Originally Posted by Captain1nsaneo
All the MA have buttstocks. It's just that the models holding them aren't using them.
|
Yes you are correct. They do have stocks, but they are way too short to be of any practical use. I forgot to add the word "useable" in my above post w/ the MA pics.
But as you said the point is moot. Whether they have no stock, have too short of a stock, or have one that is always retracted the result is the same. The stock ain't gettin' used, which again, looks odd for an empire's mainstay assault rifle and is against common sense in most situations.
Originally Posted by Captain1nsaneo
But that doesn't help the thread much so let's see if I can help out. First, you guys are right about the stock, it does help and all that jazz. HOWEVER! Check this out:
What you are looking at is a folded stock. Why do these exist? Close range combat. You don't need that stability a stock offers when your inside a building and the ranges are short. The folded stock allows for better maneuverability in tight spaces for rifles. |
I would argue that foldable/retractable stocks exist more for weight, portability, concealment, and ease of entering/exiting vehicles for paratroopers, pilots/drivers, security forces, etc than they do for use in CQC, although an F/R stock would help to an extent in tight quarters as well.
But I disagree with your assertion that you don't need the added precision and stability of a stock in CQC. CQC is incredibly dangerous (duh! hehe) because even an untrained combatant with an AK has a decent chance of hitting you within a few seconds if you don't drop him immediately, so you want to be able to take him out in as quickly as possible.
My understanding is that with your typical stock-folded assault rifle it's difficult hitting a man-sized target at all outside about 25m much less get a kill shot due to the lack of control. But if you want to be able to consistently deliver that "2 to the chest, 1 to the head" you're going to want the precision that comes with bracing your weapon against your shoulder.
If CQC is a concern, you'd be much better served using a frame stock and a shorter barrel instead since you'd get increased mobility similar to that gained by the folded stock (since both designs are shorter and lighter) but you'd still be able to use the stock in an instant to engage targets beyond 25m when you enter larger indoor areas (like hallways, cafeterias, meeting rooms, loading docks, warehouses, etc).
Originally Posted by Captain1nsaneo
Finally a quote from T-Ray
|
Originally Posted by T-Ray
7 words.... Wep Pin Cuss Tim My Zay Shun
|
Pretty sure you can add a stock. That stockless version probably has a higher RoF for lower CoF or some such. |
I dunno, in both the official trailer and the 2 screenshots we've been given that show the whole weapon, the Pulsar has no stock, which leads me to believe it's the base model since that's the design they keep showing us.
But we've already covered the "customization" approach.
The VS are supposed to be the "versatile" empire. Having a buttstock by default would make the Pulsar a more versatile weapon than not including one, thus IMO it should be included on the base model. Offering it as an unlock/sidegrade is not the way to go, especially given that the TR & NC weapons appear to have them by default.
And remember that you won't always have the resources to be able to pull customized weapons and in those situations you'll be stuck using just the base model. With that in mind I'd like to have the more accurate, versatile model that has a stock, TYVM.
2011-11-27, 02:11 AM
I go shooting everyday.
Linear Mode
