The weapons thread.

[messiahua 0]

Also think its quite annoying the fact that "dot position" you aim is not where the <span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%'>bullets will hit</span>. (even if we have no wind present)

I already fired real weapons and at 100m the bullet do NOT miss the aimed target. In ARMA they do. I do NOT understand why..

PS- and don't give me that wind effect bull crap.. <span style='color:red'>they just need to be fixed, thats all.</span>

I also agree on that. That strange randomness is present and also the bullet is not hitting where you aim. You always need to do a slight adjust left/right/top/down.

[Easy_tiger 0]

I still think the AK74 is a AK47/AKM with the wrong class name! Its recoil is a bit excessive when compared to rifles firing similar calibre ammunition.

Also think that the ironsight is way to small on the AK74 aswell. Anything over 100m is a nightmare to target and track, its dimensions seem to be to a smaller scale to that of say the m16a2.

[max power 21]

Correct me if I'm wrong in the case of the ak74, but the AK series has a rather large and heavy bolt assembly. This makes it very violent to fire, despite the low impulse cartridge.

[Heatseeker 0]

Also think that the ironsight is way to small on the AK74 aswell. Anything over 100m is a nightmare to target and track, its dimensions seem to be to a smaller scale to that of say the m16a2.

The AK ironsights are small because they are positioned further down the rifle, the M16/M4 have the rear iron in the carrying handle so its closer to the eye.

In any case there is a lack of consistency here, because the AK sights are the only ones that align properly (tight), in the other rifles they are made big to alow better visibility thru them.

They should have chosen one way or the other, the AK sights are more realistic but there is a lack of balance wright now, wich is not good for adversarial MP gaming.

[Easy_tiger 0]

Also think that the ironsight is way to small on the AK74 aswell. Anything over 100m is a nightmare to target and track, its dimensions seem to be to a smaller scale to that of say the m16a2.

The AK ironsights are small because they are positioned further down the rifle, the M16/M4 have the rear iron in the carrying handle so its closer to the eye.

In any case there is a lack of consistency here, because the AK sights are the only ones that align properly (tight), in the other rifles they are made big to alow better visibility thru them.

They should have chosen one way or the other, the AK sights are more realistic but there is a lack of balance wright now, wich is not good for adversarial MP gaming.

thanks for the clarification.

Im not convinced about the recoil though. I always thought the AK74 was a lighter more accurate evolution of the AKM . At the moment the AK74 feels very similar to the OFP JAM Ak47 (NOT HD) which had a hell of a kick on it and was far more inaccurate.

[Second 0]

I already fired real weapons and at 100m the bullet do NOT miss the aimed target. In ARMA they do. I do NOT understand why..

PS- and don't give me that wind effect bull crap.. <span style='color:red'>they just need to be fixed, thats all.</span>

Were you tired? Were you afraid? ArmA is about battle, not about shootingrange or peacetime training.

Infact i can score hits relatively easy in ArmA ... It just requires some things to be done. I'd dare to say that you just don't handle ArmA's way of marksmanship. They don't need to be fixed (pistols are from ass IRL ), they require just that player does something to gain accuracy. One hint: release that right mouse button sometimes... Actually you should use it only just before you fire your weapon. Otherwise you'll start to loose eye focus, makes gun "heavier" etc...

Something other (not to Bravo 6):

Why right mouse button is hamppering players dexterity to turn weapon? Because character tries to gain bodyposition that makes shooting as accurate as possible... usually it's "heavy" to turn weapons at that point... Why: Because body is base of gun, you don't turn the gun but you turn the body (and gun turns with it). That is base of marksmanship, awfully many things in marksmanship starts and ends to body and how optimal is it's position.

[Heatseeker 0]

Im not convinced about the recoil in any of the assault rifles, especially in the kneeling or prone positions, but what bugs me is not the recoil, its how the rifles climb but sudenly drop after every shot. If the recoil would work more naturally we would only have to pull the weapon down to keep it on target but as it is i most often have to pull it up?!

And now for something more graphical.

When i drop ammo i see OPF satchels . All magazines and grenades seem to be modeled in game and it would not only look better but you would know what your picking instead of pulling the inventory window to find out what it is.

If i place a satchel charge i see a nice looking bag, if i place a mine i see a mine, if i drop them from my inventory i see the OPF satchel.

[bravo 6 0]

I already fired real weapons and at 100m the bullet do NOT miss the aimed target. In ARMA they do. I do NOT understand why..

