BF2S Forums The 50cal sniper is inacurate to real life

nzjafa wrote:

you think you would get up after getting shot from any gun? even with body armour on, a bullet from any gun will knock you flat on your back. if you're not wearing armour the bullet will shatter ribs and tear through your lungs as if they were tissue paper. the shock of the bullet is usually enough to knock you out, and you're lucky if you live past 2 minutes.
if battlefield 2 was real, one shot anywhere on your body would bring you to the ground. medics would have a hard time trying to apply control bleeding and administering morphine and shit in the game. ...

And just where do you get your vast knowledge on the subject of gunshot wounds? Are you a doctor or have you ever been in real combat? A single shot does not always bring someone down. In fact, I'd say - from real experience - it doesn't take a person down in most instances. Now I'm talking regular small arms here, not heavy machine guns or a freakin tank round. I've seem several guys continue to fight after being hit. Lucky to live past 2 minutes - WTF?! Most people survive gunshot wounds. You just need to look at the statistics for any war. There are always a much larger number of wounded than there are dead. At least for statistics for US casualties. When we fought in Vietnam, I'm sure their death to wounded ratio was much higher than ours for ovious reasons.

i have to say that if the 50 cal could do all it can in real life then it would be an unstopable wep, but as this is a game and it does need to be dumbed down somewhat to its true potential,

                   BUT there is one thing this rifle should be able to do that it can in rl and thats go through an engine block, disable the vehicle from moving but still able to use till an engineer comes and fixes the thing.

               i think this addition would not over power the sniper that much as a sniper is still gonna get owned by someone to close as aiming with any sniper rifle in game is so inacurate when up close your better of throwing the gun at them than trying to shoot.

   any thoughts on this ppl

fikraag7 wrote:

However, in real life this is not the case. The British Army spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to fix this problematic weapon.

sry to pick you up on a technicality, but 1. Dollars? and 2. it wasn't the overheating that was the problem.. it didn't work in sandy conditions.

Psycho wrote:

nzjafa wrote:

you think you would get up after getting shot from any gun? even with body armour on, a bullet from any gun will knock you flat on your back. if you're not wearing armour the bullet will shatter ribs and tear through your lungs as if they were tissue paper. the shock of the bullet is usually enough to knock you out, and you're lucky if you live past 2 minutes.
if battlefield 2 was real, one shot anywhere on your body would bring you to the ground. medics would have a hard time trying to apply control bleeding and administering morphine and shit in the game. ...

And just where do you get your vast knowledge on the subject of gunshot wounds? Are you a doctor or have you ever been in real combat? A single shot does not always bring someone down. In fact, I'd say - from real experience - it doesn't take a person down in most instances. Now I'm talking regular small arms here, not heavy machine guns or a freakin tank round. I've seem several guys continue to fight after being hit. Lucky to live past 2 minutes - WTF?! Most people survive gunshot wounds. You just need to look at the statistics for any war. There are always a much larger number of wounded than there are dead. At least for statistics for US casualties. When we fought in Vietnam, I'm sure their death to wounded ratio was much higher than ours for ovious reasons.

i've never been in a war, but i've had a bullet or two my way. and i didnt really word it very well, but i mean being shot in the chest or torso, not in the shoulder or the forearm or whatever. and even being hit there- if only from the pain and shock- i've never seen someone remain standing after being shot, but its possible, i'm sure.
notice i'm talking about lungs and ribs though... you drown damn fast when you bleed into your lungs. its not often you see people live after catching a bullet in their chest. yeah, there are a few lucky ones, but thats why i say lucky, because there aren't many of them.

Last edited by nzjafa (2005-11-13 12:19:05)

xTachyonx wrote:

Possum61 wrote:

And on the same note............ Why cant a tank shell  kill a guy hideing behind a WOODEN fence ? Jezzzzz

Yeah, i agree, and those machine guns too..Many times I've seen people hiding behind wooden fences to avoid tank/MG fire...especially in karkard...I've to leave my MG position and lob grenades...

