550 réponses à ce sujet

[JaegerBane]

SaturnRing wrote...
Yeah, i certainly "feel" the 3rd burst when i fire it; enough to loose target acquisition every time. That's a good concept for AR - as the M 16 or AN 94 (2 rd burst) prooves - but for SR...

In the ME universe (at least the ME2 universe) guns that fire multiple rounds (either one after the other or all at once) are inherently more effective against active defences like shields. Hence, within the game world, having a sniper rifles that fired in bursts has some advantage.

[SaturnRing]

JaegerBane wrote...

SaturnRing wrote...
Yeah, i certainly "feel" the 3rd burst when i fire it; enough to loose target acquisition every time. That's a good concept for AR - as the M 16 or AN 94 (2 rd burst) prooves - but for SR...

In the ME universe (at least the ME2 universe) guns that fire multiple rounds (either one after the other or all at once) are inherently more effective against active defences like shields. Hence, within the game world, having a sniper rifles that fired in bursts has some advantage.

I agree. My hope was that the Incisor would offer a more stable platform. The kickback tend to whisk away all the advantages that  short burst provides ( apart from increased rof, better ammo management; better accuracy - although acc is only relevant in this case to a fully auto version ). I find myself totally ignoring the optics while wielding it for better results. I do think it would have been an awesome semi auto rifle. 

Modifié par SaturnRing, 21 avril 2012 - 09:14 .

[Rudy Lis]

JaegerBane wrote...

In the ME universe (at least the ME2 universe) guns that fire multiple rounds (either one after the other or all at once) are inherently more effective against active defences like shields. Hence, within the game world, having a sniper rifles that fired in bursts has some advantage.

Never had ME2 Incirsor, but ME3 burst is totally ruined. Let's take ME2 Vindicator - very fast burst, easily allowing to score three headshots on medium distance or mozambique drill alike for longer ones. And even ME2 Andrenaline Rush cyclic rate was quite high.
In ME3 all burst weapon is less adequate, even Vindicator himself, though he is best: Argus is basically "can't hit broad side of barn from inside the barn", Incirsor have a way too uncomfortable muzzle-climb, sort of like Hornet and Shuriken, though latter to smaller degree.
IMHO good accuracy should be mandatory for burst-mode weapon, especially in game like ME3. But I'd still prefer semi-auto. Alas, there is no selective fire in ME universe.

SaturnRing wrote...

I agree. My hope was that the Incisor would offer a more stable platform. The kickback tend to whisk away all the advantages that short burst provides ( apart from increased rof, better ammo management; better accuracy - although acc is only relevant in this case to a fully auto version ). I find myself totally ignoring the optics while wielding it for better results. I do think it would have been an awesome semi auto rifle.

Get Indra if you can, basically it is much better Incirsor/Mattock combo.

Modifié par Rudy Lis, 21 avril 2012 - 09:19 .

[SaturnRing]

Rudy Lis wrote...


Never had ME2 Incirsor, but ME3 burst is totally ruined. Let's take ME2 Vindicator - very fast burst, easily allowing to score three headshots on medium distance or mozambique drill alike for longer ones. And even ME2 Andrenaline Rush cyclic rate was quite high.
In ME3 all burst weapon is less adequate, even Vindicator himself, though he is best: Argus is basically "can't hit broad side of barn from inside the barn", Incirsor have a way too uncomfortable muzzle-climb, sort of like Hornet and Shuriken, though latter to smaller degree.
IMHO good accuracy should be mandatory for burst-mode weapon, especially in game like ME3. But I'd still prefer semi-auto. Alas, there is no selective fire in ME universe.


 

This^

The Incisor should have been a ME3 version of an M 14. Select semi auto for mid/long range firefights, with the possibility to revert to fully auto for close quaters. If not it's better utilized as a only semi auto.

Modifié par SaturnRing, 21 avril 2012 - 09:42 .

[Rudy Lis]

SaturnRing wrote...

This^

The Incisor should have been a ME3 version of an M 14. Select semi auto for mid/long range firefights, with the possibility to revert to fully auto for close quaters. If not it's better utilized as a only semi auto.

