M107 & KSVK anti-materiel

[Cpt Bollock 10]

I was doing some testing in the editor and both thease guns and they feel rather weak against light vehicles.It takes almost a whole mag to blow up a jeep and 4-5 shots for a car,even when firing straight at the bonet from 20 yards...:eek:..I was just after some feedback and other peoples thoughts, maybe we should be able to switch to the explosive round?

And take consideration we have have to leave the AT-AA in the armoury when using thease rifles, they are also limited on ammo compared to other sniper rifles.

[Beagle 684]

Why should the rifles blow something up with one or two shots?

If you want such effect use a appropriate weapon. There is no place für "Warheads" to "blow something up" in such a small projectile.

You wishing is very hollywood like.

[icfhoop 0]

Well the M107 and KSVK alike are meant for disabling vehicles. So yes I agree with Cpt Bollock.

[Steakslim 1]

Don't they still disable the vehicles anyways? Disable doesn't mean the same as causing it to blow up. Causing damage to the right part of a vehicle will stop it. Shit if you must, shoot out a tire, the fastest and best way to stop AI in a wheeled vehicle that I know of, specially with the big rifles.

[NoRailgunner 0]

M107 and KSVK are heavy rifles (~14kg) + .50 caliber ammo and such rifles arent that good to handle like assault rifles.

Disabling vehicles etc doesnt mean to make great explosions like in movies or action series. Imho 1 or 2 shots in the right place have to be enough to stop cars.

Didnt test it with AI - are they using M107 + KSVK still in "auto-fire" mode (instead of precise single-shot)?

[Cpt Bollock 10]

This is a good video of the M107 vs a vehicle and this is without the exploding rounds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4Toko3JDEQ&annotation_id=annotation_187125&feature=iv

and a shot from Iraq

And wiki on the explosive ammo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raufoss_Mk_211

I think its far to say with the commonly used mk211 round it would easily blow up a jeep or car:) and with a placed shot with a normal .50 cal bullet it should still do the job

---------- Post added at 08:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:33 PM ----------

Why should the rifles blow something up with one or two shots?

If you want such effect use a appropriate weapon. There is no place für "Warheads" to "blow something up" in such a small projectile.

You wishing is very hollywood like.

If you shoot explosive rounds into a chopper like I showed in the video its only going to end up in one place my friend.If you check the M107 under Wiki all will become clear it's main targets are aircrafts and light vehicles.

Edited July 7, 2009 by Cpt Bollock

[akd42 10]

This is a good video of the M107 vs a vehicle and this is without the exploding rounds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4Toko3JDEQ&annotation_id=annotation_187125&feature=iv

and a shot from Iraq

And wiki on the explosive ammo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raufoss_Mk_211

I think its far to say with the commonly used mk211 round it would easily blow up a jeep or car:) and with a placed shot with a normal .50 cal bullet it should still do the job

---------- Post added at 08:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:33 PM ----------

If you shoot explosive rounds into a chopper like I showed in the video its only going to end up in one place my friend.If you check the M107 under Wiki all will become clear it's main targets are aircrafts and light vehicles.

First of all, it is not even clear if the game intends to model Mk. 211 Mod 0 ammunition. It's just as likely that standard API ammunition is modelled.

Mk. 211 Mod 0 contains a whopping 0.84 grams of Composition A explosive. That is less than the weight of small paper clip, and that is not going to blow any vehicle up. The purpose of the explosive filling is to injure crew with tiny fragments from the bullet jacket after it has penetrated through armor.

[chris64 0]

Does that mean that currently the M107 and such can't stop jeeps even when they are fired directly into the engine block? I don't know because I don't have the game but if so that should be addressed, as long as there isn't an explosion when you do disable a car :) .

[kklownboy 43]

it would be best if cars and stuff didnt blow up.. they dont do it in real life...yeah you might have a gas tank that is low( not diesel) and full of gas pressure, then it will go boom some if you hit the tank.. but nothing else will blow.. then you would have to have ammo inside that went up, but to really blow would have to go at the same time... so explosions = hollywood. The damage models are lame when it comes to that stuff.

