m249 dexterity

[twisted 127]

In reality the weight of the m249 helps control its recoil. but that same weight should make it a slower weapon to move around. the m240/pkm should be even heavier right?

I hope BIS add the right dexterity values to all infantry weapons in the game to simulate the weight of weapons so smaller weapons like mp5 move faster than larger ak47 or m16 which are still quicker than m240.

agree?

[Fred DM 0]

yeah, i totally agree. i must admit, though, that i haven't really paid any attention to this, yet, so i wouldn't really know if this is already - to an extent - present in the game.

[Maddmatt 1]

Hopefully version 1.05 will have this implemented. This isn't the first time this issue has been brought up so hopefully the devs listened. In the demo the M249 just overpowers everything. It should only be really effective when prone.

[l mandrake 9]

Yeah and the dexterity of the rifles need to be tweaked - as has been mentioned many times the gun movement on the M4/AK is far too 'soupy' and slow.

[Clavicula_nox4817 0]

I agree it should have *some* drag to it, I disagree very intensly that it should "only be effective prone." The 249 is an excellent weapon when shouldered and maintains stability when proper fire discipline is used. The 240 on the other hand is still viable, but not so much. If anything, the stupid recoil when using the M4 or M16 needs to be changed. When firing with the sights up, they bounce all over the place instead of bouncing straight back.

[Maddmatt 1]

I agree it should have *some* drag to it, I disagree very intensly that it should "only be effective prone." The 249 is an excellent weapon when shouldered and maintains stability when proper fire discipline is used.

Well so long as it doesn't stay like a laser pointer.

[Easy_tiger 0]

Well i hope its characteristics are changed, Tho i understand the SAW to be quite accurate at the moment its a very strong contender for the the NOOB Cannon title (like the G36 in ofp)

[l mandrake 9]

Well i hope its characteristics are changed, Tho i understand the SAW to be quite accurate at the moment its a very strong contender for the the NOOB Cannon title (like the G36 in ofp)

Yeah pleeease no magic guns in ARMA! I actually emailed the devs asking them to remove the G36 from OPF, it totally destroyed any notion of marksmanship, you just aimed in the general direction of a distant enemy on 3 round burst and he was dead.

I used to avoid the OPF MP maps with G36 available, but sadly nobody else seemed to mind  

PS. Why the hell anyone played G36 maps like 'Hexenkessel' still escapes me - the worst use of the OPF engine possible

[Easy_tiger 0]

The SAW is going to be a hot topic for debate.

Reports from actaul operators indicate that the weapon is quite accurate so it is possible that the weapon is a real life noob cannon

however Clavicula_nox4817's comment "The 249 is an excellent weapon when shouldered and maintains stability when proper fire discipline is used" is interesting.

Im assuming "proper fire discipline" relates to short controlled bursts. Can an actual operator of this weapon enlighten us on the SAWS behaviour when used on full auto for prolonged periods of time and draw a comparision to the weapons simulation in AA?

[olemissrebel 0]

Quote[/b] ]In the demo the M249 just overpowers everything. It should only be really effective when prone.

Well, that's the way it is in theater.  The M249 is the most casualty producing weapon in the U.S. arsenal.  Just by firing it in game you should be able to see why.

Anyways, the weapon itself is decently depicted.  You won't be letting loose an entire belt from the standing position, I guarantee it.  Usually sustained or rapid fire, never cyclic.  The saw can just as easily be used in MOUT, reflexive fire drills, as any other rifle, although it is cumbersome.

The 240, on the other hand, is rarely 'humped' and is almost always mounted on the vehicle.   It's insanely heavy, even more so than the M60.  In iraq we (my squad) prefered the 240 over the .50 cal and mark 19, because with the .50, one has to set the timer on it, and do this before a mission, and the mk19, well, it just sucks.

All in all, the saw is reasonable, although you should be a little bit slower in movement with it in game.  The 240... it's ridiculous how you see the AI walking around with bravos at their shoulder, I am present U.S. Army Infantry (Light) and I can tell you that's flat out ridiculous.   Compare it to carrying around a small child and doing reflexive fire that way!

The m4/m16 series have little to no recoil, especially after being trained on it for awhile, it's compensated for.   The jerkiness of the ones in armed assault is like a untrained civilian trying to fire one off at a paint can.  The burst also seems slow to me, but perhaps it's just the sound in game.

