M24- what do you think about it?

12346»

Comments

  • SacchoSaccho Posts: 1,577Player
    IO_i_OI wrote: »
    Like I said, again!!!! This post what about the M24, not the EBR. I've made no comments on the EBR. You can like the M24 but I don't have too.

    You called for ACOG on M4s to combat the M24. The point made was that the M14 is another team role with a high-powered optic to combat the M24. It was an explanation for why the M4 doesn't need an ACOG: alternative options for battling the M24 at long range already exist.
  • [OGG]TriggerdSilence[OGG]TriggerdSilence Posts: 19Player
    Wow so OP complaining about macros and quick scoping etc.
    I honestly believe the m24 is mostly fine as it is, and snipers are a weapon that show a very large skill gap quickly based on usage. My opinion is based on a 50% accuracy after 9400 kills with this weapon.

    I can quick scope fairly well but its because I always move with my aim lined up at chest height and if needed I quickscope (right then left click quickly) when i see body in my sight (with a good aim start you don't need to adjust much same way you quick fire with an m4 on a close enemy. No macros needed, I also fail alot at quick scoping too since at that distance my bolt action will take too long. Thus whenever possible I pick up a weapon and use that for close combat instead of the sniper.

    If you use smart tactics with the sniper similar to what you would use with any other weapon you will do great. What I do that makes me "amazing" with the sniper is smart fps tactics I see too many people NOT using.

    Examples: Hold you breath and steady before standing or leaning... not aiming at the floor when leaning, if you aim and chest and head height or the rough area where an enemy will be, you have much less adjustment to do. Being patient and letting the enemy pop a corner instead of strafing out. If I already leaned and saw an enemy but missed I keep my cursor in the same aim spot reload re-scope and lean then most of my aiming work is already done, its not magic or an OP gun. Or someone calling bull if they are prone slowly crawling around a corner and forget that I can see their shoulder and sometimes head from a distance before their sight line is around the corner.

    If I get in a close quarter combat situation I don't try to run and quick scope an enemy a lot of times I'll retreat and lure them to a corner since they know I'm a sniper and will run me down. I get the corner turn crouch and scope aiming a few feet out from the corner or sometimes close depending on angle the enemy comes from (allowing for lag and run speed) and let them run into my sight and then take the shot. Again sniper is not OP in that situation, I just out played the other person. It would end the same if I had an M4A1 or M16..
    If an enemy gets spotted with 3d spotting I can aim at the general area, lean or stand up for a shot, and much of the time it only takes a slight twitch to hit accurately instead of a large adjustment.

    These few examples don't make the sniper OP but rather shows a skill difference between myself and another sniper or m4 fighting me. Its no different than myself or another player using the m4 or m249 and pre-firing at chest /head height when strafing a corner with a known enemy. Or firing at a spot where an enemies head last was, and him standing up into your suppression fire when trying to take another shot.

    Other times on bridge people complain about it being too op, however they don't use catwalks well enough or smoke. A good sniper will let a team know when they are running to largely in the open without suppression or smokes. If a poor to semi-decent player holds a sniper no big deal, but you throw in smarter aim tactics and all of a sudden is a problem.

    The power is as is should be m24 body shot 1 hit kill, m14 body shot 2 hit kill, for the reload speeds and fire rates this makes sense, weaken the sniper any more then whats the point in using it?

    My only complaint is the hipfire accuracy cone is too large. I've had it happen where i try to hipfire as a last resort when the person is almost touching the barrel of my m24 and it doesn't hit at all. That's a little drastic. I don't by any means want the cone too tight, but please just cinch it in a tich please.

    Other thing i've noticed in this beta version and yes things will change, is that if you die and get revived, the server messes something up and you fire phantom bullets until you drop the m24 and pick it up again. Spectators won't see your firing the weapon even though you do when firing the phantom bullet.
  • ProceduralPolyMathProceduralPolyMath Posts: 96Player
    IO_i_OI wrote: »
    Like I said, again!!!! This post what about the M24, not the EBR. I've made no comments on the EBR. You can like the M24 but I don't have too.