[mr.g-c 6]

Dude, if you search for realism in this "simulation", especially in the weapons part, then im sorry but you are playing the wrong game. As long as there is a hitpoint model and no real penetration model, with its after effects like spalling/fragmentation, you can forgot such wished realism. Though im of course on your side as i love realism and Arma2 is just a shooter for me as it lacks of so much simulated realism.... Arma1 with ACE1 was 100times better than Arma2 in this area.

Mods like ACE2 which aim for realism might change all that in future however.

Edited July 7, 2009 by mr.g-c

[Cpt Bollock 10]

First of all, it is not even clear if the game intends to model Mk. 211 Mod 0 ammunition. It's just as likely that standard API ammunition is modelled.

Mk. 211 Mod 0 contains a whopping 0.84 grams of Composition A explosive. That is less than the weight of small paper clip, and that is not going to blow any vehicle up. The purpose of the explosive filling is to injure crew with tiny fragments from the bullet jacket after it has penetrated through armor.

The game states there anti-materiel sniper rifles look it up on wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-materiel_rifle:) and they have the same effect as all other sniper rifles in the game after 2 or 3 hits on a vehicle it will stop.My real point here is what the points of even using them if you can have a normal sniper rifle and an AT/AA strapped to your back and about 6 more rounds of ammo... oh and the recoil is 10 times worse.

People keep saying this game is a sim blah..blah..blah how many many snipers in ghillie suits have AA & AT weapons with them,why not just give them the right rounds for the anti-materiel rifles and let them have more of an effect on light vehicles.

Just about every site on the net claims the can disable vehicles, aircrafts, and even radar/communications equipment... but believe what you want to believe my friend:cool:.Did you even watch the Iraq video I linked with the explosive round?,I think that's more than enough to take out a jeep if it was fired at the bonnet.

[toloquta 10]

Dude, if you search for realism in this "simulation", especially in the weapons part, then im sorry but you are playing the wrong game. As long as there is a hitpoint model and no real penetration model, with its after effects like spalling/fragmentation, you can forgot such wished realism. Though im of course on your side as i love realism and Arma2 is just a shooter for me as it lacks of so much simulated realism.... Arma1 with ACE1 was 100times better than Arma2 in this area.

Mods like ACE2 which aim for realism might change all that in future however.

I'm definitely disappointed with the level of realism in ArmA 2 on almost every level. I was expecting more. Looking forward to something like ACE2. Of course an official patch to fix some of the realism issues would be awesome, but I'm not expecting that to happen.

Main areas I hope to see improvement:

Real damage model

Different ammo types

Rifle elevation adjustments

Physics

Hiding in grass has no effect past grass draw distance

Wish the developers would go back and look at ACE and put some of those features in...

[mr.g-c 6]

I'm definitely disappointed with the level of realism in ArmA 2 on almost every level. I was expecting more. Looking forward to something like ACE2. Of course an official patch to fix some of the realism issues would be awesome, but I'm not expecting that to happen.

Main areas I hope to see improvement:

Real damage model

Different ammo types

Rifle elevation adjustments

Physics

Hiding in grass has no effect past grass draw distance

Wish the developers would go back and look at ACE and put some of those features in...

After ~9 years with the release of Arma2 i finally realized it - the Devs or the real Decision-Makers named Maruk+Suma, don't care at all what we were suggesting in many areas, not only the realism part, even though its ESSENTIAL for a "Military Simulation", like they call it (ROFL, nothing to rant about here).

They make their game how they like it with the biggest financial success in mind. That this big "mass-success" was so far never reached, besides OFP1 with a strong Publisher kicking in their backs, is a different story though.

Me and others were already in 2006 suggesting, no sorry we were "whining" for a proper Q&A and a real Consulting to be taken by BIS.

