The Battle Rifle Thread!

[woots 82]

It was a pretty damn good battle rifle. It shot people and helicopters!

[Katana67 2907]

It was a pretty damn good battle rifle. It shot people and helicopters!

 

Trolling/joking aside.

 

Battle rifles could possibly be used as potent anti-vehicle weapons. Yet another use. Seen a DMR bring down a helicopter in the mod and I've been smacked out of trucks many a time.

[igor-vk 909]

What will be the first battle rifle in game? Any thoughts on that? I asked Chris Torchia on shitter (twitter) about FAL, but he didnt gave any specific answer. Like you said: "Battle rifles could possibly be used as potent anti-vehicle weapons.". So, until we get any vehicles, they can wait.

Edited April 9, 2014 by igor-vk

[Katana67 2907]

What will be the first battle rifle in game? Any thoughts on that? I asked Chris Torchia on shitter (twitter) about FAL, but he didnt gave any specific answer. Like you said: "Battle rifles could possibly be used as potent anti-vehicle weapons.". So, until we get any vehicles, they can wait.

 

I suspect the FAL or the G3. Would love to see either one. Not sure how they'd work out the attachments for them without having to render the weapons with rails (which I'd support). Or they could make weapon-specific attachments.

 

Strictly speaking, the SVD is kind of a battle rifle, although it seems pretty focused on the DMR side of things. So that might be the first one, given that it has irons.

 

Other than that, there aren't any Warsaw Pact battle rifles of note. The SVT-40 is more of a collector's piece nowadays and isn't very versatile, although I'm sure it could stand in for something like the Garand. And the rest are pretty much just SVD variants or clones (i.e. PSL).

Edited April 9, 2014 by Katana67

[gibonez 3633]

I suspect the FAL or the G3. Would love to see either one. Not sure how they'd work out the attachments for them without having to render the weapons with rails (which I'd support). Or they could make weapon-specific attachments.

 

Strictly speaking, the SVD is kind of a battle rifle, although it seems pretty focused on the DMR side of things. So that might be the first one, given that it has irons.

 

Other than that, there aren't any Warsaw Pact battle rifles of note. The SVT-40 is more of a collector's piece nowadays and isn't very versatile, although I'm sure it could stand in for something like the Garand. And the rest are pretty much just SVD variants or clones (i.e. PSL).

 

yea thats just what this game needs.....

 

G3s and fn fals with tacticool rails and crap.

 

I hope they just give us plain jane G3s and Fn fals and the only attachments that work with them are the ones that work in real life.

 

 

Last thing we need to see is 1950s battle rifles with tacticool rails and acogs....

 

The irons will work just fine.

[Katana67 2907]

yea thats just what this game needs.....

 

G3s and fn fals with tacticool rails and crap.

 

I hope they just give us plain jane G3s and Fn fals and the only attachments that work with them are the ones that work in real life.

 

Last thing we need to see is 1950s battle rifles with tacticool rails and acogs....

 

The irons will work just fine.

 

How are rails "tacticool"? They add functionality.

 

The AR-15 is a weapon from the 1950s and 60s. Yet it has rails on it. Is it tacticool?

 

Again, your criterion for dismissing things is arbitrary and pointless. And coming from the guy who wants a freakin' Mk 12 SPR.

Edited April 9, 2014 by Katana67

[gibonez 3633]

How are rails "tacticool"? They add functionality.

 

The AR-15 is a weapon from the 1950s and 60s. Yet it has rails on it. Is it tacticool?

 

Again, your criterion for dismissing things is arbitrary and pointless. And coming from the guy who wants a freakin' Mk 12 SPR.

 

Yea and guess what military issued fn fals and g3s from the 50s do not.

 

Nothing wrong with the mk12 , the mk12 is just a unique firearm that is actively fielded in the US military and is quite common.

 

Railed G3s and Railed tacticool fn fals are completely different.

 

You won't find any railed fn fals outside of some posers tacticooled out civilian fn fal.

