They should look at setting the sights for more appropriate ranges. Another thing which annoys me, many of the sights do not even have the option to be set lower than 300 meters with page up/page down!

For a zero at 300m it will be almost .25 meters high at 150m...

"Assault rifles are always zeroed to 100 meters (or less)"

This is patently false. My AG3 was always set to 300m instead of 100, 200, or 400 metres.
Weirdly, that made the sight dead on at a range of 30m. That's exactly where your (unsourced, btw) average range is. Weird, right?

Besides, have you checked that the Holo sights are actually zeroed at 200m? Even if that's what it says in the corner of your screen doesn't mean that the primary aim point in the sight is at that distance.

And this ticket has no mention of calibre, weapon, or any other consideration.

VKING - If you put the aim point of a optic (or irons for that matter) on a target at 30 meters and that is where the bullet impacts, then you are sighted in for 30 meters, regardless of what the setting indicator said.
As far as the info on the screen being right of wrong, with or with out magnification, I feel that it should be right, and the range indicator be correct (on the screen, or as viewed through the optic).
As far as caliber, whether it's a .22 or a fucking rocket propelled harpoon is irrelevant. The optic get adjusted to the rifle, not the other way around.

Assault rifles with iron sights are zeroed at 100m by default in the game and ACO and MK17 Holo are zeroed at 200m and that's what rifles mostly use. SMG versions of those sights are zeroed to 100m

ARCO, RCO and MRCO sights are zeroed at 300m because otherwise the numbers and indicators would lie on those sights.

So where do you even get the 300m? The sights zeroing are just like they should be.

The bullets trajectory can actually intersect with the sight line at 2 points, not one - once on the way up, and then once again on the way down. This happens anytime that the zeroing is set above a distance that will depend on a few factors, but mainly on the height of the sighting system above the bore line of the gun.

Interestingly, the range of the 'way up' intersection actually decreases with an increase in zeroed range (draw the bullet paths on a piece of paper if you don't follow this) - so it is quite possible for VKing's AG3 to hit accurately at 30m (on the way up) and at 300m (on the way down again) whilst being 'officially' zeroed at 300m.

Bravo, that is an interesting factoid, but we're talking about a muzzle that is locked into a vice and parallel to the ground to be zeroed. Only a muzzle pointed above 180 degrees would result in an arc. My point here is that I shouldn't have the lower an optic to score a hit, with or without magnification. Holo optics are for fast (CQB) acquisition, not for range. 200 meters is way too far for a Eotech or even an Aimpoint (red dot).
In closing, when was the last time you were shooting targets at 300 meters with an assault rifle (in real life or the game)? If you put the tip of the chevron high chest at guy 100 meters away, you will send the bullet over their head. It probably is that the reading on the screen is off and not the sight (or at least that is the way it seems recently), but they should both be correct. Seems like an easy fix. The reason why the zero is 300 meters by the hash tag below it being at 400 meters, one MOA below. If one MOA down is 400m, then the chevron, one MOA up, has to be 300 m.

FYI for those interested in this esoteric discussion: http://www.ar15.com/content/page.html?id=208

Here let me draw you a picture. (It's not a pretty picture, mind, but you seem impervious to words). Note that the scope is comically out of scale for demonstration purposes.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/66038154/UO/Pictures/Gunzeroing.jpg

Now to what you said.
"Only a muzzle pointed above 180 degrees would result in an arc."
Gravity and air resistance says you're wrong.

"My point here is that I shouldn't have the lower an optic to score a hit, with or without magnification. 200 meters is way too far for a Eotech or even an Aimpoint (red dot)."
See the picture for why this is wrong.

"If you put the tip of the chevron high chest at guy 100 meters away, you will send the bullet over their head."
Not sure what you mean by tip of the chevron, but if I aim the dot of the MRCO ("zeroed" at 300m) at the chest of someone at 100m, I'll hit their chest.

"It probably is that the reading on the screen is off and not the sight (or at least that is the way it seems recently), but they should both be correct."
They're both correct. See the picture for why it's so.

"FYI for those interested in this esoteric discussion:"
It's only esoteric for people who don't understand what gravity and air resistance does to a bullet's flight path.