Of course the closminded guys here registered in this Forums then called you bad words like "complainers", "morons", "you dont get the bigger picture", bla bla bla, its everytime the same when you open other peoples eyes.... "Hey there is a world out there without BIS games..." and "Hey, its not that today NO bugfree games are getting released and that you HAVE to stick with a BI-Title"....

There were some rare posts by the Decision-Makers, or in the famous Suma-Interview, where you can hear/read in between the lines, what they are really were always aiming for.

Famous Quote by Maruk, as me and others were suggesting a simple 5 seconds "turbine Spinup" at Helicopters before their main Engine starts (just those easy little things for immersion), he said something like "The Engine Spinup times are already quite long for typical gamers habits"

Do i have to add anything here?

Arma2 is a simple Shooter in a Big Open World with a fantastic community, which mostly fully exhausts the given capabilites modding wise.

I only bought Arma1 because of the Mods and so i did with Arma2, even though i was hoping like 99% of the others, that this time they do it "right"..... what happened we all know.

What remians is again the desperate waiting for the modding-community to fix/add all the things we need. The Gigantic success of ACE-Mod for Arma1 actually must have told BIS something....At least i thought that after i saw constant ~100 Servers with ACE playing and even our mostly non-violent RPG-Community was begging for ACE-Mod powered RPG-Missions....

Edited July 7, 2009 by mr.g-c

[Cpt Bollock 10]

I'm definitely disappointed with the level of realism in ArmA 2 on almost every level. I was expecting more. Looking forward to something like ACE2. Of course an official patch to fix some of the realism issues would be awesome, but I'm not expecting that to happen.

Main areas I hope to see improvement:

Real damage model

Different ammo types

Rifle elevation adjustments

Physics

Hiding in grass has no effect past grass draw distance

Wish the developers would go back and look at ACE and put some of those features in...

Im alittle disappointed but the problem is there is so little choice and Arma is about the best of the bunch...The grass is the biggest problem for me right now and the fact that the AI can see through it.

[TangoRomeo 10]

@ mr.g-c,

i wholly agree with your sentiment that Arma 2 is no simulation, or everything that it could have been, though i wouldn't go as far as liken it to simple shooter game mechanics.

They make their game how they like it with the biggest financial success in mind.

I do not think BIS make their games how *they* like it, but act according to supply and demand. The latter -must not- be in sync with your, or my, understanding of what the game should look and play like. :)

To accuse them of catering also to the casual gamer, is like ranting against an athlete because he sweats. True simulations do have an almost negligible market share, provided there's a publisher for it at all.

I.e., i couldn't find a local dealer for SB Pro Pe, that is until someone pointed me to Okaysoft ... and they are selling it for 129 EUR.

A developer of Graviteam, makers of Steel Fury/ T-72 Balkans on Fire and a Mil. BRDM driving simulator, stated that hardly any publisher today would take the risk of signing an armor simulation.

I also remember the days when R6 first appeared, there was nothing like it. Back then the brand "Tom Clancy" was an acronym for realism and tactical gameplay. Today, titles like HAWX appear under this brand, times have changed for sure. In that sense i think request voiced here in the forums is rather insignificant to have a true impact on the development process. As you said, if anyone is able to pick up and realize our quest for realism, it's the community.

[max power 21]

Does that mean that currently the M107 and such can't stop jeeps even when they are fired directly into the engine block? I don't know because I don't have the game but if so that should be addressed, as long as there isn't an explosion when you do disable a car :) .

The regular kinetic energy rounds would probably do a better job of disabling a car.

@Mr. G-c

:j:

[MPBR 10]

After ~9 years with the release of Arma2 i finally realized it - the Devs or the real Decision-Makers named Maruk+Suma, don't care at all what we were suggesting in many areas, not only the realism part, even though its ESSENTIAL for a "Military Simulation", like they call it (ROFL, nothing to rant about here).

They make their game how they like it with the biggest financial success in mind. That this big "mass-success" was so far never reached, besides OFP1 with a strong Publisher kicking in their backs, is a different story though.

Me and others were already in 2006 suggesting, no sorry we were "whining" for a proper Q&A and a real Consulting to be taken by BIS.

