|
|
Post by juice on Dec 15, 2009 4:02:02 GMT -5
Hi, I'm generally a rifle user, and I'm trying to figure out what advantage the M4 has over the ACR, if any. They're practically the same gun, but ACR seems to have both lower recoil AND higher ROF according to charts I've seen. What does the M4 have to offer then once you reach ACR?
Other rifles like the SCAR has at least some advantage over the other fully auto high-damage rifles (less recoil than AK or TAR).
Am I missing something here?
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371 
|
Post by mannon on Dec 15, 2009 4:18:11 GMT -5
You get it earlier? ;p Honestly I don't know anything the M4 does better than the ACR, although it has a bit more recoil so if your aim is a little off you'll actually bounce on target some while the ACR will basically just whiz bullets right on by them. Some people perform better with the M4 from that.
But then if it can bounce on target it can bounce off.
|
|
link0
True Bro
Posts: 114
|
Post by link0 on Dec 15, 2009 4:32:34 GMT -5
I think M4 has a higher ROF than the ACR. It seems to perform better in close/mid ranges for me than the ACR.
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Dec 15, 2009 5:57:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ilikev8 on Dec 15, 2009 8:30:56 GMT -5
ACR surely has less recoil, making it more accurate on full auto if it really does shoot faster than it is superior to the M4, but I can say that the M4 sounds better and looks cooler.
|
|
iKONIG
True Bro
Don't know what to put here, Just something random.
Posts: 220
|
Post by iKONIG on Dec 15, 2009 9:23:51 GMT -5
surely your kidding, the grooves and modern look of the ACR is to sexy not to use! Heck, I wouldn't mind losing my virginity to it! =)
|
|
Den
He's That Guy
Posts: 4,294,967,295
|
Post by Den on Dec 15, 2009 9:36:32 GMT -5
My own ROF tests show that the ACR has a firetime of 0.08, 750 RPM.
The M4A1 has a firetime of 0.075, 800 RPM.
When watching a recording at 60 FPS, it turns out much slower than when I just use my stopwatch while firing the weapon in-game. Not to mention the synergy of pressing both the trigger and timer at the same instant is much more reliable than trying to get the clock started on seeing the first shot.
The PC version runs at 85 FPS (and whatever optimizations they made since COD4, that number does not ever go down for me).
When watching at that speed (further ensured to stay at 85 by putting everything to low at 640x480 resolution, holy crap it looks silly), the M4A1 through many magazines and OMA swaps smoothly dries out thirty rounds in almost exactly 2.15 seconds every time. When throttled to 30 or 60 FPS with Fraps, that time fluctuates anywhere from 2.4 to 3 or more seconds, both the Recording and the game itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by randombs on Dec 15, 2009 10:22:51 GMT -5
My own ROF tests show that the ACR has a firetime of 0.08, 750 RPM. The M4A1 has a firetime of 0.075, 800 RPM. When watching a recording at 60 FPS, it turns out much slower than when I just use my stopwatch while firing the weapon in-game. Not to mention the synergy of pressing both the trigger and timer at the same instant is much more reliable than trying to get the clock started on seeing the first shot. The PC version runs at 85 FPS (and whatever optimizations they made since COD4, that number does not ever go down for me). When watching at that speed (further ensured to stay at 85 by putting everything to low at 640x480 resolution, holy crap it looks silly), the M4A1 through many magazines and OMA swaps smoothly dries out thirty rounds in almost exactly 2.15 seconds every time. When throttled to 30 or 60 FPS with Fraps, that time fluctuates anywhere from 2.4 to 3 or more seconds, both the Recording and the game itself. Wow, nice work. I knew I wasn't crazy thinking the M4 had at least SOME sort of advantage over the ACR. |
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Dec 15, 2009 10:52:01 GMT -5
surely your kidding, the grooves and modern look of the ACR is to sexy not to use! Heck, I wouldn't mind losing my virginity to it! =) That's just disturbing... BTW Thanks Den! Lord what I'd give for the ROF numbers from the game files... meh... It seems you're also noticing a significant ROF slowdown under poorer system performance like Toysrme mentioned before. Considering hitscans aren't resource intensive and going full auto eliminates input lag, might you have a theory as to why the ROF drops just because the frame rate dips? At a guess, maybe the hitscans performed for firing your weapon require a frame to be drawn for some reason? I suppose it could be borrowing data from the rendering process since every pixel essentially is a hitscan already. I don't know. It just bugs me. Personally I don't see why even if you're game is running at 10 frames per second you shouldn't be able to unload your gun just as fast. But that belongs more in a gripe/rant thread. I was just curious. ;p |
|
Lexapro
True Bro
PSN: Lexa_pro
Posts: 1,066
|
Post by Lexapro on Dec 15, 2009 11:00:56 GMT -5
Any Chance of getting some accurate ROF's for the other guns in the game, Den? Sounds like you've been doing some testing, which is always good to hear.
