unfair arma ?

[vilas 473]

maybe this is stupid question, but i found ARMA is not fair in coparision East/West

i am not Russian advocate, but:

making addons and reading configs i found few unfair things:

in real life M4 is worse than AK74 by fire effective distance (M4 is used up to 350 m , AK to 500)

AK74 is very very stable and balanced weapon

M16 has (as i heard) the same accuracy and can be comparable to M16 but in game:

in game default BIS config:

AK74 kicks like hell and is almost 2 times worse than M16

PK is almost 2 times lower accuracy than M240 or M249

can I say they simulate drunker east soldier and trained west soldier on amhetamine (as we 've heard some in TV) ?

possible, east soldiers have less money on training (usually soldier from poor country fires maybe one/two magazines in year training , he is not volunteer in recruit service, he goes to the army by pressure of state, not as US or UK , so he fires worse ?)

and most funny thing :

in config there is value "max fire distance" "medium "mid fire distance"

T72 has medium fire distance 1,2 km, max 2,5 km

but M1A2 has medium 12 km, max 15 km ! it is not my mistake in numbers, just unpack and unwrap configs and look at values

is it "the best battlefield simulator" as it's advertised by delevolopers or is it US victory simulator ?

than why BIS gave same armour to T72 without ERA like they gave to the newest M1A2 ?

i don't understand it :/

[Easy_tiger 0]

I agree with your points regarding the accuracy of weapons the ak74 still feels like a 1st gen ak47!

I also think that BIS have overall done a good job simulating the properties of the russian/US/RACS vehicles (bar a few bugs which will no doubt be addressed in time..).

With regard to balance, this will have to be dicated by mission designers not the underlying ARMA framework, simply tweaking config's for vehicles to make them 'even' to their counterpart is not the solution, it just makes the game unrealistic.

example mission

WEST:

2x M1A1

2 LAW soldiers

EAST:

2X T72

4X RPG soldiers

[Rastavovich 0]

What version are you running?

Tanks were rebalanced in 1.04 or 1.05, they both have their chances now.

AK74 recoil was a plain bug and is fixed in 1.06

[dmarkwick 261]

Weapon & vehicle balancing is a total misdirection of the game's intentions, one weapon may outperform the opposite number's equivalent weapon but that really means nothing, when one soldier is using bushes and the other is using a wall, when one has the sun behind him and the other has it in his eyes, when one needs to cross a bridge and the other just needs to defend it.

You play the mission with what you got, it's up to the mission designer to decide on numbers & positions. Most cases the player side is grossly outnumbered in any case to make up for human vs AI tactics & observation, so balance is not an issue.

[bravo 6 0]

What version are you running?

Tanks were rebalanced in 1.04 or 1.05, they both have their chances now.

AK74 recoil was a plain bug and is fixed in 1.06

weeeee

hope more bugs are fixed

[zinc 0]

Is it "the best battlefield simulator" as it's advertised by delevolopers or is it US victory simulator ?

Having played online I can honestly say that 'East' would appear to be winning most of the games I have played.

Unbalanced? If anything, the 'West' should have some decent Camo in my opinion. The game needs a few minor tweaks here and there, but otherwise it feels quite balanced whichever side you choose to play on.

[Col. Faulkner 0]

than why BIS gave same armour to T72 without ERA like they gave to the newest M1A2 ?

i don't understand it :/

Please can you explain this bit, I don't understand what you

mean? The US tanks in Arma are M1A1, aren't they?

[dirtylarrygb 0]

than why BIS gave same armour to T72 without ERA like they gave to the newest M1A2 ?

i don't understand it :/

Please can you explain this bit, I don't understand what you

mean? The US tanks in Arma are M1A1, aren't they?

I would say the ak do more damage as well it seems, i use them always in semi and zoom take a shot go for the head and often get 1 shot kills. The M4 often takes two shots.

[guerilla -MCY- 0]

@Rastavovich

may we have your professional "privat" opinion on the "white rabbit" ACU Camo issue the US side are wearing? in my eyes it is destroying the whole CQB infantry balance, exspecially in the northern part of sahrani.

[o3oDeath 0]

M16 and M4 share the same specs as far as effective ranges the both have an effective range for a point target at 550 meters. The both fire a 5.56 MM round where as the AK-47 fires a 7.62 MM round which would account for a high recoil. IF you go for accuracy then I would use the M4 / M16 but for reliability i would go for the Ak-47, it has less malfunctions and is a lower maintenance weapon that the M16 or M4.