I would like to see a mode for the MG's, sustained, rapid, and cyclic, at least a version for the AI.   Sustained meaning 2-4 rounds every so often, rapid being a bit more, cyclic being fully automatic.  

Also, BIS should take into account the ranges for these weapons, whether it be point, area, or maximum effective.  While one could be hit at all three rates, at the given ranges, obviously, it should be a lot less likely in area, for say, to be wounded or killed, unlike the game has it now.  The AI are basically snipers, regardless of the difficulty, and that's totally unrealistic for a "wannabe" 'realistic' "warsim" or whatever they are aiming for...

[mr reality 0]

The 240... it's ridiculous how you see the AI walking around with bravos at their shoulder, I am present U.S. Army Infantry (Light) and I can tell you that's flat out ridiculous.   Compare it to carrying around a small child and doing reflexive fire that way!

I served in the British army some time ago and when i was issued with the GPMG (Gimmpy) i had to carry it like a normal weapon. The reason for this was so the enemy would not be able to identify the MG soldier and take him out first. The weapon did have a sling attached but it was heavy. The ArmA weapon models just havn't got slings which makes it look odd when you see the 240 soldier carrying it like he does.

Or maybe us brits are a tougher bunch than you yanks  

[Pierrot 0]

The AI are basically snipers, regardless of the difficulty, and that's totally unrealistic for a "wannabe" 'realistic' "warsim" or whatever they are aiming for...

Agreed!

BIS mistakes "difficulty" for responsibility. Unskilled soldiers tend to spray bullets at random. They even engage middle range targets with their rifles in full auto mode only to find them almost missed. This is why US army removed full auto mode from M16 series.

On the other hand, well-trained soldiers never fire their rifles in full auto mode except for ambush or CQB. They shoot bullets one by one exactly.

This is the difference between noobs and well-trained soldiers. If BIS insists that ArmA is the ultimate realistic infantry sim on the world, they should implement properties of skill properly.

[benreeper 0]

For the sake of argument let's that BIS does NOT state the ArmA is the (most) ultimate realistic infantry sim on the world. I don't ever remember hearing or reading that anywhere. Most other games including "AA", do not become ultra realistic until after numerous patches or mods. Remember "Red Orchestra" was a mod, so cut BIS some slack.

--Ben

[Messiah 2]

they are a suprisingly heavy weapon, i was stunned when i got to play around with one last year - bloody heavy things... but it doesnt seem to stop the brits walking around with them

[Big Dawg KS 6]

For the sake of argument let's that BIS does NOT state the ArmA is the (most) ultimate realistic infantry sim on the world.  I don't ever remember hearing or reading that anywhere. Most other games including "AA", do not become ultra realistic until after numerous patches or mods.  Remember "Red Orchestra" was a mod, so cut BIS some slack.

--Ben

When one says it's the 'ultimate realistic sim' or whatever, they refer not to the game but the engine, and that is where it is better. The original content is bound to have some unrealistic things in it, but it's nothing we can't already make better with mods. BIS must consider the best way to get as many (happy) customers as possible, and some people are turned off by utter realism, but mod teams and addon makers don't have to worry at all about how many people download their stuff, and since they're pretty much made by those same people who wanted it in the first place, everyone's happy. Even if realism isn't the goal, ArmA supports practically anything you can think of and have the skills to make. Dexterity is a single numeric value in the weapon's config, anyone with a brain and the right tools can change it, and that person can enjoy their idea of what is realistic, since everyone always seems to disagree on that subject.

[frederf 0]

The US light infantry fire team is based around the M249 for a reason. It's basically a rifle with M16 accuracy and a huge fire rate bonus. The whole gamey concept that a LMG has to be less accurate than a rifle is pish posh MoH game design. So I approve of the M249's accuracy.

It should be less maneuverable than a more nimble weapon, is this possible in the engine? Can you have different weapons have different levels of nimble?

Also movement speed / fatigue rate should be load out weight dependant. A simple speed = base speed * % loading formula would suffice.