<span style='color:red'>they just need to be fixed, thats all.</span>

Were you tired? Were you afraid? ArmA is about battle, not about shootingrange or peacetime training.

Infact i can score hits relatively easy in ArmA ... It just requires some things to be done. I'd dare to say that you just don't handle ArmA's way of marksmanship. They don't need to be fixed (pistols are from ass IRL ), they require just that player does something to gain accuracy. One hint: release that right mouse button sometimes... Actually you should use it only just before you fire your weapon. Otherwise you'll start to loose eye focus, makes gun "heavier" etc...

("Were you tired? Were you afraid? ArmA is about battle, not about shootingrange or peacetime training.") hu?! what are you talking about??

I only play coop in ARMA. And in "battle" like you said, i try not to waste ammo. I carfully aim the target in order to hit it, but the "random destination" does not allow me to.

Does that mean when you aim you fire to scare the living creatures? Or to take them out so they wount hit you or hit the man next to you?

when i aim, i aim to hit that AI, not to scare him away..

already tryed to use the right button to zoom and fire.. the bullets seem to have a random destination. They don't go "exactly" where i point. and ofcourse im talking about short range distance.

[shataan 1]

I think that weap attachments should be player selectable. NOT Class selectable. My main scope of choice is the ACOG. I don`t care what rifleman Class I pick, if I wanna use the ACOG I should be able to just choose my loadout.

About ironsights?? WTF uses just ironsights in the mil anymore? I do agree bout the aimpoint dot scopes. They are useless for anything but CQB distances only.

[Messiah 2]

plenty of forces use ironsights on weapons still - british forces give ironsights to medics among others, and in Jungle ops a 4x SUSAT is utterly useless when you can't see further than 10m due to folliage, hence ironsights are used - Plus they don't limit your FOV as much as a scope, giving you a wider situation awareness when using them, unlike the very small FOV a SUSAT offers - again, thats more applicable in the Jungle.

[Heatseeker 0]

Its easy enough to change the loadouts in missions or put some weapon crates around, the aimdot is workable in mid range and perfect in close range (even walking) but the irons are better all around, since the game is more about mid range/open field combat the irons work better in most situations, they should be standard issue for the blufor forces.

The 4x gives you extra range but at the loss of peripheral vision so the chances of someone shooting your butt while you are sighting increase alot, i havent done anything in game with the 4x that i cant do with the irons, its equally hard.

[rom_un 0]

I'm really disappointed about the rifles in Arma.

Aimpoint in IRL are more precise (the dot design), i've just shoot one fox running at more 100m of me. I use a 7.64 with the lowest price Red_Dot (6 MOA dot). With standing position, the two shoot was in. Try it in Arma...

For the sniper rifle, i began to make ballistic table for the M24 and the M4SPR:

-The M4SPR has a different zero if we zoom or not. The cross didn't represent the zero of the optic.

- For the M24, I've found 100 m = 1 mil -> first dot: 400m, second dot : 500m, 3rd : 600m, 4th : 700m.

Impossible to shoot target at 800m. If i look to this test, the bullet follow a line over 300m !

I didn't want a ballistic simulation like BF2 !

- The KSKV has a unusable scope, make a shoot aver 900 m is hazardous.

(I've make my test with version 1.05, 1.04 has showing different (more realistic) data.)

[spm1138 0]

The M4's ACOG is aligned wrong (compare it to the M16A4).

I don't think it's just a mechanical accuracy thing because it's like you consistently have to aim off centre.

The aimpoint doesn't always point where you're aiming. No anti-parallalax function at all. The dot seems too big. I also don't like how much of my vision the sight obstructs. Some simulation of aiming with both eyes open would be nice.

The accuracy on the Mk12 is horrible.

The recoil on the assault rifles seems excessive.

The recoil on the M240 is very low. I don't know whether this is correct or not but I could basically bullet hose it and it really underlines how nasty the rifles are.

I prefer accurate machineguns to how they were in OFP but it still underlines the weirdness with the rifles.

The aiming on the M203 feels weird. It's hard to judge I guess because the reticule changes if you zoom in but still. Would ladder sights be too much to hope for?

[Baff1 0]

I second Darksoul's opinion on the AK sights...

...they're just too tiny.

Me three.

[zwobot 17]

What's also missing: proper sights for grenade launchers (like the ones in WGL 5).

[Second 0]

Does that mean when you aim you fire to scare the living creatures? Or to take them out so they wount hit you or hit the man next to you?

when i aim, i aim to hit that AI, not to scare him away..

already tryed to use the right button to zoom and fire.. the bullets seem to have a random destination. They don't go "exactly" where i point. and ofcourse im talking about short range distance.

