Bayonet/knife poll

[MBot 0]

I don't get it. If the enemy is beyond your muzzle you have to point your rifle at him, either to stab/cut or shoot. If he is closer than your muzzle you can't use the bayonet anyway and you have to resort to a buttstrike. I don't see what the bayonet can do what you can't do with ammo.

I guess it is mostly a psychological factor for the one that is mounting it.

Edit:

I can't express to you enough how difficult it is to hit a moving target at point blank. The change in angle is so massive over short distances.

But exactly the same applies to stabbing someone with your bayonet mounted your our rifle. Your rifle stabs or shoots in the same direction, so why not shoot?

Edited July 13, 2009 by MBot

[Baff1 0]

I'm not sure you can get it without actually trying it for yourself, but I'll attempt to elaborate.

It's not that the bayonet can do anything that the ammo can't, it's that it can do it much easier in those circumstances.

When you play baseball, you swing at the ball.

If it is anywhere in front of you, you are going to connect.

You don't aim you just swing.

The same is true with a spear. You don't aim it, you just thrust it.

This is an intuative physical action.

At 1m range hitting a moving target is an easy operation. A child could do it.

The likelyhood of you connecting a melee blow with someone 1m from you no matter how fast they are moving is very very high. (95%?).

With a rifle, you shoulder the weapon place your head up to the sight and aim.

(By which time he could have already broken through your guard and had you chose to stab instead, he would hopefully be impaled by this point).

You then have to swing your rifle around with one end connected to your shoulder and your head up to it.

You then have to take the most difficult shot there is. One where you have to adjust your aim by very large degree's very fast.

Alternatively you could just shoot from the hip, which would give you the speed advantage, but make that very difficult shot even less accurate.

The likelyhood of you connecting a shot to someone moving fast 1m from you is very low. (10%?).

You think it's an easy shot, simple, and I'm telling you, that isn't. That is the hardest one of all.

Try it for yourself before you make up your mind. Go hunting or go paintballing perhaps. See for yourself.

Edited July 13, 2009 by Baff1

[MBot 0]

By which time he could have already broken through your guard and had you chose to stab instead, he would hopefully be impaled by this point

Sorry I sound like a broken record but if you can impale someone, you can by definition also shoot him. Both acts require your victim to be at the point of your rifle. If you are worried so much you could miss the shot, simply imagine a non-extisting bayonet on your rifle, stab him, and shoot when your muzzle connects his body :)

[Baff1 0]

Why not just simply stab him and not bother?

You are over-engineering the solution mate.

Just stab him.

No need to "pretend to stab him" and then shoot him after you could have stabbed him...

Just stick it up him mate. No pissing about.

Shoot him too if you like. The idea is to kill him.

The only thing I disagree with in any of your opinion so far is the use of the word "simply". The things you assume to be so simple aren't the simplest ways of doing it.

The bayonet is a tool designed to give a fighting rifleman the advantage over another fighting rifleman in melee combat. Simples.

Edited July 13, 2009 by Baff1

[SWIFT88 0]

i think your loosing the whole concept of the bayonet.

Imagine being in a building and being startled by a man with a AK47, while approaching the corner in the hallway. Inital reaction would be to aim and shoot, but depending on distance, it would be quicker to stab the victim with a bayonet.

You know it makes sence

[MBot 0]

Why not just simply stab him and not bother?

You are over-engineering the solution mate.

Just stab him.

No need to "pretend to stab him" and then shoot him after you could have stabbed him...

Just stick it up him mate. No pissing about.

Shoot him too if you like. The idea is to kill him.

The only thing I disagree with in any of your opinion so far is the use of the word "simply". The things you assume to be so simple aren't the simplest ways of doing it.

Of course I didn't mean that literal :) All I am saying is that you don't need a bayonet (and thus making your weapon more cumbersome in CQB) since you can shoot any enemy as quick and reliable as you can stab him.

[Baff1 0]

There is no point you telling me I can reliably shoot at point blank range. I know I can't.

I tried it yesterday. I missed.

I miss more often than I hit at those ranges. Always have, I don't know anyone who doesn't.

In close quarters, the guy who stabs defeats the guy who shoots.

History teaches us.

You don't need a bayonet, but you can't necessarily shoot as quickly and reliably as you can stab at point blank and that's why soldiers are equiped with them and that's why soldiers who deploy them in CQB have repeatedly defeated soldiers that do not, again and again throughout history.

Edited July 13, 2009 by Baff1

[SWIFT88 0]

I don't see what the argument is here?

Bayonets are used in combat for a reason. Google will not help you, and the arguments I have read here are crud.

Unless its a reasonable point to make or you have proven facts, why cant you be happy that some people may want it in game. I for one don't see the point in air to air refueling, but that's some-ones idea and I'm not gonna shot it down, just because the island is too small.

I hope this makes sense, and its not only the British that use them.

[Prydain 1]

People who don't want bayonets are clearly pacifist 13 year old boys. There is no argument against bayonets, people who think otherwise can line up outside the '1337SnIpER' and 'FaST-ROpE NAU!!11!!' threads.

