Weapon Balance

[Purplehasiso 10]

So if every U.S. weapon was used by only the U.S. team and vice versa for the russin team, would it be balanced?

I personally dont believe so but im not familiar with every weapon in the game.

[LibertyBull 2]

I do not have Arma 2 so I cannot answer from a game perspective.

Seeing as this is a simulator, I dont think balance was BI's main focus. But I can see why you would want balance for some gametypes.

Well I think if you are carefull in your selection of the weapons you could make it balanced.

[celery 8]

You get killed so easily by any weapon that their differences are a matter of preference. Almost all weapons have equivalents on the other side.

[Purplehasiso 10]

What about the javelin or VSS? The javelin is a one of a kind(major advantage for U.S.). Im not sure that the U.S. has a silenced sniper rifle, but if they didnt then it would be an advantage for the Russians then but not moreso than a javgelin.

[Inkompetent 0]

"Balance through unbalance." Different weapons will encourage different styles of play, but will also have to be taken in mind by the mission (since OPFOR probably won't have advantage in numbers they need to be able to get closer through concealment to get their AKs in range).

And just remove the lol-ACOG and stuff from the weapons and the BLUFOR will have a harder time as well, since they too are limited to ironsights, making long range accuracy (seeing impact points and stuff) quite a lot harder.

[Murklor 10]

Are we talking about a free-for-all selection or limited classes?

Free for all would probably be pretty balanced in the infantry section since 90% of the teams will carry SVD+RPG or DMR+SMAW. The balance of the other weapons is irrelevant. A few will carry machineguns which are infantry killers but wont carry any RPG/SMAW. The rest will either be fools or gimp themselves on purpose, either way they cannot be counted.

With a limited class selection we're talking about a whole other situation... With most units being riflemen, the M16/4 vs AK series would probably be fairly balanced since it will depend more on position and superiority rather than your DMR sight and standoff range. I do miss this in Arma 2, need to play less Domination :/

[nkenny 1057]

DMR

Take the west sniper initially a five round 7.62.x51mm Bolt Action. Give it a dual setting scope (one good for CQB, the other equal to the sniper rifle). Give it a 20 round box magazine and a semi-auto rate of fire. Oh, and retain the accuracy.

By the almighty FSM.. Having said that I don’t think the DMR is fundamentally unbalanced; it just the weapon best adapted to the typical ARMA2 engagement ranges and situations. Particularly coop, but it carries over reasonably well for pbp situations.

Assault and Field craft

Even so I find it surprisingly possible to do well at closer ranges (sub-200), provided you’ve got the patience to get there, in tooth and nail PvP. To a large part because the many PvPers are so accustomed to long engagement ranges. They don’t expect you to pop up within comparatively close distances.

They key here is field craft. Utilizing your terrain to maximum advantage. The imperative is NOT getting tunnel vision. Just as you are exploiting the tunnel vision of others, you must guard your own flank. I find simply not taking a scope the easiest way to accomplish this, but each to his own.

In the end…

Arma2 isn’t a balanced game. It shouldn’t be and was probably never meant to be.

- k

[whisper 0]

Are we talking about a free-for-all selection or limited classes?

Free for all would probably be pretty balanced in the infantry section since 90% of the teams will carry SVD+RPG or DMR+SMAW. The balance of the other weapons is irrelevant. A few will carry machineguns which are infantry killers but wont carry any RPG/SMAW. The rest will either be fools or gimp themselves on purpose, either way they cannot be counted.

With a limited class selection we're talking about a whole other situation... With most units being riflemen, the M16/4 vs AK series would probably be fairly balanced since it will depend more on position and superiority rather than your DMR sight and standoff range. I do miss this in Arma 2, need to play less Domination :/

Well, I'd argue keeping a good ol' M4ACOG-M203 or XM8 + GL vs DMR, depending on terrain feature. If I'm not in the open, forced for 200+m engagements, I'd use the former 2 guns over DMR, if you ask me, a GL is always handy, and full auto in real CQB mayhem can help (in PvP).

+ compared to real sniper rifle, DMR does low damage at long range

And w/ limits, well.... I'm less confortable with the AK, I find Kobra sights not helpfull in-game (like Holo sights, I don't know how helpfull they are IRL, but in-game.... well, smtg's not good). I prefer Aimpoint.

Same with ACOG vs PSO, but in this case, it's more a question of experience with both, I've used far more ACOG than PSO in A2, so I'm simply not used to PSO anymore.

So all in all, I find US infantry weapons better, for me.