I was trying to say than player's character highly likely is fearing for his life, which usually doesn't have positive impact to shooting accuracy... Well to be honest i have to admit that it was stupid point to even start with. So i'm throwing it overboard.

To weapons accuracy then: Did you gualified in riflerange with M16 in training mission? I completed it with all every shot hitting target couple of times (maybe average was 1 or 2 misses, i don't remeber), so i don't think that weapon, M16, itself is unaccurate. AK-74 and M4, by my experience in ArmA, are bit more unaccurate.

Now: From where does that unaccuracy of shooting come from, if not from weapon (as that training mission example tried to point out)... ArmA kinda simulates mistakes done by shooter if he doesn't do necessary preparations or let those preparations last too long (right mouse button).

So i'm fine, no, i love ArmA's aiming system and weapon accuracy as they are not sniperM16 or sniperAK from OFP.

[frederf 0]

Is the M68 CCO very common for US Army infantry? I'd MUCH rather have ironsight M4 or M16 than the darn M68 CCO (aka "Aimpoint") in ArmA for most situations.

The ACOG is quite the n00b-weapon in the open field, pretty easy to shoot long range, sights are too thick-lined (was made better in 1.05), and absolutely horrible for MOUT in veteran mode without white crosshairs.

The rifle accuracy is definitely not bench-bolted level. I do not know the actual round deviation for a M4 Mk12 SPR IRL, but in game the difference between where you aim and where the bullet goes is huge. I'm happy we're all not dead-eye shots in ArmA but I think the accuracy of the weapon is made too poor while the ease of aiming is made too easy. More sway, ironsight misalignment, and difficulty in aiming would be good if they made the M4/M16 slightly tight grouping.

The M240 is horribly inaccurate at range. A friendly AI will open up on a prone soldier at 500m and go through 200 rounds before hitting him! The M240 should be the platoon's long arms to reach out beyond what 5.56 will do, but currently it's best at medium range. The M249 on the other hand beats the M240 hands down at 500m, it just seems wrong. Thankfully the M240's 7.62 really packs enough punch that only 1 hit is required.

[monkeyboy27 0]

I think most of the weapons are pretty decent. The white crosshairs are bugged on a lot of weapons though, they don't line up to where the iron sights are pointing to. If you use the white crosshairs a lot, I'd imagine this being a big problem.

the only thing I'd change is the automatic recoil ajustment. The gun shouldn't go down again after it recoils, it should be the job of the player to level it again.

[churnedfortaste 0]

I think the weapon handling is quite good you don't want super terminators walking around spraying M249 fire accurately all over the place, even if you can fire the M249 from a standing position at full auto in real life with enough accuracy to mow down people I DONT WANT IT. That would make ArmA the same as OFP with the G36, theres no variety or 'right tool for the job' everyone takes the same weapon

The only thing I don't like is the bouncy recoil, the amount is not a problem but when your view automatically moves down again. It's annoying and extremely difficult if not impossible to fire accurately until your view returns, the sight should jump up and right at a random angle and strength and not return. This way you can fight the recoil with your mouse and some skill is involved, not just click, wait, move mouse up a bit, repeat

<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Oh and bring on suppressive fire that affects recoil and steadiness</span>

Thats a good idea, maybe also if bullets strike the ground very close to you your vision blurs aswell

There is also the problem that say when you fire an RPG at a tank, you automatically reload your gun and can't move so you are unfairly vulnerable to gunfire by it keeping you on the spot, as with AI you cannot finish reloading an AT weapon before getting shot in most cases, It should be one shot disposable not reloadable which isn't real at all. Same applies for other weapons in that you should be able to move whilst reloading / you have no ammo in clip.

[Col. Faulkner 0]

The gun shouldn't go down again after it recoils, it should be the job of the player to level it again.

But only if you fire again rapidly before the weapon has

returned to rest from the previous shot. That way, for

example, you could fire a long burst and watch the muzzle

climb if you made no effort to restrain it by repositioning your

mouse. If you fire more steadily then the rifle should return

to centre again. In the real world, if your hold is correct

(my old marksmanship coaching notes for the British SLR

say: "The rifle must point naturally at the target without

physical effort") your rifle should return to exactly the

same aim point after each shot. A major objective of

musketry training was [i assume it still is] to get you able

to do this instinctively from any position even under stress.

