rifles gripes

[Siddhi]

i find it extremly irritating that a 300m an ak-47 seems to have the same lethality as a stg-77 (steyer aug). i am well acquainted with both and find it completly implausible. on average i would say at 300m, the stg-77 is probably 2 or 3 times as lethal at a -47. when the stg-77 was introduced in australia they had to compleltly recalibre the ranges as it was so much more accurate than a m16a2.

it is possible o/c to simply add improved optics (10) and a firecontrol rating to each unit so equipped, but that kind of spoils the point.

[DRG]

Open MOBHack, Open the Australian OOB, go to weapon 8 and change accuracy to 6 and that should remove that "extremly irritating" minor problem.

Don

[PlasmaKrab]

That's right, how come (nearly) all assault rifles have the same accuracy and HEK value? Would it tip the balance too much to add accuracy to scoped rifles (or actually more accurate ones like the G-3, AUG, SAR-21...) or HEK to ones with heavier calibre / bigger fire volume?
Does it make these weapons too lethal? Or is it considered to be a statistical fluke or marginal effect regarding the use of these weapons on the field?

[Listy]

I have a question, why do assualt rifles with a scope get acc 6? is this some kind of special code? Like the 222Ap code?

[JaM]

Guys, Rifle weapon in SPMBT dont represent one rifle. It is acronym for all rifles in squad. In game all infantry squads gets bonus due to their training. With game mechanics it is hard to model assault rifles accuratelly, and those minor technical things dont have such overhelming impact as a training.

[Sewter]

I think that the universal rifle ratings help infantry battles to be more interesting. In SP2, one squad could eliminate a plt because of highly accurate rifles! To me, that made infantry scenarios less appealing. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/fear.gif

[DRG]

Listy said:
I have a question, why do assualt rifles with a scope get acc 6? is this some kind of special code? Like the 222Ap code?



It's added to make the people who think the scopes make a world of difference happy that there is a slightly higher accuracy number. It makes about |*| this much difference in game terms. ( slight... I'm not saying it makes NO difference but I doubt any battles are tipped one way of the other becasue of it ) There is NO inherant "accuracy" in a rifle as measured in real combat terms. A rifle is no more or less dangerous than the man holding it and you can give a 40 year old AK to a "motivated" infantryman and he'll do all it was intended to do just as well as if he were handed a high tech plastic wonder weapon.( and he'll be able to clean it faster ) So giving an AK47 to a unit with 90 experience and morale will produce much better results than a 70 unit with a Styer. Certainly sitting all nice and comfy on a firing range you can produce tighter 10 round groups on a piece paper using a Steyer AUG than you can with an AK-47. I know, I've fired them both, but that's not how they are used in the real world. IF you aim you'll do better with the AUG at distance in single shot encounters..... IF you aim. Most times "aiming" is a luxury in combat.

Also, everyone needs to be reminded this is not a game of individual infantrymen. It's a game where you could be fighting in an area 8km x 10km with 20+ rifle companies and at that scale what we have in the game now works pretty much as intended



Don

[Shadowcougar]

If you battles get down to the rifle makes the difference. Then you have more problems that how a rifle performs.

[Listy]

( and he'll be able to clean it faster )



Sorry, what?

You clean AK's?? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

[Siddhi]

[quote]

It's added to make the people who think the scopes make a world of difference happy that there is a slightly higher accuracy number. It makes about |*| this much difference in game terms. ( slight... I'm not saying it makes NO difference but I doubt any battles are tipped one way of the other becasue of it ) There is NO inherant "accuracy" in a rifle as measured in real combat terms.[quote]



hmm, i'm not sure what you consider "real combat terms" to be. if you think that means firing from the hip, well, i agree that the differences diminish quite radically (although even then they are some key differences, ROF and recoil being only two). for me however "RCT" would mean using a weapon as it is intended and the basic training indicates - in case of the Stg-77 it means taking a position that mandates the use of the sight down to 80m range (where u switch to burst and dispense with the sights). this is what is used in "RCT" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif, both in manuvers, Bosnia, and apparently East Timor. If your argument was correct everyone would buy ak-47s.
[quote]