Your picture has the barrel pointing up. You don't zero a rifle by lobbing a bullet. You aim it straight ahead, at a 90 degree angle. The bullet only drops, it does not go up; it does not arc. If you are zeroed for three hundred yards and you put your point of aim (a chevron is the shape of the reticle) on someone high chest at 100 yards, it will go over their head. Let me know if you need some more info on this, I'm here to help you out.

• * - - - - - _ -_

PS - This is a definition of the word esoteric: known about or understood by few people. known about or understood by very few people. "people who ... understand what gravity and air resistance does to a bullet's flight path" ARE the very few.

gotmikl. With all due respect, you think you know something that you don't know and you are being somewhat condescending to people who know better. I'm going to leave this here. Please watch it and perhaps revise your thoughts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUJfYr13k_A

"Your picture has the barrel pointing up. You don't zero a rifle by lobbing a bullet. You aim it straight ahead, at a 90 degree angle. The bullet only drops, it does not go up; it does not arc."
Do you even know what an arc is? More to the point, do you even realize that when you're aiming a rifle "straight ahead, at a 90 degree angle", the barrel's actually pointing up a bit? That's how zeroing works. It's more exaggerated in the drawing to demonstrate a point, but it doesn't look like you understood that, either.

Here let me draw you another picture of what would happen if you did what you're suggesting. See how the bullet's not anywhere near where you'd be aiming?
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/66038154/UO/Pictures/Gunzeroing2.jpg

"If you are zeroed for three hundred yards and you put your point of aim (a chevron is the shape of the reticle) on someone high chest at 100 yards, it will go over their head."
No it won't. We're shooting rifles, here, not high-angle howitzers. Have you even tried this?

"PS - This is a definition of the word esoteric: known about or understood by few people. known about or understood by very few people."
I know the definition. In this case those very few people include everyone who's ever taken a high school physics course, but apparently doesn't include you.

There is such a thing as a 100 yard zero where the bullet meets point of aim only once but it's regarded to be impractical by most. For one thing it takes longer to set up walking up and down the range to adjust each group and for another past 300m it's all diminishing returns.

Frankly speaking with an M4, if you are aiming dead center at a head with a 25 meter zero, at the highest point which is around 180 meters you will hit 3 inches high which is still a head shot.

Conversely if I aim dead center at a head with a 100 yard zero at 300 yards, I'm 12 inches low. If the guy was prone I've hit nothing at that range. If I had zero'd at 25m though I'd have scored a head shot.

Counter intuitive to think about? Maybe. But practically still easier to make hits.

I've been to Tactical Response several times and what I've learned there, advocating a zero at 50 yards, is what you posted to show me why I'm wrong? The reason why the "100 yard zero where the bullet meets point of aim only once" is because bullet drop is negligible to 200, and most shooting with 5.56 rifles occurs well inside that distance. Anyway, the rifles in the game impact at 100 yards anyway, which I tested yesterday. Not sure why you would down vote getting the info inside the optic or on the screen to correct, but whatever.

Zeroing a weapon doesn't mean that the peak of the bullet trajectory is at that distance. It just means that the bullet will intersect that point anytime during its flight. In the case of a 50m zero that will be while the bullet is still travelling up, before it hits the peak, and it will at some point further out again hit exactly where you aim.

You are welcome: http://aesirtraining.com/home/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/25-50-100-yard-zero.jpg

Also, no one is voting against making sure that sights and the UI-mentioned zeroing distances correlate, but this ticket isn't about that. This ticket is about that a 300m zero would be wrong, and that's what people are voting down.

gotmiki, a quote from the link that you posted

"The 25M gives you a zero that roughly matches a 300M zero based upon trajectory and bore access. This is the standard zero and allows the firer to hit a man sized target when aimed center of mass from between 25M out to 350M."

Maybe that is why they chose it for the standard range for the ARCO, RCO and MRCO scopes, which are not the sort of scopes that you would adjust 'on the fly' in a combat situation, hence why they do not have pageup/pagedown adjustments available.

And, just for your information, I do have extensive experience of shooting assault rifles - at 100, 200, 300 and 600 yds.