Everybody knows this. Quick speculation: would this help or hinder you developing a mental crosshair?
[Help] What exactly is the gripe about the M14?
- Thread starter Undedd Jester
- Start date
It would probably hinder it a bit, making you reliant on the dot. Personally, I hate to do anything like that, it really ruins the immersion and experience having this annoying dot right there.
yeah...I have a sneeking suspicion that this will come in massive notable surges with ROHoS, with it being a very well publicized PvP game...just a little shoutout to the other forums, if anyone over there reads this
yeah...I have a sneeking suspicion that this will come in massive notable surges with ROHoS, with it being a very well publicized PvP game...just a little shoutout to the other forums, if anyone over there reads this
In that game, the gun will move dynamically with the screen as well as interact with the environment, so it's not always in the center. I think what this will mean, is that the gun will only be in the center of the screen when using the iron sights and standing still. Firing from the hip will be a whole new experience. I don't think putting a taped cross hair will help you at all because of this.
And on topic, I think a slight boost in headshot damage for the m14 could be a good thing. Keep it so it doesn't stun screakes or rage fleshpoudns though; just a slight boost. That would be a realistic improvement.
I would like to see either the laser brightened, or a different scope/iron sights too but that's probably not going to happen.
Last edited:
I don't see how you found that difficult not having one. All you ever have to do is know where the center of your screen is, which has been indicated all those years by other FPS games. I can imagine it being really hard in games like ArmA or Red Orchestra, though. (Trust me, it really does take getting used to)
Lowering spammability is A-OK with me... If you're SS, aim for the damn head!
If the off-center iron sights were fixed, that would be a welcome improvement. However, I think an ACOG would be more appropriate as the M-14 is a medium-to-long range weapon. I notice that in some games, firing while aiming through the scope incurs high recoil (increased screen jarring/shaking, as compared to iron sights). The slightly longer recovery time would discourage spamming, since they won't be able to acquire another target until the recoil has settled.
People actually use the m14's iron sights?
I never used the m14 and thought it was garbage until the most recent update, and although I'll still go xbow/hc four out of five times, I wouldn't totally dismiss it. I prefer it on maps where I might have to play "commandoish"; watch multiple flanks, hold a position, move around a bit, etc. Not having to scope for the m14 makes this the superior choice over the 9mm/handcannon (though I still use the 9mm a lot).
Then you have the lar for husks/sirens/scrakes. It 1-shots husks and sirens, and although it isn't as good as the xbow at killing scrakes you can still kill them without them ever unstunning. This combo is also much easier to solo fleshpounds with (or at least for me lol). 2-3 lar shots followed up by ebr spam to the head. As long as the fleshpound is running in a straight line this is relatively easy to do.
So if I'm sitting in a corner or hallway and shooting down it the xbow/hc is a better choice, but if I have to mix it up m14/lar isn't half bad! Though without thinking it over I agree with the topic creator's suggestion of increasing headshot damage/lowering bodyshot damage.
I never used the m14 and thought it was garbage until the most recent update, and although I'll still go xbow/hc four out of five times, I wouldn't totally dismiss it. I prefer it on maps where I might have to play "commandoish"; watch multiple flanks, hold a position, move around a bit, etc. Not having to scope for the m14 makes this the superior choice over the 9mm/handcannon (though I still use the 9mm a lot).
Then you have the lar for husks/sirens/scrakes. It 1-shots husks and sirens, and although it isn't as good as the xbow at killing scrakes you can still kill them without them ever unstunning. This combo is also much easier to solo fleshpounds with (or at least for me lol). 2-3 lar shots followed up by ebr spam to the head. As long as the fleshpound is running in a straight line this is relatively easy to do.
So if I'm sitting in a corner or hallway and shooting down it the xbow/hc is a better choice, but if I have to mix it up m14/lar isn't half bad! Though without thinking it over I agree with the topic creator's suggestion of increasing headshot damage/lowering bodyshot damage.
Remove laser and add a short range scope, I will kiss this gun for the rest of my life
Last edited:
I rarely play without using iron sights on my weapons, so if the iron sights suck, I don't even bother using it. I do "point shoot" at close range, but not any farther than probably 5 yards at the most.
Well, I was thinking about what the underlying problem of the M-14 is and it suddenly hit me: the gun in it's current state isn't being true to it's real-life purpose.
I know, I know "Realism in games, lol" ect, but hear me out...
When Tripwire made the M14 EBR, they modelled it after the real-life weapon as much as they could. It's big strength in real life is that it hits ridiculously hard while being accurate (Despite those god awful sights). So we basically had a semi-auto weapon with the power of the Lever Action Rifle (Which makes sense because IRL, an M-14 could hit as hard or harder than most rifles of the Lever Action's size!). It was a glorious weapon. But that's the problem. If you leave the M-14 the way it really is, in a battle all about taking down opponents fast, before they can close, by shooting precisely and quickly, a powerful, Semi-Auto rifle like the M14 is an almost perfect weapon.
So obviously, gameplay-wise, this was seriously broken. People could easily bodyshot enemies. It was a serious problem. And, honestly, there's no easy solution. But the solution they did was pretty bad. They basically made it into a semi-auto-only clone of the SCAR with absolutely pathetic bodyshot damage but a huge, overcompensating headshot bonus.