A rifle is no more or less dangerous than the man holding it and you can give a 40 year old AK to a "motivated" infantryman and he'll do all it was intended to do just as well as if he were handed a high tech plastic wonder weapon.( and he'll be able to clean it faster ) So giving an AK47 to a unit with 90 experience and morale will produce much better results than a 70 unit with a Styer
[quote]


agree in principle but disagree in practice - the above example is certainly wrong in my book with the exception of possible rally (pinned under fire) concerns.
[quote]
Certainly sitting all nice and comfy on a firing range you can produce tighter 10 round groups on a piece paper using a Steyer AUG than you can with an AK-47. I know, I've fired them both, but that's not how they are used in the real world. IF you aim you'll do better with the AUG at distance in single shot encounters..... IF you aim. Most times "aiming" is a luxury in combat.[quote]


hmm, i'm not sure what you consider "real combat terms" to be. if you think that means firing from the hip, well, i agree that the differences diminish quite radically (although even then they are some key differences, ROF and recoil being only two). for me however "RCT" would mean using a weapon as it is intended and the basic training indicates - in case of the Stg-77 it means taking a position that mandates the use of the sight down to 80m range (where u switch to burst and dispense with the sights). this is what is used in "RCT", both in manuvers, Bosnia, and apparently East Timor. If your argument was correct everyone would buy ak-47s.

.[quote]

Certainly sitting all nice and comfy on a firing range you can produce tighter 10 round groups on a piece paper using a Steyer AUG than you can with an AK-47..[quote]


the steyer does 4 round bursts , as it simply is full-auto 1 second squeeze. i never heard of firing continous full-auto on the range except for the SAW and SMG mods (sounds fun though)
.[quote]

IF you aim you'll do better with the AUG at distance in single shot encounters..... IF you aim. Most times "aiming" is a luxury in combat..[quote]


totally disagree, intergral to basic training. don't believe me, ask the ozzies

[quote]

Also, everyone needs to be reminded this is not a game of individual infantrymen. It's a game where you could be fighting in an area 8km x 10km with 20+ rifle companies and at that scale what we have in the game now works pretty much as intended.[quote]


i would imagine however that is a game of technology. there should be no question as to the comparison of individual rifle technology on the average combat power.

[Siddhi]

goodness, i humbly apologise for the mis-post of the century. it so wonderfully F-k that i will leave it for all to admire http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Stirling]

That is easily the most beautiful post I have ever seen. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/shock.gif

[Siddhi]

Stirling said:
That is easily the most beautiful post I have ever seen. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/shock.gif



isn't it? i thought it such a perfect visual rendition of the discussion....:)

[DRG]

Listy said:


( and he'll be able to clean it faster )



Sorry, what?

You clean AK's?? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif



If there's a stream handy....

[DRG]

i would imagine however that is a game of technology. there should be no question as to the comparison of individual rifle technology on the average combat power.

--------------------------------------------------

If you wish to experiment with different combinations of accuracy, HE kill and range for rifles then run tests as to how those changes affect gameplay and REALLY look at the results objectivly.....please, be my guest. Have fun. make sure you don't turn everyone carrying an AUG into supersoldier. We already ran those tests and that's why the numbers we use in the game are the number we use.

The "real combat terms" I mentioned in regards to rifle usage is training and experience. They are the main factors on how well any given weapon works on the battlefield and that co-incidentally is also how it works in the game. The better the experience and moral, the better the results A rifle is just a useless lump of steel, wood and plastic in untrained hands, It has no "accuracy" until given to someone capable of using it and that's were experince and moral come int.