I have limited experience with M14, but I'd prefer to use it as semi-auto only. Of course she's heavier than F.A.L, but still, it's .308. I've heard some Yankees developed good muzzlebrake/compensator, though, but I have no comparison charts for long-range accuracy.
I see Incirsor, Raptor and somewhat Indra as AR-15 variant - little to no recoil, muzzleflip, relatively large magazine and carrying capacity. Those rifles put placement and follow-up shots above power of single shot. ME2 Viper was almost ideal for that purpose. Valiant is somewhat filling that niche, only 3 round mag spoils everything.

[SaturnRing]

Rudy Lis wrote...

SaturnRing wrote...

This^

The Incisor should have been a ME3 version of an M 14. Select semi auto for mid/long range firefights, with the possibility to revert to fully auto for close quaters. If not it's better utilized as a only semi auto.

I have limited experience with M14, but I'd prefer to use it as semi-auto only. Of course she's heavier than F.A.L, but still, it's .308. I've heard some Yankees developed good muzzlebrake/compensator, though, but I have no comparison charts for long-range accuracy.
I see Incirsor, Raptor and somewhat Indra as AR-15 variant - little to no recoil, muzzleflip, relatively large magazine and carrying capacity. Those rifles put placement and follow-up shots above power of single shot. ME2 Viper was almost ideal for that purpose. Valiant is somewhat filling that niche, only 3 round mag spoils everything.

The M 14 kicks pretty bad. But i think it's manageable up to 75 to 100yrs - rough estimation. You make a good comparison with the AR 15 (in this case probably the SR 25). But to get back on topic that's the role where Incisor or Raptor (i haven't tried the Indra)  act as a suitable weapon for a secondary sharpshooter; the primary shooter would probably carry a W or BW. or they could fit perfectly for any situation where enemies can quickly close  distances and get right in your face. The Viper was perfect for that in ME2. I find that now its trigger reset time is way too long.

Modifié par SaturnRing, 21 avril 2012 - 10:07 .

[Rudy Lis]

SaturnRing wrote...

The M 14 kicks pretty bad. But i think it's manageable up to 75 to 100yrs - rough estimation.

In full-auto, even in user controlled burst, from standing, without bipod, with basic flashhider/compensator? I doubt, really. AK is much lighter (yet have large mass of moving parts, I know), but still is not very useful for long range contact in full-auto - 2nd or 3rd tops bullet will fly above target with high probability. IMHO full auto is for something up to 10 metres, when you have some rounds in mag, but don't have time to reach secondary gun, since 10 metres could be passed really quickly.

SaturnRing wrote...

You make a good comparison with the AR 15 (in this case probably the SR 25). But to get back on topic that's the role where Incisor or Raptor (i haven't tried the Indra)  act as a suitable weapon for a secondary sharpshooter; the primary shooter would probably carry a W or BW.

 

Problem with AMR like Widows or Javelin is lack of long distances. Generally you don't need AMR at 100 metres. Especially for dynamics offered in ME3 - firing 40 kg rifle on the move, from short stops or from standing looks odd. That's why I prefer Valiant - seems more logical.

SaturnRing wrote...

or they could fit perfectly for any situation where enemies can quickly close  distances and get right in your face. 

And I won't be original, but ME2 Mattock (in terms of accuracy) could fit spotter weapon better, right for relatively close combat, yet still usable for mid-range support/spotting/guiding. Or LMG, should Revenant be more accurate - suppress targets and let "big brother" to pick them up.

SaturnRing wrote...

The Viper was perfect for that in ME2. I find that now its trigger reset time is way too long.

It's not trigger reset, it something like "refire rate", which is basically killed all Viper meaning in this game.

[SaturnRing]

Rudy Lis wrote...