[Sirex1 10]

The automatic carbine on the soldiers really dose'nt matter, what matter is how many machinguns you have.

[Heatseeker 0]

The weapons are more or less balanced, its just that everyone runs around with DMR's and SMAW's. The DMR is just way overpowered.

M16A4, AK74 and AK107, betwean the 3 and all their variants you can find a balance.

[suhsjake 1]

Its not the fact that each weapon has its own strengths and weakness. Some weapons don't have counter parts on each side some do have close ones, but its not what weapons each side has, but what tactics you use to employ them.

[galzohar 31]

If you're talking side balance, there are stuff like:

- USMC having SMAW which is much superior to the RPG-7.

- The VSS that has no US counterpart.

- DMR has more zoom and a bigger magazine than the SVD, and the M107 has more rounds and a variable zoom unlike the KSVk.

- PKP has no real US counterpart (aka MG with a scope).

In the end, though, it's up to the mission maker to decide which weapons to include/exclude to make his mission balanced. BIS should only worry about actually making weapons more realistic (which they did fail quite miserably and should fix it). If the weapons were as good as their real life versions I'd be more than happy and wouldn't care about balance, as again, it's the mission maker's responsibility to make a scenario that will be as realistic as possible while keeping it balanced and playable. It's not BIS's job to balance the missions we're making (though I have to say the few missions they did make are quite terrible).

[nkenny 1057]

Not to forget the US plethora of nightvision goggles. Even so you can do well with the right tool for the wrong situation. Balance be damned.

-k

Edited December 8, 2009 by NkEnNy

[galzohar 31]

AFAIK NVGs are exactly the same on both sides.

[An Fiach 10]

The DMR is just way overpowered.

:eek: :eek: :eek: Explain

[celery 8]

:eek: :eek: :eek: Explain

20 rounds, as powerful as M24, rapid semi-automatic fire good for close and long range fights. Only VSS (with 20 round mag) is more imba.

[An Fiach 10]

20 rounds, as powerful as M24, rapid semi-automatic fire good for close and long range fights. Only VSS (with 20 round mag) is more imba.

uses the same rounds as an m24

[Inkompetent 0]

uses the same rounds as an m24

But it is a semi-automatic weapon and not a bolt action and thus *shouldn't* have just as good performance with the round as the M24. Due to how the game works it does though.

[walker 0]

Hi all

With ACE this subject just got whole lot more complicated. My own Preference a 240 or PKM with optics. Hiting power of 7.62. Choice of optics or CQB iron sight. So almost sniper single shot capability, with short burst a high probality of kill. In CQB hose and pray in panic mode or CQB Iron sights up and single and burst fire. Short & long burst supression at long range.

Then depending on task, a Rucksack with AT or Automatic grenade laucher.

If I am part of Gun Group I pre place some AT and AP mines and Claymores to my front and or flanks.

Working from a vehicle lets you carry it all. If I am hoofing it then walking only no running. Dump the sack before or at the start of the battle.

As to balancing missions that is always down to the mission maker. Balance numbers against superior weapons. Balance Armor with terrain and fuel constraints. Balance superior weapons and numbers with ROE and asymetric targets. War is not game with balance; it is inherently unbalanced.

Deal with it.

Kind Regards walker

Edited December 11, 2009 by walker

[An Fiach 10]

But it is a semi-automatic weapon and not a bolt action and thus *shouldn't* have just as good performance with the round as the M24. Due to how the game works it does though.

Really not much difference. I would agree that rapid firing it needs to have a greater impact on the ability to aim. The major difference between the two is reach. I do not know if BIS accurately modeled the difference in accuracy over long ranges, I haven't tested. Inside of 500m though you won't see a significant difference.

---------- Post added at 08:02 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:38 AM ----------

Just tested with ACE and it seems they both have the same accuracy at range which is wrong (tested at 800m) but if you rapid fire the m21 does disperse a good bit though not quite enough for my personal tastes.

[galzohar 31]

DMR allows you to rather easily kill targets up to 800m and even more while standing. IRL as far as I know you shouldn't be able to hit much past 600 while prone with a bipod. It doesn't have the recoil it should have, and the semi-auto disadvantages just aren't simulated (or not simulated well enough), and it is extremely easy to aim while standing. Sure most of these problems are present in other weapons as well, but when added to the fact the weapon has a variable zoom scope, 7.62 rounds and still allows for an AT weapon makes it overpowered - not just compared to other weapons, but also (and more importantly) overpowered compared to the real life DMR.

