|
Post by dumdumpop on Dec 2, 2009 16:37:00 GMT -5
FAMAS has an add time of 1.6 seconds and M16 is 1.447 or something close according to a gun chart I looked at. FAMAS full reload is 2.2 and M16 is 1.14 or something close. I like how FAMAS has nice one decimal numbers and M16 is all complicated. But M16 also does 40 RPM faster than FAMAS so it's more effective closer range and FAMAS is more of a long range gun. The bullet penetration is probably the same for them like all ARs were in CoD4. The ADS is also supposed to be the same according to the chart.
About the master... It's great for range but not for one shots. If it can one shot then the model can too. But for hardcore it's nice but I know for almost 100% that each shot is not 30 damage cause in hardcore I got a hitmarker. Maybe he was close to the end of the range where it starts to drop damage significantly because hitmarker with shotguns in hardcore is fail. But in core almost all of my master kills are two shots but I have gotten a few lucky spreads where it's a one shot at past-model range.
|
|
|
Post by imrlybord7 on Dec 2, 2009 18:39:06 GMT -5
Your bullet grazed a surface.
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Dec 3, 2009 7:30:29 GMT -5
Okay now this might be a bit specific, but on the burst fire weapons like the FAMAS and M16 does it completely recenter between bursts if you fire at the full speed or does each successive burst get less accurate?
I ask because apparently the FAMAS burst is actually slightly quicker but there is more time between bursts than the M16. If the centerspeed and recoil are the same for both guns then the FAMAS might kill slightly quicker, but the M16 would actually have a slightly tighter burst, because of the slower ROF. Although the shorter time between bursts could throw each successive burst off more and more compared to the FAMAS. I think the caveat there is that you could possibly compensate between bursts and at the least you could fire the M16 slower.
Hmm... looking at toysrme's data assuming his listing is the average ROF it's easy to determine the bursts per minute and work out just how fast the bursts are.
Burst Time M16 0.104 FAMAS 0.099903422
This should be the time it takes to fire all three round based on the number of bursts via the average ROF listed and the delay. Assuming that you get a 3 shot kill and all your bullets hit the FAMAS would kill slightly faster. If you need a fourth shot, however, then the M16 kills faster due to the shorter delay. Let's say you miss some so you need two full bursts to give the FAMAS a chance to use that quicker burst to more advantage. Well the M16 is still quicker to deliver all six shots and then there's another delay so it just goes downhill from there for the M16 on kill time.
In fact the burst it-self isn't that much quicker than the M16's, though the M16's delay is definitely significantly shorter. FAMAS burst time is only 3.94% shorter than M16, but the M16's delay time is 12.5% shorter than the FAMAS which is over 3 times the improvement.
Okay with this in mind I'm not sure that the burst groupings are really going to be any significantly tighter for the M16. The difference in the amount of time between bullets during the burst is only ~0.00205 seconds, which isn't a lot of time for centerspeed to do it's magic. It is remotely possible, but still.
As to whether it completely recenters or not between bursts that may already be well known, or not. I rather like the FAMAS, but I honestly couldn't tell you because when I use it long range I rarely fire the bursts as quickly as I can because I either get the kill or I'm retargetting for the next burst, and when I do use it as fast as I can it's close quarters and I'm a little too busy to note the accuracy. ;p
Should be able to test by checking the groupings of them fired as fast as possible vs carefully firing one burst at a time.
Of course the guns may not in fact have the same viewkick and centerspeed.
BTW the numbers listed should be taken as approximations as in fact toysrme's data it-self has to be treated as approximations due to the limitations of the testing method, though I would think his data is pretty accurate. Also I arrived at my numbers mathematically based on an average ROFand I'm sure he could do better with his actual raw data to go on.
I also could have easily made some mistake, but I think my math was sound. I based it on the idea that we basically have three delays. The idea is that there are two identical delays between the three shots of the burst and that his listed delay time is the time between the last shot of the first burst and the first shot of the next one.
Then again it's quite possible I just read his data wrong. In fact now that I look at it I really don't know if that's what he meant at all. I can't tell if his burst delay means the time between the last shot of one burst and the first of the next, or from first shot to first shot... and I have the sinking suspicion now that it may be the latter...
