- User Since
- Mar 10 2013, 8:06 AM (507 w, 5 d)
May 10 2016
To be honest, adding wind wouldn't be prudent for these reasons-
- In real life, one either uses a portable weather station like a Kestrel or a guess based upon what the weather feels like to judge conditions at the shooter's position. I can't feel wind in a game, but I can use a Kestrel, so the addition of a Kestrel would be necessary. Operating a Kestrel while trying to make a quick shot would be very irritating, since I obviously can't use Kentucky windage.
- When shooting in real life over long distances, There can be multiple winds moving different directions along the bullets flight path, even over distances as short as 600 yards. When this is the case, one looks for any sign of what the wind might be like over at the target, i.e. blowing grass or trees, flags, or anything that can be blown by wind. This would obviously be impossible or very difficult to implement, necessitating a consistent wind over the entirety of the map, detracting from the level of realism.
Instead of adding wind, I suggest removing the old system of dialing the scope in. Pressing "page up" and "page down" in 100 yard increments is pretty lame. Instead, I suggest accurate Mil or MOA hash reticles in scopes for ranging without a rangefinder and for hold-over estimations, and an elevation and windage adjustment system graded in 1/10 Mil or 1/4 MOA as per the standard of today's optics. Instead of hitting below your target and saying, "I better press page up once!" you could have your spotter say, "dial three-quarters of a mil up!" This system is far more precise and would take longer to master, adding the realism that you guys desire without having to resort to a janky system in which wind is implemented.
May 9 2016
Suppressors actually don't increase or decrease velocity enough to be notable, they do however move your point of impact by a certain repeatable amount. Additionally, suppressors by the nature of their chambered design, not their weight, decrease recoil. A cross-section of a suppressor will show numerous baffles designed to decelerate the expanding gas that propel the bullet forward. A byproduct of the gases hitting these baffles is forward energy that reduces recoil. You would be surprised to see the amount of recoil a suppressor removes. A suppressor is essentially an encased muzzle brake. Just look on YouTube for videos showing the amount of recoil reduction a muzzle brake gives you.
I can't imagine snipers shooting through the sound barrier very often, because the transonic region (around 1000-1300 FPS, depending upon ambient conditions) wreaks havoc on accuracy. There is so much turbulence that, depending upon the profile of the bullet, can totally destabilize it and cause it to tumble. There is a reason that 1000 yard .308 Win (essentially the same as 7.62x51) shooters search high and low for a good transonic performing bullet. This usually means a flat-base bullet with a tangent ogive. Military snipers don't use those types of bullets, they use bullets with high ballistic efficiency to prolong the amount of time before the bullet wants to go subsonic for greater retained energy and a harder hit. This means a bullet with a secant ogive and a boat tail is best. Unfortunately, these types of bullets are also notorious for problems with going through the sound barrier; so a suppressor, under most conditions, would benefit a sniper.
Being a hunter- specifically and elk and deer hunter- I can tell you that you can locate the general direction that somebody has shot from by the report of the rifle.
Also notable, to make a normally supersonic cartridge subsonic, one must use a smaller amount of a faster burning powder to prevent an unwanted secondary explosion that, if the bullet was jammed into the rifling, could damage the firearm or the user.
Sorry for the long response, but there you have it.
Thanks for your response and criticism, it's good to know that somebody else is interested in getting this right!
Good point, but according to the designers of these short and fat cartridges, they offer more a more consistent and efficient burn because of the fat powder column. Alledgedly, the Ackley-esque shoulders these cartridges have are supposed to increase accuracy as well, but I can't speak for that as all of my rifles are chambered for standard long-action cartridges, not these powerful short mags.
I think that Bohemia is envisioning an M14 that fires a shorter, fatter cartridge than what is essentially .308 Win as per the latest shooting trends, e.g. .300 WSM, 7mm RSAUM, and the like. If that isn't the case, I would say switch it to 7.62x51.
Recoil seems fine to me, gentlemen. I have been shooting my 13 firearms regularly since I was three years old and have put thousands, if not tens of thousands of rounds down range, and can tell you that a shooter's experience or training has nothing to do with recoil- it has everything to do with getting back on target quickly and reduction of flinch; additionally, technology is not going to come to the rescue in the form of a miracle recoil-reducing system. As we stand today, the only ways to reduce actual recoil are muzzle porting/installing muzzle brake/using a suppressor, or adding weight to the gun (some receivers have also been specially designed to reduce muzzle climb, but not by a huge amount). to reduce felt recoil, a reducer that uses mercury or springs and works on inertia may also be used, but some claim that these affect accuracy adversely.