Why are bolt-actions so gimped for this game?

In Ins2, they served a purpose. They could allow someone to sit back and support by softening up an enemy wave. There were better guns, and better sniper rifles even, but bolt-actions were viable.

Fast forward to Sandstorm, and they're worthless in every sense of the word. The semi-autos are better in literally every category, and they don't gimp you with a ridiculously low fire rate and horrible post-movement accuracy. On top of that, the bolt action doesn't even always 1-shot someone if you hit them center-mass! And if they have heavy armor, you might as well ignore them.

I'm not suggesting we go to Call of Duty jumping 360 no-scope levels of crazy. But it'd be nice if the bolt-action rifles had a place in this game that wasn't already fulfilled better by another gun.

Your second comment is nearly spot on, the problem is, INS2 was the exact same. Semi is better than a bolt, period. If you chose a bolt in either game to some degree you are self nerfing. Lower mag capacity, longer reloads, slower action, but they are fun as hell to run with. Shows some skill if you can pull it off. I have run maps with my friends on INS2 where we are only allowed bolt or pump. It's a lot of fun.

The benefit you gained by choosing bolt over semi in Ins2 was that your looooong range shots are still 1-shot center-mass. The SKS and M16 etc would occasionally have some damage drop off on longer engagements and their shots would veer off course a little. It seems the opposite is true in Sandstorm.

So you are having a hit reg problem (know issue) not a gimped rifle problem. My experience, so far in game, the more you magnify the worse the hit reg gets. Try a game with iron or a 1x optic, just to see if your center mass shots still drop them. I bet it does.

I'll give it a try, but even if that's the case, the bolts still suffer from a plethora of other handicaps that simply don't fit the pace of the game. They need to be fixed, and then either balanced to fit the game or removed altogether.

I tried it, shot a dude in the chest from 20 meters, he was stationary, I was stationary, I held my breath, and I put a round in his chest just below his neck. He shrugged it off and ran around a corner while I chambered the next round (which took 1.5 seconds).

Bad hit registration is happening right now even at very close range. I would not jump to too many conclusions until it's fixed.

Many of your complaints are true to real life. Semi-auto rifles are better than bolt action in every way other than price.

Realism is fine, until it completely gets in the way of gameplay. If there is no reason to grab a bolt action, they shouldn't be in the game, period.

I still say its a hit reg problem. I didn't say try it and judge it from one shot. That may have been the one that didn't registrar, moving or being still doesn't matter. As @MAA_Bunny said, hit reg is at all ranges, I said it seems magnified when you magnify your view. If I'm right you would see more 1 hit kills at no magnification vs running an optic or scope that magnifies. I had the EBR with the 12x yesterday and scored tons of hit, that didn't hit. Ran it iron and that number went way down. I'm not saying their isn't a problem, I'm saying its not a nerf problem.

Are you using high scope detail? If you are, you are rending the entire screen twice. Once for normal view outside your scope and once for the view in your scope. That would make your hit reg even worse.

Wait for the optimization.

last edited by RifRafJonesy

Even without hitreg there isn't much reason to take the bolts over SVD/M1A. Those extra 2 points get you a ton more firepower and much faster reloads, benefits far in excess of any 2 point attachment on a bolt.

last edited by Doghead

I told you one example, but I ran irons on bolts for a few games, no difference at all. The point is that there is a weapon in the game that is 100% useless to take in every situation in the game. Therefore, it would seem, there needs to be balancing or the gun needs removed. I'd prefer balancing, but it's up to the devs.

I think i read somewhere that bolt action snipers come with ap rounds already so they should be a 1 hit kill.

In Insurgency you were much, much better off sniping with an M16. You'd one-shot most people and can do an immediate follow up if need be. I've got 80 kills with 1 death by sniping on the flank with a bipod-deployed M16 once.

That's how it freakin works. Bolt actions were an outdated junk during WW2. This is 21st century and we could use getting rid of them from games completely. IRL they are only ever useful when you intend to do just one shot at extremely long distances and even then you are better off with a semi-auto .50cal.

So they are just there if you feel like being a badass by wining despite using garbage that puts you at a disadvantage.

People have already said it, but hitreg is pretty fucked currently. I once shot a bot, prone, in the head, about seven times with an M9 and he didn't die. I'd wait for the hitreg to get fixed first. The Mosin was a slayer of everything in the Alpha.

last edited by MarksmanMax

@pakislav said in Why are bolt-actions so gimped for this game?:

In Insurgency you were much, much better off sniping with an M16. You'd one-shot most people and can do an immediate follow up if need be. I've got 80 kills with 1 death by sniping on the flank with a bipod-deployed M16 once.

That's how it freakin works. Bolt actions were an outdated junk during WW2. This is 21st century and we could use getting rid of them from games completely. IRL they are only ever useful when you intend to do just one shot at extremely long distances and even then you are better off with a semi-auto .50cal.

Your first statement is true, but don't use the "realism" fucking argument in Sandstorm. Insurgency: Sandstorm is not a milsim.

In a game such as this based around house to house fighting, enemies are more often within 100 meters from you and no more than 200. So snipers in general are going to have a hard time, taking a semi auto is the go to. The bolt actions definitely need a damage boost so that they are capable of killing from a single shot to the heart/lung area. It's the only way to make them a viable option over a semi auto sniper in this game, otherwise they may as well remove them.

I cringed on reading 'Bolt actions were an outdated junk during WW2. This is 21st century and we could use getting rid of them from games completely. IRL they are only ever useful when you intend to do just one shot at extremely long distances and even then you are better off with a semi-auto .50cal.'

Some people..

@pakislav said in Why are bolt-actions so gimped for this game?:

That's how it freakin works. Bolt actions were an outdated junk during WW2. This is 21st century and we could use getting rid of them from games completely. IRL they are only ever useful when you intend to do just one shot at extremely long distances and even then you are better off with a semi-auto .50cal.

I know I've already jumped on the "semi-auto is always better in real life too" train, but this is a bit extreme. Up until very recently bolt action rifles tended to be more accurate than semi-auto rifles. There's a reason when the US Army went looking for a new sniper platform in the 1980s (note: well after WWII) they selected a bolt-action. Even today as the M-24 is being phased out by the semi-auto M-110 the Army is modernizing its M-24s and keeping them in service - they're effective and cheaper than the new M-110.

Now, any accuracy advantage you'd see in a bolt action is never going to be noticeable within 300 meters. They are guns designed for slow paced long distance engagement, which isn't what Insurgency does at all. I'd much rather see the M-24 replaced by the M-110 / SR-25, Mk.12 SPR, or a marksman variant of the SCAR-H (like Mk.20 SSR).

Looks like your connection to Focus Home Interactive - Official Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.