[Katana67 2907]

Yea and guess what military issued fn fals and g3s from the 50s do not.

 

Nothing wrong with the mk12 , the mk12 is just a unique firearm that is actively fielded in the US military and is quite common.

 

Railed G3s and Railed tacticool fn fals are completely different.

 

You won't find any railed fn fals outside of some posers tacticooled out civilian fn fal.

 

Who says these are issued from the 50s?

 

The Mk 12 is just a "unique firearm that is actively fielded by the US military and is quite common". Same with the Mk 17, Mk 48, M240, Mk 11/M110, and M14 EBR! Funny that.

 

While DSA FALs haven't been adopted by anyone in particular (even though the Peruvians have adopted a railed FAL).

 

But seeing as how the G3 (and railed variants) are COMMONLY used by countries like Germany and Norway, gonna' go ahead and disagree with you. These aren't fancy-shmancy SF folks either, these are just regular soldiers. Google for yourself.

 

Edited April 9, 2014 by Katana67

[liquidsnake 275]

Yea and guess what military issued fn fals and g3s from the 50s do not.

 

Nothing wrong with the mk12 , the mk12 is just a unique firearm that is actively fielded in the US military and is quite common.

 

Railed G3s and Railed tacticool fn fals are completely different.

 

You won't find any railed fn fals outside of some posers tacticooled out civilian fn fal.

This. G3s and FALs shouldn't have rails and maybe even no attachments at all. I'm thinking they shouldn't add attachments for the AKM either. The AKM, G3 and FAL should be more powerful than the M4 at the expense of attachments like ACOGs and such.

[Katana67 2907]

This. G3s and FALs shouldn't have rails and maybe even no attachments at all. I'm thinking they shouldn't add attachments for the AKM either. The AKM, G3 and FAL should be more powerful than the M4 at the expense of attachments like ACOGs and such.

 

I'd rather they "balance" the weapons through things like weapon rarity, ammo rarity, and magazine rarity. Rather than limiting the capabilities of the weapon itself.

[gibonez 3633]

I'd rather they "balance" the weapons through things like weapon rarity, ammo rarity, and magazine rarity. Rather than limiting the capabilities of the weapon itself.

 

Not giving it rails and attachments does not limit the weapons at all.

 

You still have 20 rounds of 7.62 in a very accurate package.

 

My main concern is keeping the game realistic and not giving them dumb accessories that would not work on the weapon.

[gibonez 3633]

Who says these are issued from the 50s?

 

The Mk 12 is just a "unique firearm that is actively fielded by the US military and is quite common". Same with the Mk 17, Mk 48, M240, Mk 11/M110, and M14 EBR! Funny that.

 

While DSA FALs haven't been adopted by anyone in particular (even though the Peruvians have adopted a railed FAL).

 

But seeing as how the G3 (and railed variants) are COMMONLY used by countries like Germany and Norway, gonna' go ahead and disagree with you. These aren't fancy-shmancy SF folks either, these are just regular soldiers. Google for yourself.

 

 

 

Cmon man there is no chance in hell those tacticool weapons would show up in Chenarus.

 

A fn fal or a g3 with iron sights would be extremely likely.

 

The mk12 is far more common than a mk17 or a mk48 or m14 ebrs.

Edited April 9, 2014 by gibonez

[Katana67 2907]

Not giving it rails and attachments does not limit the weapons at all.

 

You still have 20 rounds of 7.62 in a very accurate package.

 

My main concern is keeping the game realistic and not giving them dumb accessories that would not work on the weapon.

 

See my above post.

 

And not giving it attachments certainly limits the weapon. Not being able to fix a 4-6x scope onto a G3 would be a huge limitation.

 

Honestly, I've been willing to take you seriously up to this point, but your logic on what constitutes something "realistic" and "dumb accessories" isn't sound at all.

[Katana67 2907]

Cmon man there is no chance in hell those tacticool weapons would show up in Chenarus.

 

A fn fal or a g3 with iron sights would be extremely likely.