The bottom line in game terms a rifle is a rifle and we've already gone through this debate and the decision was made to treat all modern assualt weapons equally becasue saying an AK is a 1 accuracy and a M16 a 3 simply does NOT make a change in game play . ( but it does to people who scroll through the OOB's looking for things like this ... would we be having this discussion if the M16 were a 3 accuracy in the OOB??) Weapons issued with scopes have a higher accuracy number ( and others have been added in the new OOB's like the AUG ) but it has a very small effect on the game. The rifle does not win battles, the soldier carrying it does and that's what you'll see in the game as well. The nations with the better weaponry always have better experience and moral numbers and those are what carry the battle. Tweaking the nations carrying an M16 to 3 from 1 makes next to no difference but increasing the experience from 65 to 70 does. Giveing M1A2's to the Egyptians does not make them equal to American crews in the same tank. Same basic weapon though.

Don

[kevineduguay1]

The basic infantry rifle can make a differenc, I am with Don on this point, The man that fires the weapon makes it what it is.

In the US I fired the Odd AK knock-offs. They were not accurate at all. But on the other hand almost every SKS rifle I shot, shot the crap out of an AK at 200 yds. Most kept the rounds in the black of a 25 yrd NRA pistol target at that range. Thats a 8 or 10 in diameter area.
M1 Garand is about a inch tighter. This also depends on the rifle.
M1A is about the same. Newer rifles peform better.

Many squads in Iraq now have 1 or 2 men carrying M1As because the M16 lacks hitting power. Durring the taking of Falugia (hope I selled it right) some US troops slung their M16s and carried pump shot guns through the stair wells and buildings of that city.

[Siddhi]

i don't think anyone would disagree with ye old yarn that the gun dosen't do the killing, the solider does. however, we are NOT talking about invididual kills but the STATISCAL EFFECT that different equipment and training has on overall lethality.

you say that you cannot think of many battles where the rifle made a difference, while i am not sure either i would guess that the israelis and south africans can offer you load of examples. personaly i can say that in bosnia- bihac in 1994 everyone was trying deperatly to get their hands on captured R-4s, as they were leagues more efficent then the AKM or AK-74. it is widely said that it even played a decisive role in 2 corps defense of the city but i not really able to provide a link for that...

...the point here is RANGE. when you have engagements over 200m accuracy varies greatly, and even well-trained soldiers will have problems compensating (you know those pitch-fork sights on an ak? can u compare that with a *designed* scoped rifle.) i don't play with the OOBs and haven't tried your suggestion - i am sure it is a good one - but i go on net effect. when a squad of infantry (exp.70) dug in on level ground and firing AUGs at a 3mph enemy squad with equal proficency *over open ground* 300m away you would expect a massacre - or in the very least 3-4 kills of an 8 man squad. presently i am averaging 1, 2 if very lucky. that simply does not work for me.

the irregulars in irak & somalia are not always hopeless with firearms - some of them by all accounts are as a good shot as you are - however REAL COMBAT condtions (not only vietnam jungles) are 300m engagements, not 50, and accuracy matters.

no mistake it is a great game but given the general grognard level in it as well as the importance of infantry combat more attention has to be paid to the rifle modeling.

[Siddhi]

DRG said:
Giveing M1A2's to the Egyptians does not make them equal to American crews in the same tank. Same basic weapon though.
Don



btw on that note, i was told by a canadian with the RGJ over here that he thought the abrams going to egypt were 'export' versions without chobam armor? is there something to that?

[JaM]

They have chobham, but not with DU panels...

[kevineduguay1]

SKS carbine in the Romanian OOB only has a HE Kill or 1 when all other Nations I checked with this weapon has a HE Kill of 2.

I did not go through all the Nations so it may have to be done.

[DRG]

kevineduguay1 said:
SKS carbine in the Romanian OOB only has a HE Kill or 1 when all other Nations I checked with this weapon has a HE Kill of 2.

I did not go through all the Nations so it may have to be done.



Unfortunately the E. German, Czech and Libyan versions are also 1 while all others are 2. I'll put it on the list for the next upgrade

Don

[kevineduguay1]

Thank you Don!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smile.gif