Automatic Rifles OP

[fatalsushi83]

I actually wish ARs in PR were closer to reality in terms of accuracy. I remember trying to take out guys with controlled single shots at relatively close range (under 100 meters) when there wasn't time to deploy my SAW, and I just couldn't hit them at all because it was so damn inaccurate, hitting completely off the crosshair. Made me feel like I was shooting a paintball gun.

I can't speak from real-life experience but it also seems strange that it takes so long for the deviation to settle. Do people really fire that inaccurately after a sprint? Even hitting a target at 100 meters is nearly impossible unless you wait the full 6-8 seconds. I also don't understand what the logic is for making deviation settle time so much longer for deployed mode other than for balance issues.

[KaB]

The succession of movements in BF2 are extremely fast compared to reality. For example, jumping on two boxes and aim accurately at your target can take you 2 seconds ingame, while it would take around 10 or 20 IRL, considering you're a tired soldier wearing shitload of equipements.
So the deviation is here to simulate those slower movements, as, once you've finished doing them, you need to wait for the real soldier you could be IRL to finish doing them.

[Cossack]

AR's are fine. Like said before, they are killing machines and working even worse than RL counterpart.

[[R-CON]​Frontliner]

Originally Posted by fatalsushi83

I can't speak from real-life experience but it also seems strange that it takes so long for the deviation to settle. Do people really fire that inaccurately after a sprint? Even hitting a target at 100 meters is nearly impossible unless you wait the full 6-8 seconds. I also don't understand what the logic is for making deviation settle time so much longer for deployed mode other than for balance issues.

Well, there's a number of things you have to consider, such as the soldier's fitness and how well one is trained with a rifle, the weight and bulkiness of the gear you're carrying(particularly body armour can be very cumbersome), terrain features(solid ground, sand) and, last but not least, stress and psychological factors. Even under very favourable conditions it takes (some) time for you to be sure that your round will hit the mark, even on rather low distances like a hundred meters, and the settle time is meant to simulate this.

With that said, then we have to consider the limitations of BF2/how BF2 handles stuff, for example that your rifle doesn't sway(which is something you'll not be able to reproduce in reality unless you can rest your rifle), it doesn't tilt even ever so slightly to the side, soldiers don't tire out and you sight into your rifle instantly whilst perfectly aligning the sights. If the game could emulate all of the above according to reality it would allow for a more "natural" and reliable way of knowing when you're ready to fire(Squad Devs, make it so), but even if that were the case, there's still a disconnection between mouse and keyboard, and an actual physical object you have to hold steady, straight and on target in order to hit.
Incidentally these are the reasons why soldiers aren't(? can't speak armies other than the Bundeswehr*) trained in their rifle profiency via videogames.


*Well, there is a simulator for us[AGSHP], but it still works with mock up rifles featuring actual recoil(air pressure cycles the rifle after a "shot") and sensors detecting various parameters in order to improve proficiency rather than mouse, keyboard and accuracy statistics.

[LakeMole]

I still believe deviation is too little on all weapons, US army uses 250k bullets per insurgent killed.
US forced to import bullets from Israel as troops use 250,000 for every rebel killed - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

Obviously, we should not increase deviation to those numbers, but it would be nice to know what the current bullet per insurgent is in PR and make some changes based on that. .98 had good deviation in my opinion.

[KaB]

Originally Posted by LakeMole

.98 had good deviation in my opinion.

I second that.

[tankninja1]

Isn't the point of ARs to be a little bit OP?

I mean they should be a feared weapon that you wouldn't just blindly rush at.

[LakeMole]

Originally Posted by tankninja1

Isn't the point of ARs to be a little bit OP?

The argument is that ARs are supposed to lay down suppressing fire to allow the rest of your squad to flank the enemy, call in CAS, or call in armor to take out the enemy like modern armies do. The problem with this is that infantry squads don't need to call support because they're unrealistically effective, and likewise don't have the time to call in support. When most engagements lasts less than minute you cannot call in support.

By nerfing ARs, you're effectively removing it from play because why use it as a suppressive weapon when every other rifle is a dead accurate laser beam? You would have to increase the deviation of all weapons to make the AR viable again.

[fatalsushi83]

KaB, just let us fire the new BAR :P

[zloyrash]

Originally Posted by LakeMole

I still believe deviation is too little on all weapons.
.98 had good deviation in my opinion.

from 3:00
https://youtu.be/-mSxXXpapwQ?t=3m