 

Well... seeing as HK G36's are in vanilla ARMA II, I think it's ENTIRELY likely. 

 

Either way, your criterion hasn't been the dismissal of them based upon likelihood, it's been on the arbitrary connotation of something as "tacticool". Even though rails are a common feature of many weapons.

Edited April 9, 2014 by Katana67

[gibonez 3633]

Well... seeing as HK G36's are in vanilla ARMA II, I think it's ENTIRELY likely. 

 

Either way, your criterion hasn't been the dismissal of them based upon likelihood, it's been on the arbitrary connotation of something as "tacticool". Even though rails are a common feature of many weapons.

 

Yes in many weapons just not he fn fal or g3.

[Katana67 2907]

Yes in many weapons just not he fn fal or g3.

 

I've proven your assertion about the G3 to be ENTIRELY false. Standard-issue Norwegian A-G3's come with rails. German G3 DMR variants COME with rails.

 

I agree about the FAL, even though I certainly wouldn't mind rails on it.

Edited April 9, 2014 by Katana67

[gibonez 3633]

I've proven your assertion about the G3 to be ENTIRELY false.

 

I agree about the FAL, even though I certainly wouldn't mind rails on it.

 

You arent getting me.

 

The VAST VAST VAST VAST VAST majority of g3s out there do not have rails or any attachment points for modern optics or accesories.

 

This is why its not a common thing. Sure you can buy an obscure aftermarket kit to attach rails to a g3 or a fn fal but lets be honest there are kits like that for every weapon out there.

 

One has to imagine how likely it would be to find a g3 in Eastern Europe, and when found what kind of a g3 variant would it be.

 

More likely than not it would be a plain jane g3.

[weedmasta 784]

You won't find any railed fn fals outside of some posers tacticooled out civilian fn fal.

 

Same with G3s, they are used more like assault rifles for regular military personnel in many countries and they do not have attachments and rails. There are better platforms for that without having to actually pimp it out.

[gibonez 3633]

Same with G3s, they are used more like assault rifles for regular military personnel in many countries and they do not have attachments and rails. There are better platforms for that without having to actually pimp it out.

 

yea the most common version of the firearm should be in the game.

 

No railed fn fals, and g3.

[Katana67 2907]

You arent getting me.

 

The VAST VAST VAST VAST VAST majority of g3s out there do not have rails or any attachment points for modern optics or accesories.

 

This is why its not a common thing. Sure you can buy an obscure aftermarket kit to attach rails to a g3 or a fn fal but lets be honest there are kits like that for every weapon out there.

 

One has to imagine how likely it would be to find a g3 in Eastern Europe, and when found what kind of a g3 variant would it be.

 

More likely than not it would be a plain jane g3.

 

What's your point? You've moved from arbitrary dismissals based on something being "dumb" and "tacticool" to likelihood in a fictional country (which it is indeed likely if you look at the fiction of Chernarus). Pick your train of thought.

 

There's nothing obscure about a B+T rail for a G3 (used as standard-issue by Norway). "...there are kits like that for every weapon out there", sort of proves my point, but alright.

 

You're also confusing likelihood with capability and gameplay. M4A1's in-game don't spawn with fore-end rails. Rails are a rare accessory to be looted. Why isn't that an issue? Why couldn't that be the case with a FN FAL or G3 in DayZ?

 

Moreover, the developers aren't interested in pure realism (hence why there are fully-automatic M4A1's to be looted in a supposed "Eastern European" country). So, regardless of your desire for pure realism, it isn't going to happen. By all means advocate for it, but the developers have been profoundly against emulating "reality" for quite some time.

 

I also remind you, that a Mk 12 SPR is pretty unlikely to be found in Chernarus by your standards. Your only concern with the Mk 12 has been whether or not it's commonly used by the United States, which is debatable (as it's being replaced by the Mk 17 and other more relevant DMRs). Not whether it is likely to be present in Chernarus. Do you see the contradiction in your logic there?