Of course the closminded guys here registered in this Forums then called you bad words like "complainers", "morons", "you dont get the bigger picture", bla bla bla, its everytime the same when you open other peoples eyes.... "Hey there is a world out there without BIS games..." and "Hey, its not that today NO bugfree games are getting released and that you HAVE to stick with a BI-Title"....

There were some rare posts by the Decision-Makers, or in the famous Suma-Interview, where you can hear/read in between the lines, what they are really were always aiming for.

Famous Quote by Maruk, as me and others were suggesting a simple 5 seconds "turbine Spinup" at Helicopters before their main Engine starts (just those easy little things for immersion), he said something like "The Engine Spinup times are already quite long for typical gamers habits"

Do i have to add anything here?

Arma2 is a simple Shooter in a Big Open World with a fantastic community, which mostly fully exhausts the given capabilites modding wise.

I only bought Arma1 because of the Mods and so i did with Arma2, even though i was hoping like 99% of the others, that this time they do it "right"..... what happened we all know.

What remians is again the desperate waiting for the modding-community to fix/add all the things we need. The Gigantic success of ACE-Mod for Arma1 actually must have told BIS something....At least i thought that after i saw constant ~100 Servers with ACE playing and even our mostly non-violent RPG-Community was begging for ACE-Mod powered RPG-Missions....

Why do you say they don't care ?

Did you ever think that while they may care and want to add in xxxx feature, they might not be able to due to time/financial limitations ?

Of course they are going to try and make a product with the biggest financial success, ARE YOU FRIKEN MAD :eek:. Every..I repeat EVERY company / business is there for ONLY 1 REASON ... and thats to make $$.

Sim gaming has always been a compramise between realisim and entertainment..and will always continue to be.

[kocrachon 2]

I love how you guys complain about the realism of one of the only simulation games on a sandbox level made by a team of roughtly 20 some people in a two year period. You expect freaking miracles. If you wanted this game to be 100% realistic you would be looking at another 2-4 years at least. This is a SMALL dev team making a game based off of an engine used by the military.

Be realistic. Look at AA3. Same amount of development time, on a PRE BUILT engine, bigger dev team, and the game is hardly more realistic and just as buggy. And it s a freaking shoebox shooter.

Be realistic people.

I would also like to point out other sim games like Flight Sim X, Lo-Mac, Black Shark, etc.

Even THOSE dont give you 100% realism. They give you ALOT of realism on a FEW things but thats it. The closest thing to a 100% simulation was falcon 4.0 and that game was almost not fun because of how realistic it was.

You guys really need to think about the time and effort it takes this small team to make what you have. Appreciate it or please leave so those of us who are GREATFUL of what the dev team did to get this game out can play in peace with out seeing your cry baby posts and rants in game.

[MPBR 10]

I love how you guys complain about the realism of one of the only simulation games on a sandbox level made by a team of roughtly 20 some people in a two year period. You expect freaking miracles. If you wanted this game to be 100% realistic you would be looking at another 2-4 years at least. This is a SMALL dev team making a game based off of an engine used by the military.

Be realistic. Look at AA3. Same amount of development time, on a PRE BUILT engine, bigger dev team, and the game is hardly more realistic and just as buggy. And it s a freaking shoebox shooter.

Be realistic people.

I would also like to point out other sim games like Flight Sim X, Lo-Mac, Black Shark, etc.

Even THOSE dont give you 100% realism. They give you ALOT of realism on a FEW things but thats it. The closest thing to a 100% simulation was falcon 4.0 and that game was almost not fun because of how realistic it was.

You guys really need to think about the time and effort it takes this small team to make what you have. Appreciate it or please leave so those of us who are GREATFUL of what the dev team did to get this game out can play in peace with out seeing your cry baby posts and rants in game.

Almost agree with all your points...save one..

Falcon 4 was huge Fun for me :D.

And I would ..almost kill...almost.. for its dynamic campaign generator in something like Arma..

I have never seen anyother game come close to the dynamic campaign in Falcon 4.