In full-auto, even in user controlled burst, from standing, without bipod, with basic flashhider/compensator? I doubt, really. AK is much lighter (yet have large mass of moving parts, I know), but still is not very useful for long range contact in full-auto - 2nd or 3rd tops bullet will fly above target with high probability. IMHO full auto is for something up to 10 metres, when you have some rounds in mag, but don't have time to reach secondary gun, since 10 metres could be passed really quickly.

it was so that it had one of the shortest service record(i have a soft spot for it though). It kicks  worse than the AK in fully auto. My only problem with the AK are the iron sight (not enough distance between front and rear sight) the M14 kick way more although they both 7.62. AK handles the recoil much better at least to me.  

Problem with AMR like Widows or Javelin is lack of long distances. Generally you don't need AMR at 100 metres. Especially for dynamics offered in ME3 - firing 40 kg rifle on the move, from short stops or from standing looks odd. That's why I prefer Valiant - seems more logical.

Don't have the Valiant, so i'll stick to Raptor or Incisor. I use the W and BW because of their anti personel/material properties. That's something that can't be ignored. Just like i would for a 50 cal SR. What makes me decide to use them or not is not so much distances but how easy the terrain is to navigate through. How easily hostiles can get to me.

And I won't be original, but ME2 Mattock (in terms of accuracy) could fit spotter weapon better, right for relatively close combat, yet still usable for mid-range support/spotting/guiding. Or LMG, should Revenant be more accurate - suppress targets and let "big brother" to pick them up.

I'd rather have something with a x6 or x12 magn. scope; unless engagements in close quarter are too frequent. But i agree that the Mattock covers that role.

It's not trigger reset, it something like "refire rate", which is basically killed all Viper meaning in this game.

That's my thought. Don't use the Viper. 

Modifié par SaturnRing, 21 avril 2012 - 10:58 .

[Wulfram]

Viper seems to work a bit better if you drop out of the scope after every shot. And I keep meaning to try it with Marksman.

[SaturnRing]

Wulfram wrote...

Viper seems to work a bit better if you drop out of the scope after every shot. And I keep meaning to try it with Marksman.

I'd have to try that too. It's kinda how i use the Incisor.

[Rudy Lis]

SaturnRing wrote...

it was so that it had one of the shortest service record(i have a soft spot for it though). It kicks  worse than the AK in fully auto. My only problem with the AK are the iron sight (not enough distance between front and rear sight) the M14 kick way more although they both 7.62. AK handles the recoil much better at least to me.  

Of course AK kicks less - 7.62x39 vs 7.62x51. Latter is practically old rifle cartridge, like Russian 7.62x54R, they kick quite similar. Relatively.
AK IMHO has 3.5 problems:
- Lack of normal mount for scopes and sights.
- Large mass of moving parts, which is bless and curse at the same time.
- Ergonomic is somewhat odd for right-handed shooter.

SaturnRing wrote...

Don't have the Valiant, so i'll stick to Raptor or Incisor. I use the W and BW because of their anti personel/material properties. That's something that can't be ignored. Just like i would for a 50 cal SR. What makes me decide to use them or not is not so much distances but how easy the terrain is to navigate through. How easily hostiles can get to me.

IMHO Incirsor has too much muzzle-climb for me, and Raptor requires a bit too much of "trigger pulls", i.e. a bit weak. Valiant and Indra are just right, I guess.
But without them, I'd probably stick to Mantis where I don't need penetration, or to BW for all other cases.

SaturnRing wrote...

I'd rather have something with a x6 or x12 magn. scope; unless engagements in close quarter are too frequent. But i agree that the Mattock covers that role.

12x? What for? I think 6x for SR and 4x for AR is excessive for most cases - I'd like to have something like 2x for AR and 3x-6x for SR. Game have few locations reaching 100 metres, even 6x is a bit too much, IMHO: I only need to shot enemy head, not third rivet in fifth row of his helmet.
And I'd like wider FOV for scopes, that's for sure.

SaturnRing wrote...

That's my thought. Don't use the Viper. 

Well, that's what I do.

Wulfram wrote...

Viper seems to work a bit better if you drop out of the scope after every shot. And I keep meaning to try it with Marksman.

Dropping scope worthy if you have dilation module, if you don't - it's just too jerky and it's hard to aim. Marksman seems to be working fine, though, but I prefer AP ammo as bonus power.