[An Fiach 10]

DMR allows you to rather easily kill targets up to 800m and even more while standing. IRL as far as I know you shouldn't be able to hit much past 600 while prone with a bipod. It doesn't have the recoil it should have, and the semi-auto disadvantages just aren't simulated (or not simulated well enough), and it is extremely easy to aim while standing. Sure most of these problems are present in other weapons as well, but when added to the fact the weapon has a variable zoom scope, 7.62 rounds and still allows for an AT weapon makes it overpowered - not just compared to other weapons, but also (and more importantly) overpowered compared to the real life DMR.

The ability to carry an at weapon does not make it overpowered, you can do that with most weapons. Most of what you described effects pretty much every weapon in game. Like I said it can shoot accurately for way too far. I agree about recoil but that isn't much of an issue anyway, just annoying for not being accurate. There isn't any real disadvantage to this weapon having semi auto other than accuracy at long range, which we both have pointed out. I imagine this might be fixable via the magazine configs, not sure though. Seems BIS just copied the mag from the m24/m40.

The issue I see with range though is that you generally do not engage from more than 5-600m anyway. Especially in PvP maps. Anyway, this is about overall balance and the game is balanced. It would be nice to have more variants on either side but victory and defeat in this game is dependant on so much more than equipment differences.

[galzohar 31]

My point was that even though these issues are mostly present in other weapons, they cause the most imbalance with this weapon because they come in addition to other too useful stuff, on a weapon that should be quite clumsier than your average assault rifle and not as accurate/powerful as a real sniper rifle. M107 has the same issues, but it's not as overpowered because it doesn't allow for an AT weapon at all - not a "good" way to balance things but it does add to balance (that is, I'd much rather see things balanced by realism, as in have the weapons actually behave realistically).

Remember that IRL bolt action isn't just more accurate, it's higher velocity and thus higher damage as well. And when you actually have to go prone in a good position to get a good shot off rather than shoot from the standing position from anywhere, the advantage of the semi-auto becomes not nearly as important compared to actually getting that 1 shot kill. There are reasons RL snipers use M24 and not DMR, but those reasons are practically non-existent in the game due to lack of realism.

At the end, make weapons (and the rest of the game) realistic and leave the rest of the balancing to the mission makers is the way to go, but it just not happening - not even with ACE2 beta. That is rather frustrating considering this is the only game on the market that tries to maintain any kind of realism.

[nkenny 1057]

AFAIK NVGs are exactly the same on both sides.

But not issued to the same extent. In generic russian forces only Squad and Teamleaders have NVGs (as I recall)

To make matters worse the DMR is easily comparable to the russian Dragunov. Aside from the fact that the Dragunov has only one scope setting (long range) and a 10 round magazine. Again the DMR offers superior performance.

DMR wouldn't have been half as bad if it replaced the optics with something like an aimpoint and added slightly more dispersion. Come to think of it I haven't checked ACE2's solution. (I usually avoid the weapon like the plague)

-k

[An Fiach 10]

My point was that even though these issues are mostly present in other weapons, they cause the most imbalance with this weapon because they come in addition to other too useful stuff, on a weapon that should be quite clumsier than your average assault rifle and not as accurate/powerful as a real sniper rifle. M107 has the same issues, but it's not as overpowered because it doesn't allow for an AT weapon at all - not a "good" way to balance things but it does add to balance (that is, I'd much rather see things balanced by realism, as in have the weapons actually behave realistically).

Remember that IRL bolt action isn't just more accurate, it's higher velocity and thus higher damage as well. And when you actually have to go prone in a good position to get a good shot off rather than shoot from the standing position from anywhere, the advantage of the semi-auto becomes not nearly as important compared to actually getting that 1 shot kill. There are reasons RL snipers use M24 and not DMR, but those reasons are practically non-existent in the game due to lack of realism.

At the end, make weapons (and the rest of the game) realistic and leave the rest of the balancing to the mission makers is the way to go, but it just not happening - not even with ACE2 beta. That is rather frustrating considering this is the only game on the market that tries to maintain any kind of realism.

Having used them in real life the DMR is a dream to use and is not clumsy at all. The higher velocity results in the higher accuracy at range for bolt actions (I mean longer distances) the other factor is the barrel but the DMR uses a match grade barrel, not the standard M1A/M14 barrel. Snipers use many different weapons in the military, depending on the targets they are deployed to engage but yes, the M24 is the standard rifle that they use.

I fully agree with you, realism must be paramount and makes the game much more enjoyable. I don't know if the ACE guys can correct this or not but I'm sure they would be happy to given that they aim for the realism the game doesn't offer.