On that same list of things I would almost kill for ...would be to have a ARMA 2 - wwIIonline offspring...

Anyway, rest of the points were very valid and succint.

[mr.g-c 6]

Hi, nice replies. Im sorry but i don't quite much that time to go deep into detail for every quote. But you could search for my name in the serach-function and you read in other topics my opinion about it.

i wholly agree with your sentiment that Arma 2 is no simulation, or everything that it could have been, though i wouldn't go as far as liken it to simple shooter game mechanics.

If you play this game types since ages maybe you would think different.

I do not think BIS make their games how *they* like it, but act according to supply and demand.

Yes/No in my opinion. In many Polls and whatnot i started here, over 75% wanted much more realism.... In every of the german comments to the game, both by reviewers and comments-functions, people were complaining about the lack of realism.

There was a demand for more realism but it was not fullfilled. BIS took care more about the "possible" broader market of shooter kiddies out there, even though that was wrong like usually.

I.e., i couldn't find a local dealer for SB Pro Pe, that is until someone pointed me to Okaysoft ... and they are selling it for 129 EUR.

A developer of Graviteam, makers of Steel Fury/ T-72 Balkans on Fire and a Mil. BRDM driving simulator, stated that hardly any publisher today would take the risk of signing an armor simulation.

Comapre apples with oragnes here? The Games you are mentioning have nothing in common with OFP/Arma/Arma2. They are very special "niche" games after all.

Why do you say they don't care ?

Did you ever think that while they may care and want to add in xxxx feature, they might not be able to due to time/financial limitations ?

Wrong newbie!

Many things are more easy to add than to waste time on unnneded stuff like a new upgraded Armory, a not really needed (besides campaign) "conversation system" or head-wobble effects, which all of them were not easy to implement too. I could write you 100 thousand more words regarding that but my time is to limitied, sorry.

Sim gaming has always been a compramise between realisim and entertainment..and will always continue to be.

Lol, do you really think you have to tell me that.... ROFL.

Still Facts are that when they would have added real penetration systems to vehicles and even simple tweaks like the muzzle-velocity issue, the "casual gamer" wouldn't be effected much.

I don't think i have to tell here how loud i laughed and cried at the same time as i started Arma2 the first time and i saw that i can kill a M1A2 Tusk with my freaking M9 Handgun again. ~9 waiting and no change, even though one of the most wished featues by community members since ages and so far never really able to realize it with the given modding tools/script commands.

I love how you guys complain about the realism of one of the only simulation games on a sandbox level made by a team of roughtly 20 some people in a two year period. You expect freaking miracles.

They are more than 50 working on Arma2, the external not counted. Please do your Homework, before making false claims to justify your defending opinion as a obviously newbie here.

You expect freaking miracles.

Wrong again. I personally asking for many smaller realism tweaks like ACE did it - the so far Most succesfull BI-Games Mod EVER!!!!!

Only bigger thing i wish for is a penetration model.... together with the already in Alpha versions teased with "Tank Interiors" (God i hope they make into the game at any point in future) and i would be fully satisfied.....

OK get rid of at least half of the ~400 bugs reported so far....lol

I would also like to point out other sim games like Flight Sim X, Lo-Mac, Black Shark, etc.

Even THOSE dont give you 100% realism. They give you ALOT of realism on a FEW things but thats it. The closest thing to a 100% simulation was falcon 4.0 and that game was almost not fun because of how realistic it was.

I wonder why you guys always compare those "true simulations" to Arma2? Arma2 is no simulation, not even close....

The games you mention are extreme... they are extremely simulating one special "branch/part/whatever" and yes i also don't think they are very much fun. I watched at a friends house some hours of Black-Shark and i think this is really just something for hardcore people....

You guys really need to think about the time and effort it takes this small team to make what you have. Appreciate it or please leave so those of us who are GREATFUL of what the dev team did to get this game out can play in peace with out seeing your cry baby posts and rants in game.

LOL i my only response to this.....Obviosuly a newbie....