Hmm, no, mebbe not. I take it to mean literally the delay between the end of one burst and the beginning of another. If it were meant as the time from first bullet to next first bullet then it doesn't match the listed average ROF. In fact that would put the average ROF up there with the AK and the SCAR.
|
|
|
Post by bepo on Dec 4, 2009 10:59:38 GMT -5
Very nice stuff here. I'm interested in the most accurate LMG. From the pictures it looks like the mg4 is very accurate with and without the grip, is this the most accurate one? The RPD has a significant improvement with the grip, how do the other LMGs do with a grip?
|
|
|
Post by utdmpewpew on Dec 29, 2009 19:32:09 GMT -5
Just one thing. What is the difference between p90 and p90 stock? And why did you made the pics with different attachments for m4 and p90 but not for the other weapons? Just because u were bored? ^^
You are my bro, bro.
|
|
|
Post by thatnaykedguy on Jan 12, 2010 10:37:46 GMT -5
Nnonononono u guys are getting the stats for m16 and famas rong These apparently are the official pc stats, either this is rong or you guys are mentally thinking that one has a faster firerate M16 and famas have the same fire rate 460 rounds per minute and in between each shot (the three burst) is a .065 wait as in ye noe in between the first to the second shot in the three burst, wait times are also the same tho im not sure of the exact time. Damage IS the same 40-30, (100 health is standard, 300 for painkiller) Hipfire spread is the same i dn't noe the exact reload times but im pretty sure m16 is faster - point teh m16 huh? then as these recoil experiments show famas seems to have a bit less of recoil now finally the last face is that famas's 40 damage doesn't drop to 30 until a further distance meaning it has beta range, it and the acr have the best range compared to the rest, FAL suprisingly has the worst, if u have doubts or dn't beleive me go ahead and test So really u can't say either one is beta even tho stats wise ppl wuld probs choose famas, but too me it looks kinda gay compared to m16 which looks badass and 1 last thing NEVER EVER rely on the bar stats on mw2 most of the time its completely rong....
|
|
|
Post by thatnaykedguy on Jan 12, 2010 10:39:31 GMT -5
soryy but fire rate its as if u had unlimited amo (no reloading) btw just to say
|
|
|
Post by thatnaykedguy on Jan 12, 2010 10:41:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mamaluigi on Jan 12, 2010 11:16:27 GMT -5
Nice little flash program or whatever it is to compare weapons!
Your spelling really needs work though. Wow. I understand that a lot of people on the internet don't care about spelling and grammar but it's actually difficult to figure out what you're saying at all. For example, beta = better? I thought you meant "beta range" as in "the FAMAS kept the same range that it was given in the beta test phase while the M16 was fixed," but then I realized that there was no beta and you meant better range.
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Jan 12, 2010 18:28:56 GMT -5
There was a beta, just not a public one. Agreed about the spelling, though. This isn't Twitter, you should really spell out entire words.
|
|
|
Post by thatnaykedguy on Jan 12, 2010 22:56:37 GMT -5
Sorry i do apologize, I'm just so use to it now :/
|
|
|
Post by killeraslox on Jan 20, 2010 14:52:33 GMT -5
Lol @ Riot Shield.
|
|
eLantern
True Bro
"Oh, cruel fate, to be thusly boned! Ask not for whom the bone bones, it bones for thee!" - Bender
Posts: 10,761
|
Post by eLantern on Feb 3, 2010 14:37:25 GMT -5
Has anyone done or know of someone who has done a side-by-side comparison of the UMP.45 without increased recoil verses the UMP.45 with an attachment that increases its recoil? I'm especially interested in the recoil difference created by the Rapid Fire attachment.
|
|
|
Post by comicstud on Jun 3, 2010 21:54:57 GMT -5
i dont know if any1 said this but.................
MG4 vs RPD with the grip, their accuracy's are almost identical
RPD thermal grip here i come!
|
|
|
Post by tplazarno on Jun 4, 2010 10:50:09 GMT -5
i dont know if any1 said this but................. MG4 vs RPD with the grip, their accuracy's are almost identical RPD thermal grip here i come! Actually, the MG4 is noticeably more accurate still. With the RPD grip, the sideways recoil is about the same, but it still goes up some more. If you guys wanted another source for these recoil tests, willagaroon made an ipod app with all of the charts and damages from snakex's chart. Then he tested all of the weapons except snipers, handguns, and launchers for their spread values. His is on quarry so if you want to pay a dollar for a mobile version of the app and some recoil tests, go ahead. I like it.
|
|
toysrme
True Bro
"Even at normal Health, there's no other choice than the Vector" Den Kirson
Posts: 1,339
|
Post by toysrme on Jul 14, 2010 7:44:57 GMT -5
mg4's practical accuracy is too crappy to use. the sight covering the target is a deal breaker VS the rpd/l86.