This is a suggestion for bayonets, it is not an invitation for sunlight-dodgers to discuss why they are the centre of the universe in their heads and that bayonets are not useful because they sit on top of a high-rise with a "UBERSNiPER RIFLE, MAN!!!1!" and thus don't need it instead of playing like a human being.

Lets stop thinking of this suggestion as a free and open debate, if you have any objectives to this SUGGESTION, feel free to keep them objections to yourself.

[goose4291 11]

it would be quicker to stab the victim with a bayonet.

There are no VICTIMS of Bayonet attacks.. just honourable opponents.

[EWAAR 0]

I also think bayonets would make a nice addition.

[MEDICUS 0]

Bayonets would perhaps be a nice gimmick, but i don't see any real use for this in ArmA2. The collision inside buildings doesn't give you enough leeway to use it proper. And i don't think you can manage to get close enough to use it outside.

Oh ... and i'm not a 13 year old '1337-FaST-ROpE-SnIpER' ;)

MfG

[mr_centipede 31]

with bayonets, we could make a proper banzai charge.

BANZAI!!!!

[SWIFT88 0]

Bayonets would perhaps be a nice gimmick, but i don't see any real use for this in ArmA2. The collision inside buildings doesn't give you enough leeway to use it proper. And i don't think you can manage to get close enough to use it outside.

Oh ... and i'm not a 13 year old '1337-FaST-ROpE-SnIpER' ;)

MfG

please if you can re-install OFP + Resistance and install the UKF weapons pack and give it a go.... I can asure you its a good and simple way of killing

[IronPants 0]

Excellent thread and suggestion. I've been in melee range quite a few times playing arma, and would love to be able to carry and employ a bayonet! It would have saved my virtual life at least a dozen times. While it's obvious that modern combat is mostly carried out with ranged weapons, some of you are blinded by it and don't seem to realize that melee fighting is intrinsic to infantry warfare no matter the tech level of involved parties.

[NeMeSiS 11]

There is no point you telling me I can reliably shoot at point blank range. I know I can't.

I tried it yesterday. I missed.

I miss more often than I hit at those ranges. Always have, I don't know anyone who doesn't.

In close quarters, the guy who stabs defeats the guy who shoots.

History teaches us.

You don't need a bayonet, but you can't necessarily shoot as quickly and reliably as you can stab at point blank and that's why soldiers are equiped with them and that's why soldiers who deploy them in CQB have repeatedly defeated soldiers that do not, again and again throughout history.

I guess the point he is trying to make is that if you can poke your bayonet in his stomach you can also just push the end of your barrel in this stomach and pull the trigger. ;)

I liked the bayonets in UKF, although personally i prefer a 'press button to stab' instead of an 'automatic stab when enemy < x distance' solution.

Edited July 16, 2009 by NeMeSiS

[-Snafu- 78]

Love this thread, can't believe I just found it now.

Aye, bayonets are needed. I miss them from the UKF infantry addon. It was extremely satisfying gutting an enemy in close quarters. Anybody arguing against it should go try out the UKF addons for OFP.

Cold steel. The AI don't like it up 'em.

[IronPants 0]

I guess the point he is trying to make is that if you can poke your bayonet in his stomach you can also just push the end of your barrel in this stomach and pull the trigger. ;)

Bullets are a finite resource and guns can malfunction (in ACE). So no, you can't just pull the trigger - which makes the point irrelevant to this discussion. If all we ever encountered were ideal situations, we wouldn't need bayonets in the first place and this thread wouldn't exist. Positing situations in which a bayonet is unnecessary as proof that a bayonet is unnecessary is asinine.

[VutherAC 10]

I agree with this. After all, in the very least, what looks cooler?

This?

Or this?

I think it's safe to say, the first one.

[Andi 10]

Reminds me of fanbois of a certain fruit company who buy their products because they look "cooler" than the standard, 1/4th of the price, ones.

Anyway, I couldn't care less if it will be implemented or not. :dancehead:

[TechnoTerrorist303 10]

Guns for show, knives for a pro... nuff said

Bayonets please. I can think of a great many tactical situations I've been in already in this game where they would very handy indeed.

[VutherAC 10]

Reminds me of fanbois of a certain fruit company who buy their products because they look "cooler" than the standard, 1/4th of the price, ones.

Anyway, I couldn't care less if it will be implemented or not. :dancehead:

At the very least. :D

[SWIFT88 0]

what the hell is that gun above ???

Try this one for size

credit for picture (http://plamill.tripod.com//id66.html)

[Baff1 0]

Sems a bit effeminate if you don't mind me saying, try this!

He could cut his own ears off with that beauty.

[todayskiller 10]

and you wonder why brits are dumb? yeah ok the enemies have fully automatic guns, lets go charge at them with a little knive attached to the end. In game I see a knife on my side? lets use that if you get into close combat...not charge with a stupid knife on the end.

---------- Post added at 06:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:07 PM ----------

oh and btw...this is marines not a british unit game...owned plz? I think the guy who made this post loves cod games where you run around and stab people...this is a tactical game...quit trying to have kids come here and poke people.