Senior Member
What will matter is.
What gun can have a lower sound signature?
What gun beats body armor better.
What gun is more precise at a higher distance.
What gun retains more velocity as distance progress.
It's like Bone already said.
At really close ranges, pistols and pistol caliber carbines should do more damage.
Or at least make the enemy react more to being shot.
If the enemy had an actual body armor.
Would make players be more stealthy while progressing through an enemy base, and choosing really well which enemy to eliminate and how.
Because body shots with an 45 would not be a very good idea.
But a 45 would have a very low sound signature.
While a rifle would give you away.
If you are wanting to snipe someone.
A 556 might not be a very good choice after a certain distance.
You could have its damage drop to a certain degree.
This are choices that should matter.
And not come up with an arbitrary stupid thing like.
Look we have 3 AR15 rifles.
2 have a good damage but you move slower than a snail.
One makes you move as a turtle (which is an improvement, I guess).
But have a really low damage.
Mantic, with your mentality to defend this, you are also taking the player freedom to pick a gun because he likes that particular gun.
As it is in game right now.
I cant play with the guns I like the most, because they suck d i c k.
Senior Member
then scale back guns for the next game and put proper balancing towards the weapon sandbox balancing 20 or 30 guns is easier than 200Originally Posted by ArgimonEd Go to original post
also the m4a1 will be the only gun to get any play need range 20 inch barrel need mobility 11.5 inch barrel outside of the m4a1 maybe the sr 25 or some bolt action
but here's the real problem with realistic balancing your 500 dollar glock will never be as good as some 3000 dollar plus high performance super gun just how an ak 74 will never be as good as a sig 553 some guns are just inferior but with an arcade balance you can make the 500 dollar handgun as useful as the mega super gun
all those choices should matter and more I'm sorry but realistically well over half the assault rifles in the game are straight up inferior to the m4a1
guess what I like the mk16 and xm8 and ump 45 but realistically their not better than an m4a1 not to mention guns like the l86a1 which are hands down not good guns tons of shooters have bad guns that wouldn't be used but should that just mean due to realism something no tom clancy game has ever balanced their weapons on should take precidence
oh you like that gun too bad it's garbage in real life now pick your jack of all trades m4a1 and piss off
Senior Member
Sorry, but an stock glock can kill you just the same as an STI staccato.
It will fire the same bullet, if you know your trigger reset you can shoot it really fast.
And if you are a good shooter, for all intents and purposes, you can put accurate and effective rounds on target for the distance that the gun is designed to be. (Decided to add to this part. I never saw or heard about a low life here, being shot 2 to 6 times by an Taurus PT 100 or PT 840 and saying. Nope, I ain't gonna die, your gun is inferior to an G22, which is inferior to an SIG 320 .40, which is inferior to an HK USP .40, which is inferior to an walther, which is inferior to an 3000 dollars race gun.
Never saw someone survive being shot to the chest with an FAL, which is inferior to an MK17 and to an Armalite AR10...But the low life died regardless. There are cases where people survive? Of course, the same way I already seen a situation where a police officer survived being shot by an cartel gang banger that had an high end AR15) ...
And even with an 20 inch barrel for an AR15.
Unless you are shooting a more heavier round (heavier versions of the 556) it will lack some penetration at ranges.
Against a jihadist at 600m wont make much of a difference, but we are tackling an actual military force here.
With "theoretically, body armor".
As for mobility, you can walk as fast with an AR15 at any barrel length.
You got mad I disagree with you, to the point of trying to insult me?
Are you a child?
Who said I want to use the M4?
My point is exactly to not use the M4, I want to use a G36 without feeling handicapped, want to use the 516, because it looks better than the M4.
I dont want to have to use what the game wants me to use.
Senior Member
Senior Member
I'm not insulting youOriginally Posted by ArgimonEd Go to original post
here's another example a lee enfield will always be inferior to an m1 garand outside of incredibly niche uses
and yeah a fal will still kill just like a lee enfield but any high end ar 10 is just better why have inferior weapons no one will use them
there has been some study's but basically players will always attempt to min max and make the game easier that's what humans do so yeah if we have a fal and some mega ar 10 the ar 10 gets chosen 9/10 times
so why don't we give the fal more damage or more damage range or let it aim faster even though it's not realistic it now gives the fal advantages over the ar 10
I'm fine with having 1:1 ballistics hell I agree with everyone else on that but balancing off of realism hurts so many more guns than it helps how does having a realistic g36 that will just never be as good as an m4a1 help over having one that gets advantages even of not realistic but one that gives it it's own niche
the g36 rocks I love it but it's just never gonna be as good as an m4a1
I don't wanna be forced to use an m4a1 I wan't to use so many guns but 1:1 realism is not gonna help make bad guns good it's just gonna make them worse while making 3% even more powerful
I'm even fine with rounds dealing similar damage or even the same damage but if one gun is hurting why not give it a bump in damage it won't be realistic but it'll help it out
I don't wanna just take my m4a1 and piss off I wanna use a xm8 and acr and all the other failed guns cause I think the're really cool
Senior Member
Dude, I'm gonna stop you right there.
The FAL is old, it has a weird grip angle.
But it is sturdy as hell.