    You called for ACOG on M4s to combat the M24. The point made was that the M14 is another team role with a high-powered optic to combat the M24. It was an explanation for why the M4 doesn't need an ACOG: alternative options for battling the M24 at long range already exist.

    That was an awsome change I must admit. Only recently I noticed they did that and it's very neat. Brought the M14 back to the game. I was mostly using the M16 with the Acog by now.
  • SacchoSaccho Posts: 1,577Player
    I don't think the M14 was ever out of the game?

    It's always been available through the Sniper role and the DM role. Recently they made it so DM M14 could use Mk4 or ACOG when previously it was DM M14 only got ACOG and S M14 only got Mk4. I still feel like that's probably a bug since the change was never announced, but whatever.
  • ProceduralPolyMathProceduralPolyMath Posts: 96Player
    edited May 2015
    No, I meant it brought the M14 back to the game in terms of usability, as a pick to consider. Opposed to have to choose between M16 and M14 Acog. Which I normally favoured the M16 more lately due to flexibility.
    Now the M14 has something more to edge over the M16 and fills a counter-sniping role similar to the SPR in AA2.
  • PredictionPrediction Posts: 132Player
    keebler, you of all people should know "hipfire" term in this game is ridiculous on its own. you should never have to aim down a scope when an enemy is 10 feet away from you. you should be able to shoot 20 meter targets "from the hip" with very little practice, without aiming down sights, have you always scoped in when running shooting drills irl? cqb + ads zoom optics shouldn't be necessary.
    -
    33:50 of this video listen to this guy perform "hipfire" drills - also he shows at 12:18 the slightest difference between "hip" and ads... in 3rd and 1st person view...

    Ground Branch looks fun. All I played was the shooting range and just all the features and different movements and customizations along with the more realistic scopes oh and even has the bipod. Once this game is released aapg is going to be dead lol.
  • =IK=SgtBadazz=IK=SgtBadazz Posts: 160Player
    Thanks for the vid fity... I'll be looking out for that in the next couple of years.
  • =IK=Doba==IK=Doba= Posts: 2,789Player
    That won't kill AA. Looks like another version of Arma to me..not saying it doesn't look good, but I just can't see these slow moving games fun for long, nor do I envision how any sort of comp can be played with such movements.

    Also 3rd person views while engaging in a fps to me is a joke
    _____________________________
    #Support Comp Mode

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN4YhM6jUB2MxVj8i3b9rhw
  • .dcG-Colts^.dcG-Colts^ Posts: 1,973Player
    edited May 2015
    IO_i_OI wrote: »
    Back to the same ol same ol argument. The M24 is too OP because it takes no skill to zoom in on an enemy at the end of the map and get a kill with a torso shot. Give us back the M4 with ACOG option and you can keep your M24 "new player" weapon all you want.


    So your qualified to judge that the m24 is too OP and it takes no skill. When you have 48 kills,12 headshots, and 30% accuracy with it?
    Pie charts + Graphs= Very Bad.



  • Dem@nDem@n Posts: 564Player
    edited May 2015
    i think it's op and takes no skill but fun to oneshot people and i think i'm overqualifyed to say it because it's true.

    5409 kills out of 6225 hits while 13036 shots fired 48% accuracy and i didn't even had to abuse a weapon selection bug on official servers to play with it.
  • .shhfiftyfive-.shhfiftyfive- Posts: 495Player
    edited May 2015
    =IK=Doba= wrote: »
    That won't kill AA. Looks like another version of Arma to me..not saying it doesn't look good, but I just can't see these slow moving games fun for long, nor do I envision how any sort of comp can be played with such movements.

