Extensive knowledge of guns comes at a cost.. to the point of it ruining movies and shows for me
...something seems to be missing.
It does seem VERY odd that it even has a 5 round mag, as Barrett doesn't sell anything short of a 10 rounder on their own site for anything other than the M95, so you'd have to go out of your way to get 5 rounders rather than just the 10 rounders they come with lol.
Title pretty much says the gist of it.
- Reduce the cost to 2 supply
- Shorter 20 round mag by default (can spend supply points for other mags at a +1 rate over normal M16's, so stanag-30 is 1, extended is 2, drum is 4)
- Semi-automatic only
- Reduce muzzle velocity from 960m/s to 840m/s (from the 20" barrel reduction down to 18" barrel)
- Give it AP rounds
- Only magnified optics options
- Default it has a muzzle break, so automatically gains some foregrip and compensator benefits
For some variety of playstyle and platform options, especially for when night-maps come around, the long monolithic rail would be perfect for NV-adapters (as intended on it). The change alters it to a point where it is still a balanced option for those seeking more options and use-cases for the class without needing to "overkill"-pick.
-Better at close ranges
I think that's the fear the devs have, it ending up dominant without there really being a drawback that isn't too steep, like once you start to mess with damage-numbers etc.
@kiberman545 Though I'm not exactly sure where the weapons would fit in (in terms of it being supposed to be security contractors vs insurgents) I do still really like the guns in question. But then again, there are "eastern european rebels" type of insurgent voices available in the game, so why the hell not! Hopefully slap in some equivalent "specialty" weaponry and finally get a wider variety of Russian style optics in! Would absolutely love a PP-19-01 as the "Russian MP5 equivalent"
Additionally would be cool to get some matching character-customization while they're at it with weapons and such.
@marksmanmax For someone that wasn't even a teenager yet when I served, those are bold claims you make. And I'm not exactly sure where you're getting all these "insulting and disrespecting everyone on this forum post the entire time" from, as you're the only one really going out of your way to do such. Barely once pointed (accurately mind you) that someone didn't seem like they had served. You're the one going out of your way to use ad hominem and failing to provide actual counter-arguments. You're saying something is wrong and not actually providing a counter-argument.
Don't be surprised if moderators come along and take measures of addressing your behavior, as this is not the first time you have been behaving toxic on the forum, and you are well aware of this.
@Sgt.Kanyo First up... FN Herstal failed the "SCAR trials", they did not meet the requirements, hence why the contract went to H&K. Secondly, the SCAR "H" Mark.17 in Sandstorm is the short "CQC" version with the 13 inch barrel, with a muzzle velocity nearly identical to the AKM because of its short barrel causing there to be a lot of unburnt powder (which just results in more recoil from the muzzle-blast rather than if it had an appropriate amount of powder that burned up in the length of the barrel), because of that short barrel the projectile doesn't build up more velocity (putting it at that velocity akin to the AKM, with the same projectile but just a longer case with more powder that will not benefit the velocity of the projectile because of the short barrel). You have to take into account WHAT VERSION of the SCAR they're using in the game, the longer barrel versions would have higher muzzle velocities and be more what people want for the CQC version, but the devs put the CQC one in for a reason, and you don't have to use it, nobody is forcing you to use it.
As I stated in my first reply because of these threads keep popping up, I've been trying to keep stuff relatively simple so people not familiar with physics and ballistics etc might be able to get a gist of understanding the concept of it and not have to go into writing an essay just to explain it and in the process alienate users that may just be interested in getting a pith on the matter, please stop your attempt of aggrandizing when you just go into examples that have zero relevance and even when they have some relevance they're not even accurately represented or done in a relevant manner.. and you're wasting time by continually trying derailing and a long list of fallacies. Go sign up for the military, you'll benefit from it.
@sgt-kanyo Yeah lmao.
I mean, I'd just love it if I could kill a bot wearing a t-shirt with a single 5.56 round. Somehow, I can't even do that.
Networking issues primarily for that, for some reason they haven't made the servers prioritize players over bots, which is extremely frustrating. It's like
Battlefield Hardline networking all over again.
Also, I use the basic formula for kinetic energy, because it's clearly what the devs are using for their damage-model in conjunction with pilodyn penetration, and I STRONGLY doubt they could be bothered to go into anecdotal variations for in-flight behavior of rounds as a major balancing factor (so it won't even play into the topic), if they did they'd have to add wind, weather and elevation simulation into the game combined with individual behaviors of different twist-rates etc. (which such a small team won't be able to take time doing, as this is not a simulator, nor do they have budget or manpower for it).
Btw, if you take "middle of the road" slug in the range of 438grains, and the corresponding motr velocity of 548m/s, you'll land north of 4260 J..
There is no Glock 17 in the game.. not anymore.
Twist-rates affect resistance in the bore, more resistance less velocity. Primary function of the rifling is to match velocity and rotation, if you start to change ammo types (different powders or amounts etc) you get into an area of accuracy vs velocity though some loads may be more optimized for a certain twist rate than the standard recommended ammo etc.
Just because the powder burns completely doesn't mean the bullet stops accelerating. The bullet accelerates until it leaves the barrel. Longer barrel length = better velocity.