Edited April 9, 2014 by Katana67

[gibonez 3633]

What's your point? You've moved from arbitrary dismissals based on something being "dumb" and "tacticool" to likelihood in a fictional country (which it is indeed likely if you look at the fiction of Chernarus). Pick your train of thought.

 

There's nothing obscure about a B+T rail for a G3 (used as standard-issue by Norway). "...there are kits like that for every weapon out there", sort of proves my point, but alright.

 

You're also confusing likelihood with capability and gameplay. M4A1's in-game don't spawn with fore-end rails. Rails are a rare accessory to be looted. Why isn't that an issue? Why couldn't that be the case with a FN FAL or G3 in DayZ?

 

Moreover, the developers aren't interested in pure realism (hence why there are fully-automatic M4A1's to be looted in a supposed "Eastern European" country). So, regardless of your desire for pure realism, it isn't going to happen. By all means advocate for it, but the developers have been profoundly against emulating "reality" for quite some time.

 

I also remind you, that a Mk 12 SPR is pretty unlikely to be found in Chernarus by your standards. Your only concern with the Mk 12 has been whether or not it's commonly used by the United States, which is debatable (as it's being replaced by the Mk 17 and other more relevant DMRs). Not whether it is likely to be present in Chernarus. Do you see the contradiction in your logic there?

 

Ok this will be my last post as I am done arguing over something so silly.

 

1. Just because norway issues rails with their g3s does not make it common , rails on a g3 are still obscure and extremely unlikely just look at any of the g3s that are actually being used and issued to troops throughout the world today most of them simply have irons.

 

2. Rails for the m4 make sense, assuming the US military occupied Chenarus this is just pure speculation judging by the humvee wrecks finding m4 accessories such as rails would make sense and would be plausible.

 

3. Who knows what the developers are interested when it comes to realism or not. If they are indeed not concerned with it then they should Bohemia Interactive has a mil sim pedigree and to go against that will only result in a worse game.

 

4. As far as the mk12 yea the mk17 will not be replacing it, the only reason the mk12 is so widely adopted is because of how easy it is to convert an m4 into an spr. The mk17 is not common or will ever be common in the military, it was merely a hyped weapon system of about 4 or 5 years ago that will fade away in history.

 

 

Above all what I am trying to say is the things we see or pick up in the game have to be cohesive. They have to make sense otherwise it ruins immersion.

 

Do you think it would make for a better experience if you find all this antique soviet era can opener right next to a fully kitted out g3 with rails up the wazoo and all of the latest gizmos.

 

Of course not it would be jarring seeing something like that within the context of dayz. It is all about creating a consistent game and if they go with the current formula or follow the current recipe the fn fals and the g3s you encounter in the game will be the ones that you would most likely come across in eastern europe.

 

 

 

There is something beautiful about a vanilla firearm.

[Katana67 2907]

Ok this will be my last post as I am done arguing over something so silly.

 

1. Just because norway issues rails with their g3s does not make it common , rails on a g3 are still obscure and extremely unlikely just look at any of the g3s that are actually being used and issued to troops throughout the world today most of them simply have irons.

 

2. Rails for the m4 make sense, assuming the US military occupied Chenarus this is just pure speculation judging by the humvee wrecks finding m4 accessories such as rails would make sense and would be plausible.

 

3. Who knows what the developers are interested when it comes to realism or not. If they are indeed not concerned with it then they should Bohemia Interactive has a mil sim pedigree and to go against that will only result in a worse game.

 

4. As far as the mk12 yea the mk17 will not be replacing it, the only reason the mk12 is so widely adopted is because of how easy it is to convert an m4 into an spr. The mk17 is not common or will ever be common in the military, it was merely a hyped weapon system of about 4 or 5 years ago that will fade away in history.

 

Above all what I am trying to say is the things we see or pick up in the game have to be cohesive. They have to make sense otherwise it ruins immersion.

 

Do you think it would make for a better experience if you find all this antique soviet era can opener right next to a fully kitted out g3 with rails up the wazoo and all of the latest gizmos.