|
|
qupie
True Bro
Posts: 12,400
|
Post by qupie on Jul 14, 2010 8:05:25 GMT -5
Nnonononono u guys are getting the stats for m16 and famas rong These apparently are the official pc stats, either this is rong or you guys are mentally thinking that one has a faster firerate M16 and famas have the same fire rate 460 rounds per minute and in between each shot (the three burst) is a .065 wait as in ye noe in between the first to the second shot in the three burst, wait times are also the same tho im not sure of the exact time. Damage IS the same 40-30, (100 health is standard, 300 for painkiller) Hipfire spread is the same i dn't noe the exact reload times but im pretty sure m16 is faster - point teh m16 huh? then as these recoil experiments show famas seems to have a bit less of recoil now finally the last face is that famas's 40 damage doesn't drop to 30 until a further distance meaning it has beta range, it and the acr have the best range compared to the rest, FAL suprisingly has the worst, if u have doubts or dn't beleive me go ahead and test So really u can't say either one is beta even tho stats wise ppl wuld probs choose famas, but too me it looks kinda gay compared to m16 which looks badass and 1 last thing NEVER EVER rely on the bar stats on mw2 most of the time its completely rong.... sorry dude, I cant understand of half you are saying but do you know you are of the forums of the link you just gave us? we know the stats heck this forum is where those stats saw the first light. (esp snakex deserves allot of credit)
|
|
tacit
True Bro
Posts: 10,236
|
Post by tacit on Mar 8, 2011 21:45:45 GMT -5
I haven't tested the ACR and the F2000 with their respective shotgun attachments, but I'll try it out and see shortly.
One thing I did test today, just out of curiosity, is the quirk about the FAL doing minimum 40 damage with a holographic sight. What I was curious about was how it behaves if you Bling a silencer and a holographic sight; which damage model takes precedence.
I attached Stopping Power to ascertain whether the weapon achieves a two-hit kill at considerable range .
Even with the silencer attached, the weapon is a two-hit kill at longshot range, provided Stopping Power is attached - making the holographic sight's damage model take precedence over the silencer.
I wonder if there's any way of reliably working out the recoil spreads using controlled testing, since the information is supposed to be encrypted inside the fastfiles.
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Mar 9, 2011 19:45:39 GMT -5
On the FAL you can see all the effects and interactions of Holo, Silencer, and SP in my graph in the following thread. You are correct about the FAL retaining the Holo long range damage boost, but it also still loses damage range when you attach a silencer. The two attachments alter completely different stats so although they both change the damage profile they don't actually override each other. denkirson.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1951I was thinking about testing MW2 weapons myself since we now have more information about recoil. One thing that should be testable is the recenter time. It should be possible to test a weapon at various fire rates and through trial and error eventually determine the fastest fire rate that results in 100% recentered shots. Or you should be able to get fairly close to it. That alone doesn't tell you much, but if you knew that then if you can figure out either the viewkick or centerspeed the other, though it would really only apply to the maximum viewkick unless you checked the recenter time for each of the four directions. That would more problematic. But then again if you got the max viewkick then you could get the centerspeed worked out. Perhaps through careful observation and comparing single shot kicks, looking for the maximum kick in a given direction and comparing to CoD4 weapons or modded weapons it might be possible to work out the viewkick. Although I really do not know if centerspeed alters the apex of each kick or merely determines how fast you get there and come back. It depends on the recoil model which we've yet to fully understand in detail. On the other hand I'd be willing to bet Den could actually guess pretty close for at least some of the guns, as familiar as he is with all this stuff, and especially since some of the guns appear to be very similar to previous incarnations.
|
|
tacit
True Bro
Posts: 10,236
|
Post by tacit on Mar 13, 2011 22:32:13 GMT -5
Regarding weapon attachments and their effects on statistics, there's a player on Youtube called XboxAhoy that claims that the M16A4's recoil improves when attaching the holographic sight.
Is it possible to confirm this?
|
|
|
Post by MastaQ on Mar 13, 2011 22:43:34 GMT -5
Regarding weapon attachments and their effects on statistics, there's a player on Youtube called XboxAhoy that claims that the M16A4's recoil improves when attaching the holographic sight. Is it possible to confirm this? It's definitely true, although there are no real numbers to prove this, since the detailed stats are still under lock and key. The spread tightens when the holographic is added.
|
|
tacit
True Bro
Posts: 10,236
|
Post by tacit on Mar 13, 2011 22:49:11 GMT -5
That's quite interesting - makes me wonder about the possibility of other subtle differences in the benefits of weapon attachments on the more maligned weapons [the F2000 comes to mind].
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Mar 14, 2011 0:20:06 GMT -5
Hard to say for sure, but the only confirmed cases of the holographic giving any sort of special bonuses are the M16 and FAL. There ARE other attachment quirks though, such as the different grenade launcher on the AK, some silencers don't work, all attachments except ACOG make the AK have idle, ect...
I don't remember all the quirks off the top of my head. I also wonder if there are any weapons in MW2 that actually get improved centerspeed rather than worse with the ACOG like the M16 does in BO. (I kinda doubt it, though.)
|
|
tacit
True Bro
Posts: 10,236
|
Post by tacit on Mar 16, 2011 11:07:33 GMT -5
Modern Warfare 2 weapon guide maker, XboxAhoy, claims that Extended Mags on the P90 increases the sprint time by 75% without using Marathon. Kind of like Extreme Conditioning.
|
|
|
Post by H8ters2 on Mar 17, 2011 14:40:08 GMT -5
i tried that out and it doesent. but it was probably patched a while back. (i tried this before the hacking patch)
|
|