The M240 in game is both super light and highly inaccurate for some reason. Quite the opposite of the real weapon. The M240 should not be able to be shouldered standing or crouched for more than 2-3 seconds. Simple script using the lower weapon animation could do this *cough WGL cough*

Why is the M240 able to reach not even as far as an M16 effectively? I can see why the BIS campaign designers gave the enemy units M240s instead of M249s. Apparently it's fun to get sprayed at by an inaccurate MG instead of AI-sniped by the SAW. Alternatively it's annoying to try to use the M240 in the role it was designed for with it how it is.

Does the game have the velocity of the round decrease from muzzle velocity over time/distant or does it keep the same forward speed? Because 7.62 of the M240 should maintain velocity out to a longer range than the 5.56 of an M16.

[olemissrebel 0]

As previously stated by myself, all the values need is a little tweaking here & there. I suggest someone from BIS locate an FN MAG, or a 240 and try to run around for thirty seconds like the AI does. That will change their opinion... The 240 is a very, very accurate weapon, it's actually called a precision weapon, not meaning one can snipe with it, but what you point it at, when properly supported, it hits.

The SAW may be accurate, but it's still heavy as fuck when loaded if you ask me, and is nowhere near as nimble in real life, as it is in game. The saw gunner needs to have in his config the added strength, etc to properly weild it, so if a randomly civilian, or POG picks it up, they would be less effective, etc. Hopefully my rambling makes a bit of sense to some of you...

[twisted 127]

The SAW may be accurate, but it's still heavy as fuck when loaded if you ask me, and is nowhere near as nimble in real life, as it is in game.

exactly.

The dexterity setting simulates how heavy/large/cumbersome a weapon is. that's what's being discussed. make each weapon move appropriately/expectedly based on size and weight.

that way the m249 stays as it is as far as recoil etc goes but simply becomes a bit slower/bulkier to bring on target than a lighter assault rifle.

[max power 21]

I still think there should be some impulse that wanders the barrel around a little bit when you're going hollywood off the hip. There is an impulse there and, from what I have heard and seen, you do do have to lean into it. I mean, there's the SAW in terms of light recoil, and then there's the Ultimax 100. You can fire that thing off your forehead. I think there should be some concession for weapons that do actually have very little or no recoil, like the above and the ak 107.

[Col. Faulkner 0]

For the sake of argument let's that BIS does NOT state the ArmA is the (most) ultimate realistic infantry sim on the world.  I don't ever remember hearing or reading that anywhere.

Well on this page http://www.armedassault.com/ it

clearly says that it is "The ultimate combat simulation".

In this context it is not unreasonable to interpret "ultimate

simulation" as implying "realistic".

[Maddmatt 1]

For the sake of argument let's that BIS does NOT state the ArmA is the (most) ultimate realistic infantry sim on the world. I don't ever remember hearing or reading that anywhere.

Well on this page http://www.armedassault.com/ it

clearly says that it is "The ultimate combat simulation".

In this context it is not unreasonable to interpret "ultimate

simulation" as implying "realistic".

Is there a game that is closer to being "The Ultimate Combat Simulation"? Because I can't think of one.

[Col. Faulkner 0]

For the sake of argument let's that BIS does NOT state the ArmA is the (most) ultimate realistic infantry sim on the world.  I don't ever remember hearing or reading that anywhere.

Well on this page http://www.armedassault.com/  it

clearly says that it is "The ultimate combat simulation".

In this context it is not unreasonable to interpret "ultimate

simulation" as implying "realistic".

Is there a game that is closer to being "The Ultimate Combat Simulation"? Because I can't think of one.

I don't think there is one either (despite its faults). I was

merely trying to obviate any riposte about it not explicitly

saying "realistic simulation" there. All I wanted to say was

that is a matter of record that ArmA is in fact advertised

as the "Ultimate combat simulation".

[4 IN 1 0]

so is the problem easy to fix with the things we have right now or it needed a engine code change?

[Col. Faulkner 0]

Most of the parameters like accuracy, range, recoil

and "weapon handiness" are configurable (or at least they

were in OFP - assumption is that ArmA continues this) so

most of what is argued about here can be adjusted without

refactoring the engine code.

[twisted 127]

so is the problem easy to fix with the things we have right now or it needed a engine code change?

easy to fix. ArmA has most of the built in ability i think.

dexterity is a command that can be added to all infantry wepaons to control how 'heavy' they move.

i think aimprecision controls the 'wobble' of the gun and changes by stance but i can find no information on that in the biki. anyone confirm or clarify this please?