 

Of course not it would be jarring seeing something like that within the context of dayz. It is all about creating a consistent game and if they go with the current formula or follow the current recipe the fn fals and the g3s you encounter in the game will be the ones that you would most likely come across in eastern europe.

 

There is something beautiful about a vanilla firearm.

 

1. Most weapons have irons. Most weapons now have rails as well as issued. Including the G3, which I've demonstrated (not saying that railed G3s outnumber unrailed G3s). But cool. Most M1911's don't have rails, yet it's in the game with rails, does that break your immersion?

 

2. Okay, then finding Mk 17's, M240's, Mk 48's, and Mk 11/M110's would be plausible. All commonly used/issued weapons within the United States Armed Forces (vanilla Army units use Mk 48's, M240s, and M110s can provide pictures and info if necessary). Much moreso than the Mk 12. Won't justify it, it's just the way it is. You can't just arbitrarily pick and choose.

 

3. I know what the developers are interested in. They've said so. They're not interested in pure realism, and are seeking a balance. They've said it. And it's evident in the current crop of weapons. We have typical Warsaw Pact weapons mixed in with NATO weaponry and relatively rare weapons (i.e. Amphibia S and kitted-out M1911). To say nothing of attachments.

 

4. Seeing as the Mk 17 (Mk 20) is slotted to replace the Mk 12 as per USASOC contract (http://kitup.military.com/2011/06/usasoc-reveals-fnh-usa-mk20-plan.html), you're wrong on that one as well. Never mind the fact that the Mk 17 is already in regular use with USSOCOM as a battle rifle and is continued to be purchased by the military from FN. Which I've demonstrated to you multiple times in the past. Nevermind the fact that it isn't easy to convert an M4 to an SPR. They don't convert M4's to SPRs. Sure, they use the same lower, but they make Mk 12's as one-off weapons, hence the military designation separate from that of the M4A1, M16A4, SDM-R, and SAM-R.

 

If you're saying it's easy to convert an M4 to a SPR, why is it difficult to add a rail to a Mosin? This is where your logic is inconsistent.

 

Your definition of "cohesive" and "immersion" is not my definition of those concepts in DayZ. Stop supposing your opinion as objective.

 

Your statement about the can opener is completely irrelevant. I'm not saying they should be common. Which is what you're saying in that anecdote.

Edited April 9, 2014 by Katana67

[agouti 105]

I purchased a low profile hardened steel mount for the G3 for $20. It's very simple to install with a metric allen wrench set, and can be done in less than 5 minutes. Why not include rails as separate objects in some cases from optics and both are needed to install optics? It certainly makes more sense than just mounting the SKS, which needs to be drilled and tapped for a side plate.

 

But yes, if I have no optics, I don't want a rail, it looks better without one.

Edited April 9, 2014 by agouti

[Katana67 2907]

I purchased a low profile hardened steel mount for the G3 for $20. It's very simple to install with a metric allen wrench set, and can be done in less than 5 minutes. Why not include rails as separate objects in some cases from optics and both are needed to install optics? It certainly makes more sense than just mounting the SKS, which needs to be drilled and tapped for a side plate.

 

But yes, if I have no optics, I don't want a rail, it looks better without one.

 

Agreed. Would also separate it from the M4 (which comes standard with an optics mount on the upper).

 

Would much rather have looted rails than rails as standard, but it should be an option.

[gibonez 3633]

I purchased a low profile hardened steel mount for the G3 for $20. It's very simple to install with a metric allen wrench set, and can be done in less than 5 minutes. Why not include rails as separate objects in some cases from optics and both are needed to install optics? It certainly makes more sense than just mounting the SKS, which needs to be drilled and tapped for a side plate.

 

But yes, if I have no optics, I don't want a rail, it looks better without one.

 

I never said they did not exist.

 

All I am saying is how likely would it be to find such rails in Eastern Europe.

 

It all comes down to probability for me. This isn't a means to balance anything its just common sense.