 4% Nato Rifles and NO SCARS or anything silly like that if you want those types of weapons go play cod. You wouldnt find a Lada in vagas.

[Katana67 2907]

The tokarev can take the PU scope. I mean, why not? There's a bajillion PUs laying around Chernarus. Also, Russia is still selling off it's stockpiles. Still. To this day. $300 for a brilliant looking one in Canada. Also, there's scopes for the garand. Why not scope these beautiful rifles? I'm not a big fan of the idea of "tiers". I see guns as each a work of art in its own right.

 

I just think it should be separated from the SKS we've got already.

 

I am usually a huge fan of "realism", but I don't really mind having some artificial limitations. Like for example, cutting down the LRS use on the Mosin. I don't mind that the LRS is on the Mosin, but just to justify how common the Mosin is... I feel it should be neutered in some meaningful way.

 

Im all for a G3 and a FAL i guess you can argue their pressence in Chernarus. But a G3 or Fal covered in rails is just a no the only attachments that should be availible to them should be the issued ones but they should be extremly rare like .22 pistol magazines rare..

 

In my opinion for whats its worth it should be 70% Civillian eastern/soviet rifles. 26% Russian/Eastern Mil Weapons. 4% Nato Rifles and NO SCARS or anything silly like that if you want those types of weapons go play cod. You wouldnt find a Lada in vagas.

 

You wouldn't find a Belgian-designed weapon in fictional Chernarus? Funny that FN makes both the SCAR and FAL then. Not gonna' sit here and continue to justify what already is plausible. SCAR's are employed by a variety of militaries, including Eastern European and European ones. Nevermind the fictional reasonings for it.

 

Why people view it as somehow unreasonable is quite beyond me.

Edited April 11, 2014 by Katana67

[gibonez 3633]

Why people view it as somehow unreasonable is quite beyond me.

 

We have nothing against the weapon honestly.

 

It is just that seeing a scar in the game is too immersion breaking and jarring.

 

If it gets added then why not add a cheytac or a mrad into the game or any number of obscure modern weapons that have low adoption rates in very few militaries.

 

The weapons obscureness makes it immersion breaking.

[weedmasta 784]

Calling it obscure, silly, stupid does not really clarify why you do not want it and why it is immersion breaking. You are talking about realism, you are fine with having M4's being available in an Eastern European country and yet you are against implementing weapons which armed forces, both military and civilian, use in this "part of the world". I call that favouritism rather than anything else. You have no arguments besides giving it adjectives and that isn't really an argument, it is a matter of taste.

[Katana67 2907]

It is just that seeing a scar in the game is too immersion breaking and jarring.

 

If it gets added then why not add a cheytac or a mrad into the game or any number of obscure modern weapons that have low adoption rates in very few militaries.

 

The weapons obscureness makes it immersion breaking.

 

Why? Why is it immersion breaking to have a SCAR?

 

MRADs are different, because no militaries have adopted them at all (even though there is a Czech distributor of Barrett Rifles, including the M98B). I wouldn't mind them being included, but that's not a coherent example. Cheytacs are similar, being adopted in small numbers by only a few militaries (four IIRC, one of them is Poland).

 

The SCAR has been adopted by a multitude of militaries and law-enforcement agencies globally... globally...

 

Never mind that the SCAR is provided for in the fiction of ARMA.

 

And even if DayZ isn't solely in the Armaverse, the United States was in Chernarus at some point. The United States is the largest user/producer of SCARs.

 

From EVERY angle, the SCAR is plausible in Chernarus. People just somehow still think it's a prototype or special.

 

One question - Do you find the weapons in ARMA III immersion breaking?

Edited April 11, 2014 by Katana67

[maka (DayZ) 4]

Why you have such a hard on for SCARS is beyond me.... The M4 isnt too bad seen as how common the damn thing is plus i suppose its the main rifle of Georgia also the devs need to satisfy the leet us rail fanboys :rolleyes:

 

I think the mod would be just fine with eastern weapons, mostly civilian.

 

Your need for a scar is daft wouldnt you rather have a VSS or an AN94 maybe a Groza? F*** the western guns theirs enough already.

 

It might be plausable but its highly unlikley

Edited April 12, 2014 by maka

[maka (DayZ) 4]

 

Edited April 12, 2014 by maka

[Katana67 2907]

Why you have such a hard on for SCARS is beyond me.... The M4 isnt too bad seen as how common the damn thing is plus i suppose its the main rifle of Georgia also the devs need to satisfy the leet us rail fanboys :rolleyes:

 

I think the mod would be just fine with eastern weapons, mostly civilian.

 

Your need for a scar is daft wouldnt you rather have a VSS or an AN94 maybe a Groza? F*** the western guns theirs enough already.

 

It might be plausable but its highly unlikley

 

You bring shame to that E92 M3 with your lunacy.

 

And no, I welcome all weapons. Eastern and Western included. There's zero point in discriminating based solely upon real-world circumstances when we're dealing with a work/location of fiction.

 

And for what it's worth, I did say that I could see the AR-10 variants being substituted for the SCAR. So, your deeming me as a "fanboy" is sort of juvenile and misplaced (not that my non-prejudice against weapons isn't evidence enough of that).

 

And "plausible but highly unlikely" is the definition of rarity. Nobody's saying it should be common.