Also, the round numbers like 800 and 750 are much more comfortable looking than the other measurements people have been taking.
|
|
|
|
Post by juice on Dec 15, 2009 13:13:15 GMT -5
thanks Den, that makes sense regarding ROF comparison. I felt like the M4 was a little better up close for some reason, but I wasn't sure. I'd prestiged recently soon too, so I couldn't compare directly to ACR anymore either.
|
|
Den
He's That Guy
Posts: 4,294,967,295
|
Post by Den on Dec 15, 2009 16:17:19 GMT -5
I tested the Famas, M16 and M93.
Both rifles empty at 3.8 seconds, equaling the same 460 Rounds Per Minute as in COD4.
The Raffica's a little tricky with the 20 round mag.
It also appears to, with about 2.65 seconds, have the same exact 460 round per minute rate of fire.
All three must have the 0.065 firetime and the 0.2 delay between bursts.
---
Then the TAR and SCAR.
The TAR-21 appears to have an identical rate of fire to the ACR. 0.08 firetime, 750 RPM.
The SCAR, though, seems to delve into the thousandths of time measurement.
It's fireTime is around the 0.0925 to 0.095 range.
IW prefers to at least give the guns a near-real rate, 0.095 time and 630 RPM is closest to what may be true.
I don't have the other two rifles right now.
---
The MP5k. About a 2.05 to 2.1 time. My best guess is a 0.07 rate of fire, 850~ RPM.
UMP, I had a 2.9 result from each mag, this may be another that falls into the 600s of RPM and may use a thousandth in fireTime.
I'm gonna have to go with another 0.095, just like the SCAR-H. Difficult to compare them with the different mag sizes.
---
The Kriss Super V.
0.06 fireTime.
1000 Rounds Per Minute.
Just for that, I checked out the Rapid Fire version.
0.045.
1333.
Hell yeah.
If that 0.05 thing is still in place (and the Frames Per Second dependancy), consoles are stuck with 1200 RPM. Sad face.
---
It feels like the Mini-Uzi and P90 were both slowed down a bit.
The Uzi... I think it has a thousandth. Maybe even a ten-thousandth.
Getting times of about 2.1 to shoot the 32 round mag.
I guess a 0.0675 fireTime. 888 RPM.
The P90, a tough one to figure out. I've gotten 3.4 seconds to empty every time.
It may have a fireTime of 0.07, same as the MP5. Or something like 0.069.
Regardless, slower than the Mini-Uzi by a small amount. Again.
|
|
|
|
Post by ilikev8 on Dec 15, 2009 17:03:49 GMT -5
So they slowed down the M4's rate of fire from the last game and upped the MP5? Considering how fast the Vector shoots and its low recoil, it seems like the best SMG, seeing how the MP5k is nearly uncontrollable
|
|
|
|
Post by ilikev8 on Dec 15, 2009 17:05:07 GMT -5
The easiest way to see which gun shoots faster, have a person with a console do split screen and fire there controllers at the same time
|
|
Lexapro
True Bro
PSN: Lexa_pro
Posts: 1,066
|
Post by Lexapro on Dec 15, 2009 18:08:45 GMT -5
So are the M16 and Famas functionally identical then? I remember earlier comparisons saying that the M16 fired its bursts slower but had less delay between each shot, while the FAMAS had faster bursts but overall slower ROF.
If that is not really the case, what is the difference between the 2 rifles?
|
|
iKONIG
True Bro
Don't know what to put here, Just something random.
Posts: 220
|
Post by iKONIG on Dec 15, 2009 19:09:18 GMT -5
Nothing, other then having rebel points for using the particular gun.