It weights more than both the AR 10 and the MK17 (so you'll need to be really fit to operate with it, sure if you're fit enough with the FAL you'll have a better stamina with the other 2.)
But between me, and a "faccionado" from RJ (Aka, drug soldier) with an AR10.
We both have the same chances of killing each other
What it will come down to is:
Who sees first.
Who doesn't hesitate and shoot first.
Who shoots more accurately.
Because in the end.
The round is the same, travelling at a similar speed, with similar energy, over the same distance.
That is why everything you are saying isn't valid.
There is no need to give those stats to people so they'll use the FAL.
Just give an stamina reduction for using it, and a stamina benefit for using the others.
I have messed with the FAL and its derivative (IA2) a lot.
And I can engage fast and accurately with them.
In the end. The fight will come down to who can perform the fundamentals better under stress and pressure.
And I'm sorry, but your piss off seemed kind of gearing towards offending and insulting.
And in that particular case of the G36...
Well the devs did the complete opposite, they even went in and worsen the gun even further.
Senior Member
In the end, we all want the same thing, Mantic.
Be able to play with other guns.
But you are defending what is preventing this In the game.
I want to use the G36, 516, 416, M4, Ak's, Mk16, Mk17, Mk18 and etc.
But how am I going to?
If the game had realistic "not real, because the real thing would make a lot more things come into play, but focusing only on the end result, the diameter of the hole you are making in your enemy" you'd be able to use a G36, without thinking, crap.
This gun sucks a donkey d i c k.
With a 20 damage, vs 27 damage of an M4 with a shorter barrel.
You move really slow, as if you had no love for your own life
Because moving in a firefight is about getting to point A to cover in point B as quickly as possible (except for CQB, where you go semi suicidal trying to clear the room as violently and swift as possible, while being stealthy up to the point of shots fired.)
But how to do so?
In a game where the Scorpion allows you wo walk faster than any other gun.
Faster than a pistol.
While in real life, I can go 5km/h in a treadmill and still shoot accurately enough, to drop plates that are 4 to 6 meters away from me.
This speed is almost a jogging speed.
I used to compete in shooting clubs doing this kind of thing.
In a human sized target I can even hit a bit further away ( 10 to 12 meters, after this gets pretty hard).
I can literally hit someone up to 4 to 5 meters from me, while running (of course the terrain will dictate how accurate I can be in all the occasions mentioned, but since moving faster is more to a CQB/MOUT setting, you'd most likely do this on solid ground).
How can I use the pistol I want, if it is a 45 ACP, but has a much lower damage than an 9mm ( m9 with 25 and the CSFP with 30).
These things make me not be able to play with the guns I want to actually play.
It does the contrary of what they preached (Making players experiment with several guns) when people only stay with very few guns in the game due to stats., instead of because they like the gun).
I love AK's don't use them because they have really low damage, and are the guns that make you walk the slowest in the game, even slower than some sniper rifles and machine guns.
So, yeah, realistic stats, would allow people to select guns based on their tastes.
Senior Member
yeah the piss off bit was rhetorical because the internet sucks this is gonna be my last post for a while until I can come up with a solution for intent because I never wan't to insult people it's a waste of time and energyOriginally Posted by ArgimonEd Go to original post
now yes I wan't all guns to be useful but I disagree on the solution the weapons are poorly balanced now but making them 1:1 realistic is just gonna hurt them
look at MW's balance all though not perfect it makes all the guns have something of their own and for the most part are all fun to play with
and although damage between rounds is similar it does deal different damage out of different guns sure most 5.56 guns are 4 hit kills but some are 3 or 5 depending on a number of factors
once again it's not perfect but it's one of the best balanced modern shooters ever
I'll just end it on the fal it's obsolescent it's hands down not as good as an ar 10 mounting optics on it is a pain, It'll never be as accurate or as light, some how the ar 10 has less recoil and it has better ergonomics why would anyone choose the fal over the ar 10 there is zero reasons too
so yeah I think the game needs to give a reason to use all the other weapons other than it looks cool
just because the current balance sucks doesn't mean we need a whole new balancing design with it's own problems if someone could sit down with the devs and explain the current balancing issues to them (yeah right) they could easily fix them instead of adding in a brand new completely different design that objectively makes guns blatantly worse
nobody want's a realistic Hi Point and no ones gonna pick a realistic Hi Point over literally any other handgun (other than a zip 22)
Senior Member
MW is better balanced because it's more realistic.
Guns feel unique because, even tho they are on the same caliber there will be small or more noticeable differences in accuracy, weight and etc.
Even recoil might differ due to a lot of factors.
These are the points in which game can make their guns feel unique.
Not creating stupidly different damages, specially for PVE.
And the FAL can mount optics just fine.
Here we solved the issues of the optic not retaining zero.
As to weight, we also have several solutions that dropped the weight of the FAL.
As to choose one gun over another, I will choose whatever I have the money to buy.
Adding this my first competition I came in first with a time of 24.16 overall while the second place had a time of 24.45.
He had a "top" race gun.
I had an stock Taurus PT57 that my grandfather purchased in the 80's.
So the price tag on a gun means nothing.
Depending on who is using it, even a 38 is lethal.
