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?!


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]

Originally Posted by Plaqueis

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]

Originally Posted by bites

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

[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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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...)