    Also 3rd person views while engaging in a fps to me is a joke
    i don't disagree. but for clarity, arma has server/difficulty setting so you can force disable 3rd person. i expect you can get the same server settings from a future game like ground branch. i also expect the keyboard controls for ground branch will be less daunting compared to arma.
    Keebler750 wrote: »
    I wasn't debating "hip fire" but rather shooting accurately during the "transition phase" from low ready to scoped. You either do one or the other...you don't let a shot go halfway between or you're really using the "Hope and Pray" method. Coincidentally, hitting your target is pure luck during the transition, IMO.
    the transition between low ready to scoped is the same as transition between low ready to on point. the flaw here is you thinking this game aapg has a low ready stance at all. that crosshair on the screen when shooting non-ads is not low ready. low ready doesn't have the weapon pointed down range.


  • Keebler750Keebler750 Posts: 3,607Beta Tester
    Well, technically I think you're right, but I was already trying to make allowances for the concept of "hip fire" and all the messy vernacular we've got going on. Many people believe we're scouting around with the rifle butt scraping our hip pocket....:p

    The real issue here is whether you can fire while "Point Shooting," looking over the top of the gun versus being scoped up, and what happens in your brain and muscles when you transition, and how that effects accuracy.

    I'm dying to do a little experiment with a rifle and a laser to test actual point shooting accuracy. The reason I want to do it without live fire is so I can watch the 'sway' pattern too. :) If the laser was in a non-visible spectrum you could video it and see how much you move around when you think you're on target. (If you use visible spectrum you'll just ride the beam into the target...)
    ______

    This has been a test of the emergency flame-fest system. Please do not adjust your set.
  • .dcG-Vortex^.dcG-Vortex^ Posts: 188Player
    I like how 5/7 people voted that it's too easy to use, but nobody has commented as to why.

    Sway should be a little more aggressive
    TheTots wrote:
    I think this thread has run it's course......
  • SSKnecaboSSKnecabo Posts: 2,721Player
    I like how 5/7 people voted that it's too easy to use, but nobody has commented as to why.

    Sway should be a little more aggressive

    I literally never even hold my breath when playing it and I'd consider myself a very good player on the M24.
  • Yato^Yato^ Posts: 103Player
    Uhm, I agree? The issue isn't the game but the playing field. A few maps have excellent positions for the sniper though, in my eyes there aren't any bad maps to bring the sniper to. It all comes down to how you approach the map with the sniper. The same goes for every weapon really. I've seen people work wonders with the shotgun on coldfront even.

    Edit: You should also keep in mind that realism has no place in videogames past a certain point. Just because something exists or functions differently in the real world is no excuse to implement it into a not-a-real world.

    For example, what if we implented this?

    http://www.techtimes.com/articles/22202/20141216/exacto-is-darpa-s-self-guided-bullet-that-changes-direction-mid-flight-to-seek-target-beware-bad-guys.htm

    Wouldn't that be super duper fun for everybody? It exists in the real world so why not in AA?

    The issue is the design, which influences many decision and not just one. It's that thing you feel when you use an application after a while and even just from the user side you grasp a little what the people that code it were considering while making it. Right how that is hard to figure since there's a lot of placeholder'ing, but I don't like the 1st light/sketch. I know it was some versions ago, but first round I played it was on Downtown and I swear it felt I was playing Combat Arms (which is not a good comparison).


    Realism has no place in videogames? That's like your opinion, man... Which is refuted by many titles and even past AA versions at some degree for their scope and limitations.
    The cartoonish silly argument of an upcoming bullet technology is by no means a standard of realism, please... I'm really tired of people putting forward silly off-topic examples to make their point, by trying to couple what I say with random crap.

    The game to me, right now, It's like you're watching a nice movie and something takes you out of it for being stupid. Things that weren't present before. Like people incapacitated asking teammates to grenade their body because it won't kill them, COD/BF like animations speed completely ignore handling, training mission maps instead of deployments, healing someone that took a bullet to the face, shooting someone afar and having the game telling you who you killed. You know, unreasonable things that were done better before and brake the game experience and legacy.

    And of course there's a threshold for realism, but what sets the pace and where the game ends up doing compromises, again is the design. Which right now it favors "Easy", which rhymes with boring.

