Perun58;n2294984 said:
Subjective. I can't stand them. The fact that the elevation pin is bigger than the actual sights is incredibly frustrating. I was strongly sceptical about the M16 sights but they are very, very precise and not that hard to use.
Well its something I can back up with ingame performance, not just once, but consistently. The AKs sights are just that much easier to use.
Sorry, but this is an actual value, not a matter of opinion - the AK has lower damage than any rifle in the game and the only primaries with lower or same damage are MAT a PPSh while the M16 has massive damage. 60% of my hits with the M16 are lethal but only about 1/3 of hits with the AK are lethal if my ingame stats are to be trusted.
We just saw the stats, the AK apparently does more dmg pr. round than the M16.
In terms of ingame experience however I didnt notice any difference between the two when hitting people in the same spots.
Btw you gotta remember to always do any comparison on a low ping server, cause on high ping servers there are some serious hit reg issues. You ping should be 70 or lower ON the server, otherwise issues start to arise in my experience.
Penetration yes. But as I said the M16 will penetrate the wall anyway.
Thats not my experience at all. The AK reliaby punches through obstacles ingame, the M16 does not.
Higher magazine capacity is barely useful if bullets do no damage and the gun has apparently bent barrel.
Again the damage is either the same or apparently slightly in the AK's favor. Only thing I can see change this is is if the 5.56's superior wounding ability (fragmentation) within 150m is simulated.
How is higher RoF disadvantage? The M16 has ideal rate of fire and is perfectly controlable in full auto... unlike some other guns.
Ammo expenditure vs mag capacity. It's rather simple. Both weapons are stupid easy to control in full auto, if you cant control the AK full auto I really dont know what to tell you.
Most relevant attributes of the gun are in my opinion accuracy, damage and recoil.
​​​​​​All which is secondary to proper sights.
Everything else is secondary and the M16 is not only better than the AK in these, it's astronomically better.
"Exaggeration promotes understanding" seems to be your motto, because thats definitely not true.
That said the M16 HAS both a lighter recoil and is more accurate than the AK in real life, thus if this wasn't the case ingame then something would definitely be off.
But there's much more to a usable and effective ingame (and real life) firearm than being the best in just these 3 disciplines. Easy to use sights are paramount and above all else, and a more usable RoF coupled with a subtantially larger mag capacity is of high importance as well.
I think you meant 100m, because on 150m it's not about carrying out headshots but about hitting guy "somewhere".
No I meant 150, and Ive also done headshots with the AKM at this range plenty of times, it's just no longer a sure thing at this range - but tbh neither is it with the M16, its just more consistent at long shots, which also should be the case.
On shooting range perfectly aimed AK won't constantly hit target on 200m and that's uncovered target in standing position ( I will need to do the video on that so there won't be no doubt that it's the gun, not the player is can't hit thing) . Shooting people who actually hide behind things and are not standing on more than 100m is a nightmare in the game. I am highly sceptical that it's 5 MOA, it's more like 15... we can't really talk about headshots...
The devs confirmed 4.5 to 5 MOA AFAIK.
I think the only reason you say that is because M16 sights are around the target while the AK sights are mostly under it.
Which is what matters.
What I am talking about is that if you count pixels on the screen covered by sights the AK would probably take more.
I highly doubt it, but even so it's completely irrelevant as that isn't what determines how effective the sight picture is. The MG42 in RO2 is a perfect example of this, takes up lots of pixels on screen, but the sight still provides excellent FoV because vast amount is kept under the target and the actual point of aim is mostly obstruction free.
I need to set my sights on the AK on 200-300m so I won't cover up my target while using it.
Odd, I never do this, I wouldn't see the point. But that might explain why you seem to miss with the AK all time...
With the M16 I have at least some space around the target when I aim on it. I am not arguing that the M16 has good sights. I am just claiming that the AK doesn't.
I can't undetstand this at all as the AKs sights are as easy and natural to use for me as any other V notch sight ingame.
