So been playing around with the L1A1 for a while now and I've come to the conclusion that by far the most intrusive part of the sights is the thickness of the aperture ring, esp. the top part, and not how big the opening is. As a result I've been struggling to be effective with the L1A1, despite the huge peep hole.
Now since the launch of RS2 I've taught myself to hold low with the M16 & M14 in order to atleast be somewhat effective with these by allowing muscle memory to quickly bring the target into the aperture, however this is hard with the L1A1 because the hold has to be almost twice as low (large distance between aimpoint and top of aperture ring), increasing the distance I need to move my weapon to get the target into my sights and costing invaluable time in the 3 step process of 1. spotting, 2. aiming and 3. shooting.
In short its the thickness of the ring thats the important part when making all these peep sights usable in games, and not so much the size of the opening itself.
Has anyone else had similar problems with the L1A1? Or do you find the L1A1's sights to be fine?
Now since the launch of RS2 I've taught myself to hold low with the M16 & M14 in order to atleast be somewhat effective with these by allowing muscle memory to quickly bring the target into the aperture, however this is hard with the L1A1 because the hold has to be almost twice as low (large distance between aimpoint and top of aperture ring), increasing the distance I need to move my weapon to get the target into my sights and costing invaluable time in the 3 step process of 1. spotting, 2. aiming and 3. shooting.
In short its the thickness of the ring thats the important part when making all these peep sights usable in games, and not so much the size of the opening itself.
Has anyone else had similar problems with the L1A1? Or do you find the L1A1's sights to be fine?
Upvote
0