The projectile can only accelerate as long as it has an accelerating force in the form of the expanding gas, the second it no longer is expanding, it will not provide the projectile with further increasing velocity, if you put a round that burns completely in a 2" barrel into a 200" barrel it will not be continuously accelerating through those 200" of barrel, but instead start to create suction. The projectile only accelerates as long as there is a continuously expanding propellant source.
So why doesn't Sandstorm's stats state that? They mention guns that have AP and guns that don't have AP. Why leave out +P ammo from the stats?
I don't know and it annoys me as well. I would prefer it if they did. Like for crying out loud, how hard would it be to just write "+P" at the end of the ammo type since they're clearly using the +P numbers
The bullet firing forward causes the gun to recoil backward.
No. The gases as the projectile is leaving the barrel and gases affecting the action and the mass of the moving carrier assembly (for the MP5, that carrier is forced back from the inertia and force of the casing pushed on by the ignition of the powder that also propels the round forward as it expands, interacts with the bolt carrying the inertia through it to the carrier causing the carrier to move rearward and unlocking the rollers allowing the force of the gases on the case to then start pushing on the bolt) is what causes the gun to recoil.
The MP5 uses a delayed blowback system, or a roller delayed blowback operating system, it is delayed with the rollers but the bolt isn't really "locked" into the chamber like a rotating bolt with locking nuts such as an M16 has, though it does use both the force of the spring and weight of the bolt to keep it closed just like you would see on most standard linear blowback operated pistols (meaning the force of gases are delayed by the resistance of that, keeping it closed long enough for the round to leave the barrel preferably).
But the MP5 also uses the rollers to delay the action further (so to have less violent effects on casings etc allowing for better extraction and delayed felt recoil), requiring the initial inertia of the fired round to first cause the carrier behind the bolt itself to start moving rearward, and in the process starts pulling the wedge/firing-pin carrier/locking piece inside the bolt with it that is the piece preventing the rollers from unlocking and keeping the bolt "locked in" for a bit longer, the locking piece with the wedge on it moves with the carried and in the process moving the wedge of the locking piece back allowing the rollers to unlock and be pulled in (unlocking the bolt and pulling it along with the already moving carrier part of the action from the force pushing back on it via the case now that it's no longer "locked" in, after the initial inertia was enough to cause the carrier to start moving, the remaining movement is now from the force of the case pushing the bolt into the carrier). Now in this process, it does still require (just like any other blowback operated action) that equal opposite action of the action of propelling the projectile forward to operate the mechanism. Operating that mechanism then because of it is inherently going to siphon off some energy, but at that point the round will optimally have already left the barrel (or in a case of the MP5SD variants, reaching an integral suppressor/silencer area causing suction on the round slowing it down just enough to bring it to subsonic levels when using normal ammo as well, so there is no need to go for specific subsonic ammo just to get it to subsonic levels, but instead just slowing the normal projectile down).
Same general concept still applies to the UZI, but it's open-bolt action will instantly start ejecting the round the second the round is ignited and the force starts pushing back on it the bolt, combined with a bit longer barrel (which will give more accuracy from more rifling to move through spinning the round more without as much resistance as would come from a short barrel with aggressive enough rifling to cause the same spin in a shorter barrel) there are factors at play putting the round at a lower velocity from both a longer barrel and the same siphoning off of the force of the gases by the mechanism as the pistols have (but has the momentum-shift from the open-bolt slamming forward first, rather than closed-bolt like the pistols, with mostly just singular direction applied force with no shift in it from the momentum etc).
If a 124-grain 7.62x39 round is moving at the same speed as a 180-grain 7.62x51 round
Standard M80A1 7.62x51mm NATO has a 130 grain projectile. Most common 7.62x39mm FMJ for AKM's uses a 123 grain projectile. At best you're looking at around a hundred joules in difference, where the AKM sends them slightly fast, but the SCAR-H sends some slightly heavier. Still making them mostly very comparable in the given circumstances. But nobody seems to want to bring back the long-barrel option (even if it's just for something like the SCAR-H, which is what I'd like.. just some getting access to it.. allow players to spend the points if they want, make it 3 supply point even!).
I think most people agree that the SCAR-H is far weaker than it should be for a .308 rifle, so it's not just my opinion.
If it wasn't the 13 inch barrel, but instead a longer one, it'd be underperforming from what it should be, it's silly that the 13 inch version is in the game at all, but people seem to like it regardless and that's what the devs put in.
@sgt-kanyo said in BUFF 7.62x39 and 5.56 DON'T nerf anything:
Once again let me just bring up the SCAR-H:
US Army: Right folks we need a new AR, since our 5.56 based M4s don't always kill with 1 shot.
FN Herstal: Sure man, here's an AR that is just as "bad" in killing term as the M4, but at least it only has a 20 round mag >> and weighs a lot more.
US Army: That's amazing, we'll take it.
This represents the flaw in @Mainfold 's argument right here. Seriously, this man is a dumbass.
But it's not correct.. again, they didn't go for the fucking SCAR, the SCAR lost the SCAR-trials to H&K, which is why the H&K "M27 IAR"/HK416 and HK417 were adopted as the new service rifles.. as they won the SCAR-trials, and not FN Herstal.
Nice attempt at grandstanding and pandering there.. try better next time.