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Dec 15, 2009 20:23:35 GMT -5
More challenges you get do do all over again and different iron sights?
The differences in the video testing could have been due to purely graphical effects, perhaps. Hard to say.
|
|
|
|
Post by KingVaroon on Dec 16, 2009 0:49:21 GMT -5
I was just about to create a topic asking the same question. Thanks a lot for some accurate testing Den, non of the ROF numbers so far made any sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by mw0swedeking on Dec 16, 2009 1:26:36 GMT -5
So they slowed down the M4's rate of fire from the last game and upped the MP5? Considering how fast the Vector shoots and its low recoil, it seems like the best SMG, seeing how the MP5k is nearly uncontrollable Vector's not bad, but I think the SMGs are pretty well balanced. Don't forget the mp5k is a 2 shot kill at max damage range, none of the other smgs are. And pop firing can be fairly effective at longer distances. Personally I like the mini uzi best and the mp5k second. |
|
|
|
Post by randombs on Dec 16, 2009 6:06:15 GMT -5
So they slowed down the M4's rate of fire from the last game and upped the MP5? Considering how fast the Vector shoots and its low recoil, it seems like the best SMG, seeing how the MP5k is nearly uncontrollable Vector's not bad, but I think the SMGs are pretty well balanced. Don't forget the mp5k is a 2 shot kill at max damage range, none of the other smgs are. And pop firing can be fairly effective at longer distances. Personally I like the mini uzi best and the mp5k second. The UMP is a 2 hit kill as well with S/P, and will never take more than 3 shots to kill. |
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Dec 16, 2009 6:34:20 GMT -5
Mp5K:40-20
UMP:40-35
Pure damage = UMP FTW, but damage most certainly is not everything.
|
|
|
|
Post by slashdolo on Dec 16, 2009 9:24:48 GMT -5
MP5k is a monster if you stay in close quarters and juke and jive. Went 30-2 with it on Highrise in FFA earlier. Of course, an assault rifle is better 9.9 times out of 10, but the MP5k sure is cool and fun to use.
|
|
|
|
Post by chip sandwich on Dec 16, 2009 10:02:44 GMT -5
I personally like the Vector and the Mini-Uzi. I use the Vector as my general submachine gun (getting extended mags is an absolute pain though) because of it's high accuracy, and the Mini-Uzi as my "spray it like an MP40" gun, or put an ACOG scope on it for wtf?s from people who try to pick it up. Akimbo is functionally clumsy but looks badass.
On topic, even if the M4 turns out to be redundant compared to the ACR, it's still an Assault Rifle, and therefore super duper.
|
|
|
|
Post by ssog on Dec 16, 2009 18:06:31 GMT -5
Mp5K:40-20 UMP:40-35 Pure damage = UMP FTW, but damage most certainly is not everything. UMP also has less recoil. Of course, the MP5 has better RoF, making it the better gun for extreme close-quarters (i.e. at the ranges where both guns deal 40 damage, the MP5 wins). |
|
n1gh7
True Bro
Black Market Dealer
Posts: 11,718
|
Post by n1gh7 on Dec 16, 2009 21:17:03 GMT -5
On the SMG note I think the reason that they suck so much is that their center speed is lower.
|
|
|
|
Post by jlayman920 on Dec 16, 2009 22:59:44 GMT -5
I've been using the ACR with a thermal scope alot lately. If you like the ACR, give it a try. That gun has so little recoil that you can get some nice long distance kills at sniper ranges.
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Post by mannon on Dec 17, 2009 5:43:12 GMT -5
...or put an ACOG scope on it for wtf?s from people who try to pick it up. NICE! hehee |
|
|
|
Post by juice on Dec 17, 2009 17:11:53 GMT -5
I've been using the ACR with a thermal scope alot lately. If you like the ACR, give it a try. That gun has so little recoil that you can get some nice long distance kills at sniper ranges. i just unlocked the acr again in prestige mode, so yeah, i'll try using it again. i just couldn't believe that they'd make the M4 both slower ROF and more recoil than ACR, so i'm glad to hear they gave the M4 some advantage, even if slight. ACR is still most likely better though due to its laser accuracy though, yeah. |
|
