So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..?

[Plaqueis]

I'll use the shiny new NC-8 RailJack just for example (there's plenty of similar things in any factions spawnlists to choose from):

Muzzle velocity is 850 meters per second. So the projectile should travel a mile in about 2 seconds, depending on various things. But ballpark is set there anyway.

It can be equipped with a scope that has 12 time magnification, meaning that if your target is say 1000 meters away, it will appear 12 times larger on the scope than it would with plain eye.


Yet the weapon will not kill anything beyond 300 meters, no matter how precise you are (unless you shoot it twice). Dafuq are the projectiles? Are we shooting cottonballs or something?!

1,000 yards 1942 91/30 Russian Mosin-Nagant (P/U) sniper rifle - YouTube

That's a 1942 Mosin-Nagant from second world war (the weapon itself first came in first world war), with a PU scope (3.5x magnification if i'm not mistaken), hitting deadcenter repeatedly at 800+ meters... and you can be damn sure that the 7.62x51mm round will still be lethal at that range.

Again, explain this one to me please.

[bites]

That's a 1942 Mosin-Nagant from second world war (the weapon itself first came in first world war), with a PU scope (3.5x magnification if i'm not mistaken), hitting deadcenter repeatedly at 800+ meters... and you can be damn sure that the 7.62x51mm round will still be lethal at that range.

Again, explain this one to me please.

To add more to the mix (not taking sides here) I own a Lee-Enfield (Lee-Manning in actuality).. MK I and it was/is sighted to 800 yards, using .303 rounds.

Its a lovely rifle which is dated 1903, despite its 100+ year age its still as accurate today.

Unfortunately however ... we're playing a game which does not by default follow the real world :/

[Plaqueis]

To add more to the mix (not taking sides here) I own a Lee-Enfield (Lee-Manning in actuality).. MK I and it was/is sighted to 800 yards, using .303 rounds.

Its a lovely rifle which is dated 1903, despite its 100+ year age its still as accurate today.

Unfortunately however ... we're playing a game which does not by default follow the real world :/

Well yeah, the first production model of the Nagant rifle was adopted in service by Russian military at 1891... not to compete or anything, just saying. I should have said 'became known in first world war' or something like that in my first post.


I just used that as an example, as i've played alot of DayZ lately and the gun is in that game. I'm not in that video myself nor have anything to do with it, i just searched it.

[camycamera]

because balance?

[AThreatToYou]

PlanetSide 2 is in no way, shape, or form realistic nor does it try to be.

Also, you have to factor that the soldiers are wearing futuristic armor and are protected by futuristic powered shielding.

[bpostal]

The distances don't really equal out. In the beginning I was hoping for rifles such as the AMR-66 to be good out to 500m but as was pointed out...500m in game isn't exactly the same thing as 500m IRL.

[Falcon_br]

I play red orchestra 2, I can´t hit anything past 100m with a Mosin-Nagant, even with point blank precision weapon, without a sight you can´t perfect aim with just iron sights, also, moving target make it worst to hit. Of course I get 150m kill with it, but it is not common. That why everyone uses bayonets on that game, you can miss even at cqc if your target is moving.
With a 4x scope some people can hit up 200m if the weapon is braced and controlling the respiration.
There is a 400m+ kill achievement with bolt action rifles in the game, almost everyone that did it, did against away players or with a stationary friend on the enemy team, also they only hit 1 in 5 shots at that range, most of the shots do not hit a vital area.
Normally people take screenshots when killing with at 300m+ target with all weapons but the LMG (stationary HMG and tanks can kill target at long ranges!), LMG on that game uses the same ammunition then the sniper rifles, but they are full automatics and have longer barrels. Snipers are to kill deployed LMGs that kills everything at all ranges, if well deployed.
WW2 german standard squad tactic: cover the MG team to a good position where he can kill everyone. WW2 russian standard tactic: MG gives suspression fire, rifles covering fire, SMGs get close and with 71 mags, kill everyone at close range. WW2 American standard tactic: Everyone only has m1 garands, kill everyone with those rifles, we also have another weapons, but the m1 garands will do everything that needs to be done. WW2 Japanese tactics, we have the worst weapons, banzai rush the enemy and die! We also don´t have tanks, the only things we got that we are proud is the navy and the Zero, all the rest are ww1 equipment, and knee mortars.