    You're justifying what we have by saying that playing with the M24 is very doable... That's not the point here. I know it's doable. I play with the M24 and the shotgun. In AA2 my most played map was Urban, so I know how to bring a sniper alive in such maps maps. What I'm saying is that there aren't maps where it excels at, and I see no reason not to implement some of them. My second most played map in AA2 was Border. Either M24 and M16 were put to good use. It was really fun in AA2 in large maps to try to shoot a guy really far a way with the M16, playing with cover, creeping up on the enemy team up and down hill, etc. Challenge!

    After we have the full spectrum we can address better what in the weapon needs to be changed, and not just model it after a, for now, crippled experience. My suggestions where for reason-ability coupled with balance.

    Cheers

    Past AA versions couldn't take games to a realistic level we an today and even todays games dont take games to such a realistic level they can, people just don't want it to be that tedious because it makes it boring. Even the Arma series, praised for its realism has the most bizarre feature of 3rd person camera. You could make the argument that it's up to the player to use it or not but the fact is that the vast majority of the players do use it and stay away from 1st person exclusive servers. Other thing is that the most things you're complaining about in the game are being adressed, it's almost like you didn't bother with the opt-in beta at all.
  • Yato^Yato^ Posts: 103Player
    Uhm, I agree? The issue isn't the game but the playing field. A few maps have excellent positions for the sniper though, in my eyes there aren't any bad maps to bring the sniper to. It all comes down to how you approach the map with the sniper. The same goes for every weapon really. I've seen people work wonders with the shotgun on coldfront even.

    Edit: You should also keep in mind that realism has no place in videogames past a certain point. Just because something exists or functions differently in the real world is no excuse to implement it into a not-a-real world.

    For example, what if we implented this?

    http://www.techtimes.com/articles/22202/20141216/exacto-is-darpa-s-self-guided-bullet-that-changes-direction-mid-flight-to-seek-target-beware-bad-guys.htm

    Wouldn't that be super duper fun for everybody? It exists in the real world so why not in AA?

    The issue is the design, which influences many decision and not just one. It's that thing you feel when you use an application after a while and even just from the user side you grasp a little what the people that code it were considering while making it. Right how that is hard to figure since there's a lot of placeholder'ing, but I don't like the 1st light/sketch. I know it was some versions ago, but first round I played it was on Downtown and I swear it felt I was playing Combat Arms (which is not a good comparison).


    Realism has no place in videogames? That's like your opinion, man... Which is refuted by many titles and even past AA versions at some degree for their scope and limitations.
    The cartoonish silly argument of an upcoming bullet technology is by no means a standard of realism, please... I'm really tired of people putting forward silly off-topic examples to make their point, by trying to couple what I say with random crap.

    The game to me, right now, It's like you're watching a nice movie and something takes you out of it for being stupid. Things that weren't present before. Like people incapacitated asking teammates to grenade their body because it won't kill them, COD/BF like animations speed completely ignore handling, training mission maps instead of deployments, healing someone that took a bullet to the face, shooting someone afar and having the game telling you who you killed. You know, unreasonable things that were done better before and brake the game experience and legacy.

    And of course there's a threshold for realism, but what sets the pace and where the game ends up doing compromises, again is the design. Which right now it favors "Easy", which rhymes with boring.

    You're justifying what we have by saying that playing with the M24 is very doable... That's not the point here. I know it's doable. I play with the M24 and the shotgun. In AA2 my most played map was Urban, so I know how to bring a sniper alive in such maps maps. What I'm saying is that there aren't maps where it excels at, and I see no reason not to implement some of them. My second most played map in AA2 was Border. Either M24 and M16 were put to good use. It was really fun in AA2 in large maps to try to shoot a guy really far a way with the M16, playing with cover, creeping up on the enemy team up and down hill, etc. Challenge!

    After we have the full spectrum we can address better what in the weapon needs to be changed, and not just model it after a, for now, crippled experience. My suggestions where for reason-ability coupled with balance.