EDIT: Wait i can add something here for you newbies...

After OFP1, there were not much suggestions made for Arma1, no whining, no complaining, no nothing as the most people simply expected another blockbuster like OFP1 was from BIS.

BIS did advertised/teased Arma1 already with increadible features, like fully dynamic building and whatnot detruction, etc. etc. As Arma1 came out then, it was one of the biggest dissapointments so far.... a large portion of the modders left instantly. All Forums were cluttered with complains, rants, whatever and in my opinion fully justified. The community suffered so terribly from Arma1 its not to put in words.

Then People have learnt from that and made a enormous amount of suggestions, whined a lot what was bad in Arma1, to get BIS attention to change something, to in gods name not make the same mistakes again.....

About the Result, if it would be anyway near "good" i wouldn't have to complain at all. Do you think it is really funny to be not able to even properly play Arma2 with brand new Hardware you exclusively bought for it? Do you think its funny to wait a year or however long it might take until they fix at least some of the worst showstoppers in the camaign at least? I don't think so and yet again i feel extremely cheated by BI, thats why my reaction are not the best, even though i report quite some bugs in the bugtracker for all you guys that we get a bugfree game sooner than later.

Edited July 8, 2009 by mr.g-c

[Hell_Toupee 0]

I wouldn't say its because they don't care its more because its bloody hard, games that really acheive realism do so by focusing on only one thing, eg falcon 4/blackshark/steal beasts etc.

[mr.g-c 6]

I wouldn't say its because they don't care its more because its bloody hard, games that really acheive realism do so by focusing on only one thing, eg falcon 4/blackshark/steal beasts etc.

As i said, i disagree here....

Small realism changes + 1,2 bigger changes like a penetration system with after-effects, etc. would add very very much to the game.

Just buy yourself a copy of Arma1 and try it with ACE-Mod..... believe once played and got used to it, you can't play normal Arma1 or Arma2 anymore.... Its evey single and even simple change which makes the difference in that game.

[Cpt Bollock 10]

I love how you guys complain about the realism of one of the only simulation games on a sandbox level made by a team of roughtly 20 some people in a two year period. You expect freaking miracles. If you wanted this game to be 100% realistic you would be looking at another 2-4 years at least. This is a SMALL dev team making a game based off of an engine used by the military.

Be realistic. Look at AA3. Same amount of development time, on a PRE BUILT engine, bigger dev team, and the game is hardly more realistic and just as buggy. And it s a freaking shoebox shooter.

Be realistic people.

I would also like to point out other sim games like Flight Sim X, Lo-Mac, Black Shark, etc.

Even THOSE dont give you 100% realism. They give you ALOT of realism on a FEW things but thats it. The closest thing to a 100% simulation was falcon 4.0 and that game was almost not fun because of how realistic it was.

You guys really need to think about the time and effort it takes this small team to make what you have. Appreciate it or please leave so those of us who are GREATFUL of what the dev team did to get this game out can play in peace with out seeing your cry baby posts and rants in game.

Basically there are features missing that was in the Novalogics Delta Force series which never even had 3dfx in 1998.If you read most of the posts on realism,you will see that post people are asking for small tweaks not an overhaul of the game engine.

[An Fiach 10]

No need to make excuses for BIS, they dropped the ball on this. They spent more time on visual quality and making a few drag and drop game modules for the editor than making anything right. Yes, they have a small team, but I've seen whole game companies that were smaller then the dev team BIS has that didn't ignore such major factors. The hit point system was a major point of complaint from the last game and was promised to be replaced/improved. It did not happen and once again the community will have to try and do something about it.

Let's be honest, it is not as if they had to come up with a brand new game. BIS deserves credit for the improvements they have made and for adding features that the community felt were needed in the original and so modded in. However, let us also criticize where it is warranted.

[galzohar 31]

There is one thing I can say for BIS's defeinse - their game is probably the best one out there. However, most of the criticisms on these forums are well-justified and are actually asking for things that are needed in the game and would make it worlds better than it is now.