Like I said, PS-2 almost all the times cannot render enemies past 300m, so why to worry to kill something you can´t see or damage?
Sometimes I am killing enemy infantry inside the spawn room because I am firing from a special place, it is at 281m, at that distance the spawn room shield will not render, but those inside it, will, can also work with prowlers, but you don´t have enough precision to hit them, unless with HE and lots of aiming shots.

PS: Also WW2 ammunition were not stabilized, the lee enfield rifle was know to have a more devastation effect on the human body because the bullet destabilized in mid air and started rolling in the air and inside human bodies, losing a lot of the precision:
PPS: I can´t talk about dayz and a nagant rifle without placing this video on the thread:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRXuTMbo9FA
Read the comments, the bandits made contact with the video maker. That how you use a nagant against well equipped players with m4 and win.

[synkrotron]

Was not rendering infantry past 300 metres part of the so called optimization then? I clearly remember getting a headshot kill at a smidge past 400 metres. I suppose that explains why they nerfed the range of the sniper rifles.

I've never really tested the render range until last night. I went into the VR to test out the Railjack, before buying it. I placed my waypoint marker on a target and backed away until I got to 300 metres. At that point the target disappeared and even though I knew where the target was, I never registered a hit.

So, I suppose the bottom line is, while infantry targets are not rendering past 300 metres there is no real apparent advantage of owning the Railjack.

That said, there are still a few advantages... There were occasions where I was able to kill a target with one shot to the body, at distance, which may have been to the extra little bit of damage dealt out by the Railjack.

Also, in VR last night, I could kill a MAX, at medium range, with four headshots. With the Longshot it takes six.

I therefore conclude that, for me at least, this was a worthwhile purchase :D

[ChipMHazard]

It's a video game. Balance trumps any and all real world logic. As such using real world logic as an argument is rather moot.
If the new sniper could kill at farther ranges than any other rifle then why would NC use rifles like the Longshot anymore?

[almalino]

Like spawn beacons, cloak and laser rifles etc are all real :)

[Plaqueis]

I didnt mean this as a whine about realism, just wondering about the logic behind it all (i dont buy the balance thing btw, but lets not go there).. nor did i mean to single out the new rifle, i just used it as example. The point is valid with almost any weapon in game actually, basr's just highlight it best.

I guess in PS2 version of the 'world' they have awesomely powerful weapons and as i said, cottonballs for ammunition.

[ChipMHazard]

I'm sure that if it was possible to make the draw distance greater and have larger areas then they might increase the fatal range.
As it stands it's not possible, this change was part of the sniper rifle change as a result of SOE not wanting snipers to one-shoot players at all ranges. So the logic behind it was balance concerns. I can only guess that the reason why the railgun sniper isn't an exception is because it would make other bolt action rifles obsolete.
I agree that it would be more logical, even with PS2 logic, that when its muzzle velocity is so great then it would also have a greater effective range, but again...

[HereticusXZ]

All "tier 3" Sniper rifles have a damage cap off at 300m, meaning no one-shot kill headshots beyond 300m. Consider that infantry stop rendering (you physically can't see them) beyond 350m.


These Sniper Rifles piss me off.... The NC get a Sniper Rifle with crazy awesome velocity. The VS get a crazy awesome Sniper Rifle with unlimited ammo and charge shot for some decent level of skill involvement....

The TR get a Scout Rifle, I don't care if the Filter says it's a Sniper Rifle because it isn't. It doesn't even have a 12x Scope on it! The TR Trap is made for close-medium combat, NOT long range!

TR did NOT get a fraking Sniper Rifle in the Sniper Rifle Update!

[Belhade]

I didnt mean this as a whine about realism, just wondering about the logic behind it all (i dont buy the balance thing btw, but lets not go there).. nor did i mean to single out the new rifle, i just used it as example. The point is valid with almost any weapon in game actually, basr's just highlight it best.

I guess in PS2 version of the 'world' they have awesomely powerful weapons and as i said, cottonballs for ammunition.

I like to imagine that there are gravitational and atmospheric density factors on Auraxis to account for things like weapon behaviors. It's not Earth; why should weapons act the same?