[SaturnRing]

Rudy Lis wrote...

Of course AK kicks less - 7.62x39 vs 7.62x51. Latter is practically old rifle cartridge, like Russian 7.62x54R, they kick quite similar. Relatively.
AK IMHO has 3.5 problems:
- Lack of normal mount for scopes and sights.
- Large mass of moving parts, which is bless and curse at the same time.
- Ergonomic is somewhat odd for right-handed shooter.

Haha, and watch out for broken thumbs if you're a left shooter...just like you said: cursed or blessed. I do love both AKs 47 and 74. If it weren't for the sights (and muzzle flash signature) the 74 is just awesome. 

IMHO Incirsor has too much muzzle-climb for me, and Raptor requires a bit too much of "trigger pulls", i.e. a bit weak. Valiant and Indra are just right, I guess.
But without them, I'd probably stick to Mantis where I don't need penetration, or to BW for all other cases.

I certainly won't argue about the Incisor. I always advocate for a semi auto version of it. I do favor the Raptor though. The mantis is a marvel for someone on budget. Ireally like it.

12x? What for? I think 6x for SR and 4x for AR is excessive for most cases - I'd like to have something like 2x for AR and 3x-6x for SR. Game have few locations reaching 100 metres, even 6x is a bit too much, IMHO: I only need to shot enemy head, not third rivet in fifth row of his helmet.
And I'd like wider FOV for scopes, that's for sure.

Although it's unwise when you have a large center mass at you disposal, Headshots. I just can't help it. Or shooting phantoms swords of...

Modifié par SaturnRing, 21 avril 2012 - 11:52 .

[Rudy Lis]

SaturnRing wrote...

Haha, and watch out for broken thumbs if you're a left shooter...just like you said: cursed or blessed.

*Badassfully* I'm lefty.

SaturnRing wrote...

I certainly won't argue about the Incisor. I always advocate for a semi auto version of it. I do favor the Raptor though. The mantis is a marvel for someone on budget. Ireally like it.

I guess we all advocated for proper selective fire. But no - artistic integrity and memory saving. For moar bewbage, no less.

SaturnRing wrote...

Although it's unwise when you have a large center mass at you disposal, Headshots. I just can't help it. Or shooting phantoms swords of...

Phantoms are PITA on their own, yeah. That's why my major complain is projectiles velocity - 100 m/s, are you kidding?
For headshots, I think, standard 4-6x are sufficient. Maybe only back in London, if you dug in somewhere at back.

[SaturnRing]

Rudy Lis wrote...


Phantoms are PITA on their own, yeah. That's why my major complain is projectiles velocity - 100 m/s, are you kidding?
For headshots, I think, standard 4-6x are sufficient. Maybe only back in London, if you dug in somewhere at back.

Geths are making a name for themselves dodging those 100 m/s bullets.
How do most SR in the game stack up as far as velocity is concerned?

[Rudy Lis]

SaturnRing wrote...

Geths are making a name for themselves dodging those 100 m/s bullets.

Geth jumps somewhere back-left are way too easy to predict and take proper lead/correction.
As well as Cerberus rolls, which make me laugh - it's like damn circus: we have jugglers, acrobats, clowns (Shepard and co) and animals.

SaturnRing wrote...

How do most SR in the game stack up as far as velocity is concerned?

As far as I able to calculate - all projectiles have this velocity. Well, that's improvement over ME2 - with 50 m/s. I've seen pucks flying faster.

I can understand why in game like ArmA2 mean projectile velocty is 400 m/s regardless of distance - you can be engaged in combat with enemy at distance of several kilometres. But here?

Modifié par Rudy Lis, 22 avril 2012 - 12:10 .

[SaturnRing]

Rudy Lis wrote...

As far as I able to calculate - all projectiles have this velocity. Well, that's improvement over ME2 - with 50 m/s. I've seen pucks flying faster.

I can understand why in game like ArmA2 mean projectile velocty is 400 m/s regardless of distance - you can be engaged in combat with enemy at distance of several kilometres. But here?