    Cheers

    Past AA versions couldn't take games to a realistic level we an today and even todays games dont take games to such a realistic level they can, people just don't want it to be that tedious because it makes it boring. Even the Arma series, praised for its realism has the most bizarre feature of 3rd person camera. You could make the argument that it's up to the player to use it or not but the fact is that the vast majority of the players do use it and stay away from 1st person exclusive servers. Other thing is that the most things you're complaining about in the game are being adressed, it's almost like you didn't bother with the opt-in beta at all.

    Edit; and the "upcoming" sci-fi target finding bullet was real a year ago. Do I even need to explain how it is then realistic?
  • ProceduralPolyMathProceduralPolyMath Posts: 96Player
    edited May 2015
    Past AA versions couldn't take games to a realistic level we an today
    Just what I meant with:
    and even past AA versions at some degree for their scope and limitations.

    I'm not asking for Arma scale maps. So please don't try to present those as my arguments. I'm asking for reasonable size maps and mechanics like say AA2 had and maybe even improve it taking into considerations other games that have them...
    I do wish that the game could grow up to a bigger scale Battlefield-like, which really immerse you with with a sense of busy battlefield, there's always stuff going on , several vectors on the conflict and many roles you can take. But that would require re-spawn and vehicles, etc, which is not very interesting, so the game will always have to remain smaller than BF, of course. That said a Battlefield tuned towards realism would be awesome. More manageable than Arma but big enough to surround you.
    Other thing is that the most things you're complaining about in the game are being addressed, it's almost like you didn't bother with the opt-in beta at all.
    No, I missed it because I have busy overtime work weeks at times and basically I disappear at such times. On the other hand other weeks are slow and I waste more time playing and reading and posting in threads. I actually was expecting a final release for spring, not a period of experimentation.
    Edit; and the "upcoming" sci-fi target finding bullet was real a year ago. Do I even need to explain how it is then realistic?

    No, you don't. It's just unfortunate you bring a silly example and try to couple it with what I'm saying about realistic mechanics and a reasonable natural feel of game events.
    It's like me saying that since you do NOT advocate for realistic mechanics, you would be in favor of soldiers wearing bikinis and being able to fly in this game...
  • -=[USA]=-rubberboot-ACI--=[USA]=-rubberboot-ACI- Posts: 126Beta Tester
    =IK=Doba= wrote: »
    I agree only change I would like to see is to the damage model..too many leg hand shots result in kills .. only upper torso and head should be installed kills ..

    I have always assumed they only happen when recipient of hand/leg shot is already low on health or is at reduced health? I often survive M24 shots, which I imagine hit me in the arm/leg/nether region/foot whatever.. it does leave me with very little health if I manage to escape a second shot. Whenever I have been insta-killed I feel it's been a headshot or upper torso.. but lets not forget about damage dropoffs over distance they will have a factor too no doubt.

    you can get a 1 shot kill with a shot to the wrist... massive wrist shot kill. its silly. seen it, done it, tested it. its my opinion but M24 unbalances the game, like the M14 did when it had full auto. then you have servers with all weapons unlocked.... ugh. Yay, thats fun :/ - M24s everywhere. maybe if it actually operated/behaved like it does when the setting is set to dual render, and there was some way to slow down close range target aquisition, then maybe it would be better. but i am not holding my breath that it will get better. its silly you can come out of a full cross the map sprint, stop, scope, aquire, kill against someone prepared with an M4. Headshots are one thing, and yeah anyone can get lucky running into a gun fight but the shotgun and M4 are supposed to be king at short range, and there not.

    you want that rifle not to be so OP, then reduce the shots to kill for the rest of the weapons to up there stopping power at closer ranges. M14 is ok at 2 STK.

    i think somewhere in the old forums someone even posted up how the maps design don't support it. I just wish there was a way to turn it off in the server settings - just like enemy spot.

Sign In or Register to comment.