[War Barney]

You know what else is crazy, I shoot a ROCKET, a specially designed future rocket at a tank and it doesn't blow up in 1 shot like a modern tank would, whats with that? also I shoot people in the head with my pistol and they live, why?

Please don't try to complain about snipers and ignore that every other weapon is also different to how it should be for balance, snipers already are to powerful in my opinion (OHK with 2 shots for easy moving target kills from 300m away with stealth...)

[Mastachief]

because balance?

This.

This is not arma/ofp/dayz, effective sniper rifles would have us all hiding in a bush, shitting in a bag for our play sessions.

[Taramafor]

2 words. Sniper nerf. Was the last straw for me. Stopped caring about the game at that point since it was my play style. Well, that and bases being too close together and constant "oh look, yet another sun defeating all strategic and tactical play because they just keep coming" and such. And bases don't really "do" anything, like say in Renegade X/C&C Renegade where they can be destroyed (with ion cannons/nukes which would be similar to orbital strikes which are in PS1 yet not PS2) and have benifits (weapons factory gives you vehicle access, refinery credits, etc). Oh, and spawn rooms are broken of course, because everyone holds up in them not wanting to be the first to die when they go out, which means not putting up resistance against an invading enemy. Even just fixing 1/4 of these things would bring me back into the game.

In a game THIS big with THIS many people, SOME instant kill weapons aren't a bad thing and a sniper rifle should be one of them. If only because it takes a lot of skill to hit a MOVING target. If you just stand around, frankly, you deserve to die. [/sarcasm] Next thing you know HE rounds will take 2 hits to kill, despite it being a tank shell. I mean, it's not ARMA, right? So let's do that. Yea, makes sense. Sounds tons more fun. Can kill you in cover with splash damage after all. [/sarcasm] Also, SOME realism is appreciated by quite a few gamers. Not saying it should be similar to ARMA or something (too much realism isn't always a good thing after all), but when thinking about balance, one has to keep player numbers into consideration, along with how easily defended a base can be/is (Which is next to none existent right now only adding to my argument) and other such concerns.

[War Barney]

2 words. Sniper nerf. Was the last straw for me. Stopped caring about the game at that point since it was my play style. Well, that and bases being too close together and constant "oh look, yet another sun defeating all strategic and tactical play because they just keep coming" and such. And bases don't really "do" anything, like say in Renegade X/C&C Renegade where they can be destroyed (with ion cannons/nukes which would be similar to orbital strikes which are in PS1 yet not PS2) and have benifits (weapons factory gives you vehicle access, refinery credits, etc). Oh, and spawn rooms are broken of course, because everyone holds up in them not wanting to be the first to die when they go out, which means not putting up resistance against an invading enemy. Even just fixing 1/4 of these things would bring me back into the game.

In a game THIS big with THIS many people, SOME instant kill weapons aren't a bad thing and a sniper rifle should be one of them. If only because it takes a lot of skill to hit a MOVING target. If you just stand around, frankly, you deserve to die. [/sarcasm] Next thing you know HE rounds will take 2 hits to kill, despite it being a tank shell. I mean, it's not ARMA, right? So let's do that. Yea, makes sense. Sounds tons more fun. Can kill you in cover with splash damage after all. [/sarcasm] Also, SOME realism is appreciated by quite a few gamers. Not saying it should be similar to ARMA or something (too much realism isn't always a good thing after all), but when thinking about balance, one has to keep player numbers into consideration, along with how easily defended a base can be/is (Which is next to none existent right now only adding to my argument) and other such concerns.


Wait.. are you trying to complain that snipers aren't a OHK from 300m away with stealth on ANY part of the body? if so you are completely and utterly insane, if not I have no idea what your complaining about snipers keep getting buffed, hell the just made them shoot even faster this patch.

[BlaxicanX]

He's talking about no longer being able to OSK with headshots from beyond 300 meters.

Which is, indeed, bullshit.

[Plaqueis]

Got to love guys with Vanguards on signatures whining about a OHK's... lolz. I'd love to see the forum meltdown if they'd cap tank OHK's similarily, just to 'balance' things... specially after they already nerfed the HE (something which i equally hated).