I'd be surprised if this behaviour was possible to add just in

a mod though. The "stay pointing up" thing I suppose could

be done by tweaking the recoil config, but it's not realistic

(and I know it would annoy the crap out of me).

I think it would also be nice if essential personal attributes

like marksmanship were more conveniently and precisely

adjustable per AI unit.

[sluggCDN 0]

I have serious beef with the M24 & Mk12 scope. it's misaligned in the game. In order to hit a target that is 300m away you have to aim 2 dots under the target which is absolutely absurd. It's a bug that has to be corrected. I believe its simply incorrectly positioned sniper scope cross-hair texture.

Another serious oversight is tracers in the sniper rifles. HELLO!!!

 

BIS is harping on how much they are devoted to high degree of realism in ArmA and then adds tracer rounds to M24!!! Tracers should only be present in MG's and AA guns or optional in assault rifles with the toggleable option in settings (it's not functioning now).

I'm willing to let the recoil go - the dispersion in ArmA is based purely on a script. I can even predict sometimes where the next round will go. It's hardly random. Overall it's OK by me.

[churnedfortaste 0]

I have serious beef with the M24 & Mk12 scope. it's misaligned in the game. In order to hit a target that is 300m away you have to aim 2 dots under the target which is absolutely absurd. It's a bug that has to be corrected. I believe its simply incorrectly positioned sniper scope cross-hair texture.

Another serious oversight is tracers in the sniper rifles. HELLO!!!

BIS is harping on how much they are devoted to high degree of realism in ArmA and then adds tracer rounds to M24!!! Tracers should only be present in MG's and AA guns or optional in assault rifles with the toggleable option in settings (it's not functioning now).

I'm willing to let the recoil go - the dispersion in ArmA is based purely on a script. I can even predict sometimes where the next round will go. It's hardly random. Overall it's OK by me.

The reason why you have to aim down to hit a target is because in RL rifles are zeroed at a certain range and the sniper rifles are zeroed to hit a target when they are in the center of your crosshair at 500m, if the target is closer than 500m you have to aim below the target, estimating how close they are.

<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>BIS should really have an adjustable dial on sniper rifles so you can zero the range on them, maybe this would be pretty cool for all rifles</span>

I believe that tracers should not be available at all for assault rifles and only on AA and MG's and also automatic GL's

[Maximus_G 0]

Aiming with a PSO scope has no logic, it doesn't follow any real rules.

There is a logic, not like in RL, but still.

Put your standing target in the rangefinder, get the number, choose the corresponding chevron. The chevrons, one after another, correspond to the numbers 2,4,6...

Doing it that way, i make pretty nice shots.

[sluggCDN 0]

churnedfortaste

thanks for explaining - it makes sense...... in real life. I'll test whether it's the case in ArmA, whether it's actually zeroed in at 500m. But I have a hunch it's just another oversight.

I remember one ex-serviceman made a comment on this forum about this issue. I'd think someone with military background would have been informed on this subject. Yet he was pointing at it as something to be corrected.

[LastRifleRound 0]

My brother is active duty armored cav, and his unit was equipped with M4 CompM2's (Aimpoint). He says they take a long time to calibrate, but when completed they have no problem hitting center of mass on targets out to 400m.

I think it's silly in this game I can drop prone, center my target, squeeze a round and....miss.

Want to simulate nervousness? Show it on screen so I can compensate with skill. There is no weapon sway. Your aim can be dead on and you will miss anyway. It makes no sense, takes any shred of realism out of it. Then the AI pops off one round and head shots me at 250m w/out NVGs using iron sights in the blackness of night.

The only thing real about ArmA is that you die in one or two shots. That's it. I'm uninstalling this uncompleted graphical update of OFP until they release a major patch. ArmA is supposed to exceed the standards set by OFP and the modding community that followed, giving us brand new material and an engaging game to build upon. Instead, this buggy inconsistent mess is given to us, and the modders are left to clean up the mess and get the basic weapons it shipped with to work.

Saying that it is accurate for a modern assault rifle to hit at 20-25% at 150m from a prone position is ok is pure fanboyism. Saying its ok the Javelin doesn't work is same. It's integral to this game that infantry have a long range threat against armor as they have since the advent of guided missile. Modders are left with that one.

Infantry combat is all this game has, the rest is arcade action. Which is fine. But it isn't anything close to immersive or realistic. It's just strange. Doesn't BI beta test anything? Is this a 45$ beta test I've gotten involved with and am not aware of?

I'll see you guys come patch time. I'm sticking with AA and OFP FFUR/SLX for now