[scubaman3D 0]

^The AK47 isn't even in the game, and there's a reason why the russians don't use it as their main battle rifle anymore.

So now I'm wondering what you actually know about malfunctions and maintenance...

[Col. Faulkner 0]

M16 and M4 share the same specs as far as effective ranges the both have an effective range for a point target at 550 meters. The both fire a 5.56 MM round where as the AK-47 fires a 7.62 MM round which would account for a high recoil. IF you go for accuracy then I would use the M4 / M16 but for reliability i would go for the Ak-47, it has less malfunctions and is a lower maintenance weapon that the M16 or M4.

But the Kalashnikov rifles in the game are clearly AK-74s (5.45mmx39), not AK-47s (7.62mmx39).

[LastRifleRound 0]

If this were a U.S. victory simulator, I don't think OPFOR would be picking you off from 500m with those "crappy" AK-74's. Note that they only suck when they are in YOUR hands.

The M4 aimpoint is by far the most unreliable least accurate weapon in the game.

The T-72 can successfully destroy an M1A1 at any distance as opportunely as an M1A1 can strike it.

I don't know what the configs say, but playing the game, having your dumb AI squad annihilated by all-seeing OPFOR doesn't seem anti East, it seems anti-player.

Drunken Russians? No. More like omniscient ninja communists to me. (Note that OPFOR in this game is not Russian, rather a made-up communist nation. The only "real" country simulated is America.)

[amrax 0]

.................

[ijozic 9]

^The AK47 isn't even in the game, and there's a reason why the russians don't use it as their main battle rifle anymore.

Actually, AK-47 was only produced for a short while. The standard version was AKM which is also the version which was produced under licence in other countries.

[dirtylarrygb 0]

^The AK47 isn't even in the game, and there's a reason why the russians don't use it as their main battle rifle anymore.

Actually, AK-47 was only produced for a short while. The standard version was AKM which is also the version which was produced under licence in other countries.

Just want to add in here that the Ak47/74 AKM etc is actually a German Gun from WW2, the Soviets faced the german version when invading, then copied it and improved it and used it as there main weapon ever since.

The M16/4 traces back its routes to the M14 (a team rifle!, just more plastic than wood.

I find it intresting that people use either M4 or Ak as in most coop mission and hold maps you can pick up a SAW or G36, both being very good weapons for different reasons. I have noticed time and time again the g36 will make a kill before an opponent can nail you with either a Ak or M4 etc.

I personally cant wait for loads more weapons to be added.

[max power 21]

That AK rounds [5.45x39] do way more damage [than the 5.56x45] and are probably more accurate...

I editted your quote a bit because it was vague and this is what I took you to mean. I figured that by AK you mean the AK74, and by M series you mean M16 mean AR-15 and its children. Please inform me if I'm wrong in assuming that and I have misquoted you.

From everything that I've read, the 5.56 NATO round causes more tissue damage at close range, and I would be surprised if there was much difference at longer ranges. I have read that the 5.45 round was designed to be much less velocity dependent in the damage causing area.

The 5.56 is said to have better ballistics, being a higher velocity round. I don't know about the accuracy of either, though, I'd imagine that they would both be quite adequate. I have a book here that claims that the m16a2 has a dispersion of 1.24141 mils and the ak74 has a dispersion of .702478. Those are both very small angles! Compared to their predicessors, the akm (1.7489 mils) and the m16a1 (.565885), they are quite close!

I'm not sure how this is reflected in ArmA but I would imagine that the difference is probably quite small and the difference between the two rifles will shrink further when the AK74's recoil is reduced.

[Soviet Spetsnaz 0]

^The AK47 isn't even in the game, and there's a reason why the russians don't use it as their main battle rifle anymore.

Actually, AK-47 was only produced for a short while. The standard version was AKM which is also the version which was produced under licence in other countries.

Just want to add in here that the Ak47/74 AKM etc is actually a German Gun from WW2

Stop spreading that crap. The AK47 has nothing in common with the StG44.

[dirtylarrygb 0]

^The AK47 isn't even in the game, and there's a reason why the russians don't use it as their main battle rifle anymore.

Actually, AK-47 was only produced for a short while. The standard version was AKM which is also the version which was produced under licence in other countries.