I didn't mean this to be a whine at all, i was just questioning the reasons behind the decisions to make all BASR's (and to lesser extenct, all handheld weapons) so freaking weak in the game. BASR's are just the best example of this. Not only are their only advantage (range) capped ridiculously close, but in addition, the dude holding the weapon has no lungs at all so you'll have like a second of aiming time, he can't go prone, has no useful camo (game has metric ton of stuff thats sold as camo, yet none of them actually blends you in the surroundings), and so on.

And please stfu about the cloak; not only does it make a very distinctive sound, on top of that you're hardly any less visible with it or without it, unless you're sitting perfectly still.

This.

This is not arma/ofp/dayz, effective sniper rifles would have us all hiding in a bush, shitting in a bag for our play sessions.

Geez. You seriously think so? This isn't some retarded COD either, this is combined arms game.

[War Barney]

Uhu.. well first off a picture on a sig means nothing, I have that pic cos I like the look of it, I actually hate vehicles and would be very happy if they made it so they didn't get OHKs as I've always felt anything that does a OHK is utter skill-less bullcrap, it takes no kill to get 1 shot. People might try to say its fine as they fire so slowly they don't push battles but they DO manage to cause more annoyance than pretty much any other class with not only OHKs but doing over half hp with 1 shot meaning its VERY easy 2 hit kills (especially annoying when you get 20-30 of em shooting non stop like at most fights in the open).

And stealth is a distinctive noise sure... which one which sounds pretty similar for all the factions so you never know if its an ally or not and even then hearing a stealth doesn't mean you're safe as they could be anywhere and going anywhere, especially with stalker now available it could easily be a guy sitting perfectly still while almost completely invisible never having to move. Oh and *hardly less visible*.... please tell me your settings cos for me they are almost invisible while moving and pretty much completely invisible when standing still, you must have the PERFECT settings for seeing them while stealthed or just letting people know you're hacking in some way.

Or would you like me to complain about why all my shotguns don't OHK ANY part I shoot when in range? its a shotgun when in a 5-10m range any shot should be a OHK no matter where, I sometimes have to shoot people 3 times with a piston for the kill! They need a buff right? after all I have to get within 10m for it while you sit at 300m with stealth

[Taramafor]

I actually hate vehicles and would be very happy if they made it so they didn't get OHKs as I've always felt anything that does a OHK is utter skill-less bullcrap

-10 respect points (for tank shells at least). A shell to the face means you deserve to die (splash damage perhaps not so much). Not every weapon should instant kill of course, but some should. Also, you like tank pics yet hate tanks themselves? O.o

it takes no kill to get 1 shot.

-20 respect points. Have you even tried head shooting a moving target at long range? (also ties into vehicles and so on. Point is, one needs skilled reflexes and good aiming). The only no skill part is when people stand still (then they have it coming).

People might try to say its fine as they fire so slowly they don't push battles

So... Make sniper rifles MORE useless in real fights by nerfing them? Christ, no wonder I stopped playing if that's the case.

[Plaqueis]

Uhu.. well first off a picture on a sig means nothing, I have that pic cos I like the look of it, I actually hate vehicles and would be very happy if they made it so they didn't get OHKs as I've always felt anything that does a OHK is utter skill-less bullcrap

I stopped reading right there, and i doubt i need to explain why.

EDIT: Jebus tapdancing christ.. seriously, you'd be happy if a infantry guy caught a 150mm highexplosive antitank shell from a Vanguard (using as an example just because), and lived thru it?! Ffs...

[War Barney]

With full flak armour and a shield up HA shield up yes.. it seems its incredibly easy for tanks to bulls eye people in this game as it happens almost non stop even while running, more than half my deaths to vehicles are from bullseye hits, if its so incredibly easy to do it shouldn't OHK really.

And yes I've tried to shoot moving targets, its really rather easy especially when you just aim for the body, how am I saying make snipers more useless? I'm just saying they are irritating enough as it is without buffing them, hell they got a buff this patch as it is

[Plaqueis]

how am I saying make snipers more useless? I'm just saying they are irritating enough as it is without buffing them, hell they got a buff this patch as it is

Snipers got fuck all in this patch.. additions were; a sniper-rifle that was nerfed in about 24 hours after the release, 2 scoutrifles, and whatever piece of shit VS got. Also, a very cool but not very useful crossbow was introduced. And on top, there's an option to give up healthsticks/AP mines, and get yourself a motionsensor.