But that doesn't matter, because it's not the M-14 EBR anymore. It's the SCAR-Sharpshooter Edition, swapping the SCAR's scope for crappy ironsights and a laser, swapping the SCAR's all-around damage for crap bodyshot and over-the-top headshot damage, and losing the SCAR's full-auto mode (And 5 rounds out of it's mag size).
You know the sad part? What gun do YOU think of that wouldn't do much with a bodyshot but would be lethal with a headshot? A .22 rifle. That's right. The beast known as the M-14 performs like a .22 rifle right now. It's just a really depressing gun right now. My grandpa has an M-14 from his army days (Not that fancy EBR, just the 1960s version with the wooden stock, but it's still a beautiful gun!) and it's amazing (Doesn't have the "EBR"s craptastic Iron Sight either!). Nothing like the sad .22 cal EBR we have in the game right now. I wanna see the M-14 be an amazing gun again, damnit!
I know, I know "Realism in games, lol" ect, but hear me out...
When Tripwire made the M14 EBR, they modelled it after the real-life weapon as much as they could. It's big strength in real life is that it hits ridiculously hard while being accurate (Despite those god awful sights). So we basically had a semi-auto weapon with the power of the Lever Action Rifle (Which makes sense because IRL, an M-14 could hit as hard or harder than most rifles of the Lever Action's size!). It was a glorious weapon. But that's the problem. If you leave the M-14 the way it really is, in a battle all about taking down opponents fast, before they can close, by shooting precisely and quickly, a powerful, Semi-Auto rifle like the M14 is an almost perfect weapon.
So obviously, gameplay-wise, this was seriously broken. People could easily bodyshot enemies. It was a serious problem. And, honestly, there's no easy solution. But the solution they did was pretty bad. They basically made it into a semi-auto-only clone of the SCAR with absolutely pathetic bodyshot damage but a huge, overcompensating headshot bonus.
But that doesn't matter, because it's not the M-14 EBR anymore. It's the SCAR-Sharpshooter Edition, swapping the SCAR's scope for crappy ironsights and a laser, swapping the SCAR's all-around damage for crap bodyshot and over-the-top headshot damage, and losing the SCAR's full-auto mode (And 5 rounds out of it's mag size).
You know the sad part? What gun do YOU think of that wouldn't do much with a bodyshot but would be lethal with a headshot? A .22 rifle. That's right. The beast known as the M-14 performs like a .22 rifle right now. It's just a really depressing gun right now. My grandpa has an M-14 from his army days (Not that fancy EBR, just the 1960s version with the wooden stock, but it's still a beautiful gun!) and it's amazing (Doesn't have the "EBR"s craptastic Iron Sight either!). Nothing like the sad .22 cal EBR we have in the game right now. I wanna see the M-14 be an amazing gun again, damnit!
The real-world EBR is what drew me to the Sharpshooter class when I first purchased KF. I wasn't aware of it's "broken" status, but I thought its power was appropriate: it fires heavy, nasty 7.62 x 51 rounds.
You certainly shouldn't feel it necessary to apologize for wanting some "realism" in games. An in-game weapon filling it's intended role in the real world is acceptable realism. You've said what I've been thinking this entire time: that the M14 performs like a .22 rifle. All the while, Medic is used as an offensive class...
Nanostrike said:
drunkentiger said:
Both Nanostrike and drunkentiger are quite correct. TWI decided to go with a real-world weapon in their choice of the M-14 EBR. They could have just as easily, created some generic hodge-podge and called it the Combat Assault Rifle, or some such moniker. There is precedence for this; the crossbow isn't exactly a standard-issue item. In the case of the EBR, they chose to include an actual RW weapon.
So, I don't think there should be any apologies, LOLs, or other qualifiers due when expecting this weapon to perform in a manner at least somewhat akin to it's depiction/description. The M14 *should* outperform, not equal, the LAR across the board, period. If that is simply too much realism for some people, well, fellow forum members, we just disagree on that point.
The "easy solution" that nanostrike was searching for, IMO, would have been to simply sharply reduce the amount of ammunition. Doing so would probably have deterred most of the spamming without the need to toy with the original damage dealt. All that being said, I'm not advocating, nor expecting, a reformulation of the headshot/bodyshot/stun numbers; that would be a chore.
What I think would be an easier task is that the existing iron sights could be "cleaned up" to be more sharply defined; they're a bit of a mess as they are. And, if the point-of-impact isn't as yet properly aligned with the iron sights, obviously, that needs to be fixed. Getting into a more ambitious vein, I'd dump the laser and replace it with a flashlight. Adding a low-power, wide angle-of-view scope seems like the best fix. Most especially if the damage numbers aren't re-tooled.
Interesting #33, I never use the m14 except for short and medium range. I pick off the trash from long range with the 9mm, and anything larger than a siren with the lar. This works fine with me but does bring up another problem: A gun that costs 200 dosh shouldn't mostly outperform one that costs
Well I doubt they would be crappy, considering the level of people that use those rifles are SF guys and SEALs. Think the Marines are starting to field them as well.