You're both wrong...it works. You can shoot through fences with the MG of the tank. I once had that on Karkand. But you still can't see the target, so it's a matter of luck. But possible. As well as with the blackhawk-gun.

oberst_enzian wrote:

rEdTe@M wrote:

I WANT TO SEE HEADS EXPLODE

Seconded. THis game is simply not violent enough. I want to have to wade through innards on Songhua, and slip on the splattered corpses of guys who fell off the dam at Kubra and couldnt get their chute open

You obviously haven't seen someone's head explode or slipped on someone's intestines. You also haven't seen someone get beheaded. Go to http://poetry.rotten.com/failed-mission/ if you want to see your "exploaded heads." Anyone else, don't go there because I took one look, and didn't sleep for a week. I really don't understand why some idiot wants to see gore because of what they seen on television. And if you have seen this stuff and still want to see/do it, well, go to hell.

[ar15]crazylarry wrote:

they dont need to make it more powerful just accurate and maybe give it a high zoom distance.

Damn right. I would use it more if it was actually useful against pilots, and had better accuracy. Since I unlocked it after the patch came out, I've sniped a pilto once. ONCE!!!!!11!1!!!11oneone

as far as the barrett sniper rifle family, from what I remember the only barrett that is used for snipeing that is semi-auto is the M82A1 (used in BF42's DC mod), the M99 and the M95 (used in BF 2) are bolt action..most good sniper rifles are bolt action.

Anyways here is some info I found on the M82A1 and M95:

M82A1 This is .50 BMG semi-automatic magazine-fed rifle. It is capable of effectively engagin targets at 1000 yards and beyond. The recoil is moderate due to a patented desgin, so rapid follow-up shots are possible.


Model 99 This rifle provides the accuracy and reliability of the Barrett M82A1 in a single shot bolt action .50 BMG rifle. It is a more affordable alternative for shooters who want to engage in long range competition.

good call. ITS A GAME!

Bravery wrote:

fikraag7 wrote:

Um....the weapons in BF2 are often highly inaccurate. Consider the L85A1. In-game, this is a fairly accurate and reliable weapon. However, in real life this is not the case. The British Army spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to fix this problematic weapon. It overheats, jams, and the shitty plastic construction causes it to fall apart. So, no, BF2 is not very accurate and therefore don't expect that from a video game of all things. And learn how to  type--it  helps everyone.

You actually have it wrong, it's both a terrible weapon in-game and in real-life.

Aren't British boys using the L85 in Iraq at this moment?

Instant Cereal wrote:

Bravery wrote:

fikraag7 wrote:

Um....the weapons in BF2 are often highly inaccurate. Consider the L85A1. In-game, this is a fairly accurate and reliable weapon. However, in real life this is not the case. The British Army spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to fix this problematic weapon. It overheats, jams, and the shitty plastic construction causes it to fall apart. So, no, BF2 is not very accurate and therefore don't expect that from a video game of all things. And learn how to  type--it  helps everyone.

You actually have it wrong, it's both a terrible weapon in-game and in real-life.

Aren't British boys using the L85 in Iraq at this moment?

more than likely dont mean they are any good now does it, lets say the SA80 wonderful wep aslong as u keep it away from water,sand,air,dirt,dust,wind,cold,heat etc etc get the idea

Bravery wrote:

fikraag7 wrote:

Um....the weapons in BF2 are often highly inaccurate. Consider the L85A1. In-game, this is a fairly accurate and reliable weapon. However, in real life this is not the case. The British Army spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to fix this problematic weapon. It overheats, jams, and the shitty plastic construction causes it to fall apart. So, no, BF2 is not very accurate and therefore don't expect that from a video game of all things. And learn how to  type--it  helps everyone.

You actually have it wrong, it's both a terrible weapon in-game and in real-life.

Let's not get into that again...but I've had success with the L85 in single-shot mode (scoped)

Somebody here thinks that the M95 is more powerful against friendlies than enemies.
By the meaning that one shoot kill on friend and 2 shoots kills hostiles??