Not one thing on that list that snipers needed. Infiltrators on the otherhand... i bet those are very useful for that guy shooting you in the back with SMG, hacking turrets and terminals, and maybe setting up AP mines on your base. I'm not one of them.

[Taramafor]

With full flak armour and a shield up HA shield up yes.. it seems its incredibly easy for tanks to bulls eye people in this game as it happens almost non stop even while running, more than half my deaths to vehicles are from bullseye hits, if its so incredibly easy to do it shouldn't OHK really.

And yes I've tried to shoot moving targets, its really rather easy especially when you just aim for the body, how am I saying make snipers more useless? I'm just saying they are irritating enough as it is without buffing them, hell they got a buff this patch as it is

For some reason, I do find it easier to hit targets with tank shells then sniper rifles. Perhaps it's because tank shells are bigger and has a good chance of killing you if it's a near miss.

And i was talking about the devs nerfing sniper rifles, which results in snipers having less of an effect in the larger fights. I'd rather have irritating snipers on both sides that actually SNIPE then more useless ones wasting time to close in, making them even more useless in a big battlefield. I mean, if snipers wern't doing anything before, how are they doing anything now? Following that logic, why not just be done with it and axe sniper rifles? (Not saying they should of course, but this constant nerf after nerf against this play style is driving me and others with this play style INSANE!)

Also, semi auto for long range makes more sense then a bolt because of more then 1 shot. Etc. You get the idea. I don't expect ARMA, but Christ, this is just silly. I mean, people complain about snipers, so NERF. It happened with HE tank shells (something I'm also against), NERF! Striker? NERF! (and now useless) It just seems to me like nerf is the answer to everything.

[War Barney]

Plaq you should check the notes.. unless I miss read it they made a lot/all the snipers shoot faster in the last patch

[Dougnifico]

I think current snipers are bs. Put more drop on the powerful weapons (perhaps 9.81ms^2...?) and make them headshot lethal at ANY damn range. Maybe a 1,000m limit. That's cool. Still, I like to be able to be able to actually do something with a sniper.

I know there is a lot of BF hate here, but maybe on the really long range rifles, give them scope glint for balance. The current ones don't need it, but have a couple extreme range sniper rifles with it.

[Azzzz]

I think current snipers are bs. Put more drop on the powerful weapons (perhaps 9.81ms^2...?) and make them headshot lethal at ANY damn range. Maybe a 1,000m limit. That's cool. Still, I like to be able to be able to actually do something with a sniper.

I know there is a lot of BF hate here, but maybe on the really long range rifles, give them scope glint for balance. The current ones don't need it, but have a couple extreme range sniper rifles with it.

You know as I know and everyone else knows, none of this is going to happen until the game gets more optimized. We can't even get people to render past a certain range (300m no?) as it is much less 1000m :(

Also, also, also....Loves me some tank sniping with AP shells. I get so many hate tells and hacker accusations it's just too damn funny!

Protip: Heavies with rocket launchers, stop standing still to fire at me. You only make it easier for me ;)

[Dougnifico]

You know as I know and everyone else knows, none of this is going to happen until the game gets more optimized. We can't even get people to render past a certain range (300m no?) as it is much less 1000m :(

Also, also, also....Loves me some tank sniping with AP shells. I get so many hate tells and hacker accusations it's just too damn funny!

Protip: Heavies with rocket launchers, stop standing still to fire at me. You only make it easier for me ;)

I'm not saying they have to render at 1000m, I'm saying that I should be able to OHK them with a bolt action to the head at any distance out to there. If they render shorter, so be it. OHK at render range.

[VikingKong]

Or would you like me to complain about why all my shotguns don't OHK ANY part I shoot when in range?
The semi autos don't kill in one shot, no. That's what the pump actions are for.
And on top, there's an option to give up healthsticks/AP mines, and get yourself a motionsensor.
The motion sensor goes in the tool slot replacing the dart gun, not the utilities slot where you'll find the med kits and junk.