I seriously would have expected more. But if you take in consideration that you don't have to account for gravity, humidity or wind (or planet rotation), that's an acceptable trade i guess. Still that's somewhat of a handicap; specially when firing SR like the Mantis. It is strange that i only felt that lack of velocity when firing the Javelin.

Modifié par SaturnRing, 22 avril 2012 - 12:22 .

[All-a-Mort]

I think I tried the Incisor on one n7 mission. Recoil was horrible and since the delay between shots still hasn't been fixed (honestly I was expecting like say a AN94 style firing rate) it was a magic combination of too weak, too much recoil and too much time lag in the burst to land 3 headshots. So pretty much useless.
The Raptor for me is more the spotter weapon. SLightly more accurate and slightly more powered compared to a scoped Mattock, though in my infiltrator build I don't use it.

I do agree though that the engagement range for the most part in ME2 and ME3 is not far enough to really require a fully fledged sniper rifle as such. Strikes me its more designated marksman kinda ranges if that. I imagine its why I use the Valiant more. As said earlier in this thread, it has assumed the role the Viper had in ME2 of being a more rapid fire accurized rifle.

[SaturnRing]

All-a-Mort wrote...

I think I tried the Incisor on one n7 mission. Recoil was horrible and since the delay between shots still hasn't been fixed (honestly I was expecting like say a AN94 style firing rate) it was a magic combination of too weak, too much recoil and too much time lag in the burst to land 3 headshots. So pretty much useless.
The Raptor for me is more the spotter weapon. SLightly more accurate and slightly more powered compared to a scoped Mattock, though in my infiltrator build I don't use it.

I do agree though that the engagement range for the most part in ME2 and ME3 is not far enough to really require a fully fledged sniper rifle as such. Strikes me its more designated marksman kinda ranges if that. I imagine its why I use the Valiant more. As said earlier in this thread, it has assumed the role the Viper had in ME2 of being a more rapid fire accurized rifle.

You make good point. I would have expected more opened areas. I realize I haven't given enough credit to the Mattock. I should probably use it more too. It's not a coincidence that it performs so well, considering that it was built on a SR platform; i guess performances did carry over.

[JaegerBane]

All-a-Mort wrote...

I think I tried the Incisor on one n7 mission. Recoil was horrible and since the delay between shots still hasn't been fixed (honestly I was expecting like say a AN94 style firing rate) it was a magic combination of too weak, too much recoil and too much time lag in the burst to land 3 headshots. So pretty much useless.
The Raptor for me is more the spotter weapon. SLightly more accurate and slightly more powered compared to a scoped Mattock, though in my infiltrator build I don't use it.

I do agree though that the engagement range for the most part in ME2 and ME3 is not far enough to really require a fully fledged sniper rifle as such. Strikes me its more designated marksman kinda ranges if that. I imagine its why I use the Valiant more. As said earlier in this thread, it has assumed the role the Viper had in ME2 of being a more rapid fire accurized rifle.

To be brutally honest, IMHO there are three sniper rifles in this game - The Raptor (which is basically a DMR), the Valiant, and the Black Widow. All others are largely filler and/or alternatives to these.

[Rudy Lis]

SaturnRing wrote...

I seriously would have expected more. But if you take in consideration that you don't have to account for gravity, humidity or wind (or planet rotation), that's an acceptable trade i guess. Still that's somewhat of a handicap; specially when firing SR like the Mantis. It is strange that i only felt that lack of velocity when firing the Javelin.

I think it's not worthy trade-off. In ME1 we had those "hypervelocity" rounds, allowing us "instahit" at 400 metres. Even in OFP/ArmA series, that "bullet drop" and compensating for zig-zagging enemies wasn't that much of an issue, when you fired at distances over 600 metres. Recycling Shepard's own words - it's not severity of being hit, it's certainty. I think ME2-3 could be much more interesting should we have old velocity.
Less "spectaculal" maybe.

SaturnRing wrote...

You make good point. I would have expected more opened areas. I realize I haven't given enough credit to the Mattock. I should probably use it more too. It's not a coincidence that it performs so well, considering that it was built on a SR platform; i guess performances did carry over.