Just want to add in here that the Ak47/74 AKM etc is actually a German Gun from WW2

Stop spreading that crap. The AK47 has nothing in common with the StG44.

The 47 was a total "concept" knock off of the 44, mechanically they differ but the soviets even copied the factory production line methods the nazi's had used (to start with). And why not ? the soviets had noticed just how good an assault rifle was. The BAR or M14 are a joke vs the 44. Thank god the nazi's didn't make enough of them.

The 44 could even shoot round corners, a twisted barrel and a mirror allowed that. Something the modern US military is now trying with cameras.

You could argue for some time the soviets then had the best Assault Rifle in the world. As the US and European Army's didn't get decent assault rifles till the late 60's in the US and mid 80's in most of europes case.

The m80 and G36 etc etc are now moving very fast ahead.

People argue just how much the 47 is a rip off of the 44, but considering just about all assualt rifles ever since have taken most of it's basic concepts and look pretty darn similar. (look how the g36 even looks like it, 44 and g36 both made in germany!.

[dirtylarrygb 0]

That AK rounds [5.45x39] do way more damage [than the 5.56x45] and are probably more accurate...

I editted your quote a bit because it was vague and this is what I took you to mean. I figured that by AK you mean the AK74, and by M series you mean M16 mean AR-15 and its children. Please inform me if I'm wrong in assuming that and I have misquoted you.

From everything that I've read, the 5.56 NATO round causes more tissue damage at close range, and I would be surprised if there was much difference at longer ranges. I have read that the 5.45 round was designed to be much less velocity dependent in the damage causing area.

The 5.56 is said to have better ballistics, being a higher velocity round. I don't know about the accuracy of either, though, I'd imagine that they would both be quite adequate. I have a book here that claims that the m16a2 has a dispersion of 1.24141 mils and the ak74 has a dispersion of .702478. Those are both very small angles! Compared to their predicessors, the akm (1.7489 mils) and the m16a1 (.565885), they are quite close!

I'm not sure how this is reflected in ArmA but I would imagine that the difference is probably quite small and the difference between the two rifles will shrink further when the AK74's recoil is reduced.

The idea was a 5.56 round will injure, thus taking the wounded man, and a mate trying to help him out of the battle. A 7mm round generally kills so you kill a guy but don't take another guy out of the battle.

This was the official reason given by the MOD for the swap from the SLR to the SA80.

After the Falklands conflict it was noted althought he SLR was very good for long range battles. It was terrible for close quaters and house clearing etc. So the MOD went and got several guns designed and went with the SA80.

Moving to 5.56 mean't that our guns used the same ammo as as allies. And the reason was given that the idea was to try and wound the people hit by rounds not always kill them. As the mags were smaller so you could carry more ammo.

7mm is better for long range 5.65 meduim to short. Niether hurt as much as a 5o calibre browning round ...

[Soviet Spetsnaz 0]

^The AK47 isn't even in the game, and there's a reason why the russians don't use it as their main battle rifle anymore.

Actually, AK-47 was only produced for a short while. The standard version was AKM which is also the version which was produced under licence in other countries.

Just want to add in here that the Ak47/74 AKM etc is actually a German Gun from WW2

Stop spreading that crap. The AK47 has nothing in common with the StG44.

The 47 was a total "concept" knock off of the 44, mechanically they differ but the soviets even copied the factory production line methods the nazi's had used (to start with). And why not ? the soviets had noticed just how good an assault rifle was. The BAR or M14 are a joke vs the 44. Thank god the nazi's didn't make enough of them.

The 44 could even shoot round corners, a twisted barrel and a mirror allowed that. Something the modern US military is now trying with cameras.

You could argue for some time the soviets then had the best Assault Rifle in the world. As the US and European Army's didn't get decent assault rifles till the late 60's in the US and mid 80's in most of europes case.

The m80 and G36 etc etc are now moving very fast ahead.

People argue just how much the 47 is a rip off of the 44, but considering just about all assualt rifles ever since have taken most of it's basic concepts and look pretty darn similar. (look how the g36 even looks like it, 44 and g36 both made in germany!.

German propaganda.

First you say its a copy of the StG44 and now you say its a "concept knock off"? Make up your mind.

The concept of aussault rifles has been around for decades in Russia.

[Artem 0]

I like how he even admits its mechanically different, yet he still calls it a knock off? Oh I see, Russia stole the Stg44s "look"?