Edited April 12, 2014 by Katana67

[agouti 105]

We have nothing against the weapon honestly.

 

It is just that seeing a scar in the game is too immersion breaking and jarring.

 

If it gets added then why not add a cheytac or a mrad into the game or any number of obscure modern weapons that have low adoption rates in very few militaries.

 

The weapons obscureness makes it immersion breaking.

 

 

The scar would not be immersion breaking at all. Listen, the armaverse, we'll call it this, is like an alternate timeline to ours. A few notable key changes occured which sent them on a different course, kind of like the quentin tarantinoverse.

 

Among these is that the US adopted the SCAR as the primary rifle during 2012. In our world, this was heavily considered, and some parts of the military did adopt it.

My point is, the armaverse is not our universe, Different things happened, and one of those was the acceptance of the SCAR as the main rifle of the US military.

 

Thus, the SCAR should be somewhat common. Remember, not our world. 

 

Edit:

In earlier flashppoint/arma games, you used m16 variant. In arma 3, you're issued the SCAR. Does the zombie outbreak occur before or after arma3? 

Edited April 12, 2014 by agouti

[Katana67 2907]

The scar would not be immersion breaking at all. Listen, the armaverse, we'll call it this, is like an alternate timeline to ours. A few notable key changes occured which sent them on a different course, kind of like the quentin tarantinoverse.

 

Among these is that the US adopted the SCAR as the primary rifle during 2012. In our world, this was heavily considered, and some parts of the military did adopt it.

My point is, the armaverse is not our universe, Different things happened, and one of those was the acceptance of the SCAR as the main rifle of the US military.

 

Thus, the SCAR should be somewhat common. Remember, not our world. 

 

Well, in his defense, to my knowledge... there's been no actual confirmation that we're in the Armaverse. Or what year it is in the fiction of DayZ.

 

However, it doesn't take away from the fact that Chernarus is a fictional location. And DayZ is operating in a fictional universe. It's not really relevant to talk about what would be present in Chernarus by using ONLY real-world circumstance, because Chernarus doesn't exist in the real-world. I mean, the weapons of ARMA III aren't realistic by any means in terms of their use or presence in a "Mediterranean Island". But it's fiction, and the weapons are incorporated into said fiction. DayZ is NO different.

 

And, I disagree that the SCAR (if ever included) should be "somewhat common", if only for the purposes of balancing it and its placement in the loot scheme. I think it should be very rare.

Edited April 12, 2014 by Katana67

[agouti 105]

Well, in his defense, to my knowledge... there's been no actual confirmation that we're in the Armaverse. Or what year it is in the fiction of DayZ.

 

However, it doesn't take away from the fact that Chernarus is a fictional location. And DayZ is operating in a fictional universe.

 

And, I disagree that the SCAR (if ever included) should be "somewhat common", if only for the purposes of balancing it and its placement in the loot scheme. I think it should be very rare.

 

Are you suggesting ARMA 3 used the scar because it started development when it seemed very plausible that the SCAR was the next big thing, and was trying to emulate reality, and reality turned on it?

 

I would like you introduce to you the is-ought gap, regarding balance. Perhaps logical arguments for reality don't hold up to video games? I'd like a zombie survival simulator, not a game.

 

Edit: Let me say, I am for reality dictating what is possible, and what is likely. I have no problem with adding rarer guns, for the sake that is physically possible. Rare guns do exist, and sometime you find them in weird places. The relative rareness of a gun should really not be an issue when deciding whether or not it should exist (wasting resources to be implemented is another consideration, but not one idealogically, more practically), except in certain extreme instances, like the rare .45 prototype luger, or the WA-2000 which are so rare is to be essentially non-existant. But any gun where gun more than 1 or 2 or however many exist, why not add them? I'm a reality junky, not a balance or even gameplay junky. I play red orchestra religiously.

Edited April 12, 2014 by agouti

[Katana67 2907]

Are you suggesting ARMA 3 used the scar because it started development when it seemed very plausible that the SCAR was the next big thing, and was trying to emulate reality, and reality turned on it?

 

I would like you introduce to you the is-ought gap, regarding balance. Perhaps logical arguments for reality don't hold up to video games? I'd like a zombie survival simulator, not a game.

 

Edit: Let me say, I am for reality dictating what is possible, and what is likely. I have no problem with adding rarer guns, for the sake that is physically possible. Rare guns do exist, and sometime you find them in weird places. The relative rareness of a gun should really not be an issue when deciding whether or not it should exist (wasting resources to be implemented is another consideration, but not one idealogically, more practically), except in certain extreme instances, like the rare .45 prototype luger, or the WA-2000 which are so rare is to be essentially non-existant. But any gun where gun more than 1 or 2 or however many exist, why not add them? I'm a reality junky, not a balance or even gameplay junky. I play red orchestra religiously.

 

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

 

I'm in favor of adding weapons like the SCAR as well. Just not as a common occurance, hence why I slotted it into my "Very Rare" category above.

 

People can have their cake and eat it too. You can have the Eastern weapons be relatively common. But have the so-called "Western" weapons be rare.

 

The issue is that a lot of the vocal people in this thread (not me) think that the very presence of something is immersion-breaking, somehow, regardless of whether it's rare in-game or not.

Edited April 12, 2014 by Katana67