Sorry for shameless self-promotion:




Mattock accuracy is horrible, yet it is one of the best in class. Adding scope generally removes problem outright, if you willing to sacrifice some other mod for it.

JaegerBane wrote...

To be brutally honest, IMHO there are three sniper rifles in this game - The Raptor (which is basically a DMR), the Valiant, and the Black Widow. All others are largely filler and/or alternatives to these.

I'd split them next way:
Raptor, Indra and somewhat Incirsor (though massacred) - light carbines. Any soldier who slap scope on his rifle have this.

Valiant and somewhat Viper and Indra (due big magazine, mostly) - light DMR. Could be referred as "Police sniper rifle" - due power/range combo.

Mantis is generic sniper rifle.

Widow/Javelin are AMR.

BW is sort of trade-off power for, what, double ammo capacity and 0.7 of power of Widow. Should it be lighter, it could be referred as dual-purpose, between Mantis and AMR.

[JBPBRC]

Definitely the Widow.

Its just....amazing... to have Death Incarnate hanging out on your left shoulder.

[MakeMineMako]

I consider the Mantis and Viper to be among the best of ME3's sniper rifles. Mostly because of their excellent accuracy, good punch, and they are what I would consider true sniper systems in Mass Effect.

Another reason I like them isn't due to their utility or how good they are. It has to do with nostalgia. The M92 and M97 are basically the two sniper rifle designs from Mass Effect 1.

[SaturnRing]

Rudy Lis wrote...

Sorry for shameless self-promotion:




Mattock accuracy is horrible, yet it is one of the best in class. Adding scope generally removes problem outright, if you willing to sacrifice some other mod for it.
.

Ok. i give you that, the Mattock is no Famas. I wouldn't think that you'd get a thighter shot grouping from the AK 47 (I would expect that much from a 74). 
I usually sacrifice everything for accuracy sake. I'll more than likely  be using the stabilizer on my Mattock - areas of operation will determine whether optics are needed or not.

Modifié par SaturnRing, 22 avril 2012 - 03:18 .

[SaturnRing]

JaegerBane wrote...

To be brutally honest, IMHO there are three sniper rifles in this game - The Raptor (which is basically a DMR), the Valiant, and the Black Widow. All others are largely filler and/or alternatives to these.

It makes sense for the Raptor; it was originally developed for Turian infantry; then reintroduced as a SR for its long range cap.. I do however consider the Mantis to be a pure SR  too(from its bolt action to its small mag; too bad its design excludes free floating)  

Modifié par SaturnRing, 22 avril 2012 - 03:38 .

[Rudy Lis]

SaturnRing wrote...

Ok. i give you that, the Mattock is no Famas.

 

Never seen one.

SaturnRing wrote...

I wouldn't think that you'd get a thighter shot grouping from the AK 47 (I would expect that much from a 74). 

Nope. 7.62 and 5.45 AK have comparable ballistic and spread (accuracy) for up to 200 metres. Differences begin further - 5.45 has flatter trajectory, but is a bit light.

SaturnRing wrote...

I usually sacrifice everything for accuracy sake. I'll more than likely  be using the stabilizer on my Mattock - areas of operation will determine whether optics are needed or not.

My tests (and as you saw I could be quite nerdy and tedious), stabilizer isn't than much help. I used Scope/AP combo most of the time for Mattock. Only on most of N7 missions I installed barrel instead of scope - only last mission on Ontarom has some "range", but BW/Valiant excels there on their own.

Here is comparison. As usual, 50 metres, 2 second pause between shot.

SaturnRing wrote...

It makes sense for the Raptor; it was originally developed for Turian infantry; then reintroduced as a SR for its long range cap.. I do however consider the Mantis to be a pure SR too(from its bolt action to its small mag; too bad its design excludes free floating)

To be honest, I think that "1 round" rifles, like Widow, Javelin and Mantis should be like bolt-action, with built-in magazine for thermal clips. Not all supply, maybe but some of them. Sort of BW concept. Reloading clip after every shot seems to be a tad off.