How can it be a knock off when its mechanically different? That makes no sense. Is the Czech Sa 58 a knockoff of the AK47 just because it looks the same?

I think that if the Stg44 and AK47 have totally different mechanics, then the AK47 cannot be even close be called a knock off...thats ridiculous to call the concept of a smaller calibre assault rifle as a German only design. May I remind you, Mikhail Kalashnikov started the design in late 1941...Also the AK47 has more in common with the M1 Garand than the Stg-44, and finally even if the AK was a ripoff it was much more successfull as it was more robust, easier to produce and more reliable so whether or not it is a ripoff does not matter as it is an incredible improvement.

[dirtylarrygb 0]

^The AK47 isn't even in the game, and there's a reason why the russians don't use it as their main battle rifle anymore.

Actually, AK-47 was only produced for a short while. The standard version was AKM which is also the version which was produced under licence in other countries.

Just want to add in here that the Ak47/74 AKM etc is actually a German Gun from WW2

Stop spreading that crap. The AK47 has nothing in common with the StG44.

The 47 was a total "concept" knock off of the 44, mechanically they differ but the soviets even copied the factory production line methods the nazi's had used (to start with). And why not ? the soviets had noticed just how good an assault rifle was. The BAR or M14 are a joke vs the 44. Thank god the nazi's didn't make enough of them.

The 44 could even shoot round corners, a twisted barrel and a mirror allowed that. Something the modern US military is now trying with cameras.

You could argue for some time the soviets then had the best Assault Rifle in the world. As the US and European Army's didn't get decent assault rifles till the late 60's in the US and mid 80's in most of europes case.

The m80 and G36 etc etc are now moving very fast ahead.

People argue just how much the 47 is a rip off of the 44, but considering just about all assualt rifles ever since have taken most of it's basic concepts and look pretty darn similar. (look how the g36 even looks like it, 44 and g36 both made in germany!.

German propaganda.

First you say its a copy of the StG44 and now you say its a "concept knock off"? Make up your mind.

The concept of aussault rifles has been around for decades in Russia.

Erm, spanish propaganda, (saying its a total copy is attributed to the designers of the 44 living in spain after the war complaining the russian had copied).

The people who designed the 44/45 fled to spain after WW2 made another design, as the 47 entered service, they went back to germany and formed H&K. Yes the G36 is the modern version of the 44 (and rips of the modular idea of the AK!

Yes it's different in design, but the 44 solved many of the problems and the 47 benefitted from copying a few ideas. Erm note the angle of the magazine for one. M1/2 BAR 90 degree mag AK47 and 44 curved mag hmmmm...

And niether the Germans or Russians invented the first Assualt rifles the french did in 1890 then the italians made an Assualt rifles before the Americans copied with the BAR (which is a good copy of the french attempt).

The 44 was the first "real" as we know it today Assualt Rifle the 47 came soon after and adopted some of the ideas and added more.

But niether russia OR germany invented the Assualt Rifle. germany made the first mass produced modern AR used in combat. The soviet union followed a few years later and was the first super power with a AR equiped army. At the same time the US used battle rilfes and some AR's (BAR M1 etc).

[badlymad 0]

Actually, most people would agree that the first "assault rifle" (e.g one with a low calibre round, capable of selective fire and detachable magazines) would be the Federov of 1916, which was issued in limited numbers to Russian forces during World War I.

In regards to the Kalashnikov, it may look like an STG, but its resemblance is superficial at best. In fact, its gas system has more in common with a M1 Garand, although the STG and the AK both had similar applications.

[LastRifleRound 0]

This is not the place for nationalistic pride.

They all seem pretty damn effective when bullets discharged from their chambers are whizzing past your head.

I think the last thing going through a soldier's mind is "gee, that AK-47 would be so much more intimidating if it weren't a German knock-off. Besides, I'm not afraid because I'm in close range. Those 7mm rounds suck there."

Germany doesn't make the best anything. Neither does Russia, and neither does the USA. Each military has a doctrine it selected and chose a rifle to outfit itself that fit this doctrine the best way possible.

Case in point: USA has switched to primarily urban-centered warfare doctrines. Hence, most all active duty military are trained on a carbine (M4) as opposed to a rifle (M16). Are we to say that the M4 is vastly superior to the M16? No, it just so happens the US army feels that the M4 fits the role they wish filled and supports they way they wish to fight the most.