BF2; M95 Broken?

N

NIGHTMARE2

Gawd
Joined
Jul 4, 2003
Messages
645
I unlocked the M95 sniper rifle. I prone, wait about 4 seconds, get my crosshair right on someones face, take a shot.

No one is dead.

I am not that far away so I'm not losing bullet height or anything. People just won't die. I get more blind luck shots when people are sprinting than I do when I line up and aim right at someone else who is sniping.

What gives?!

p.s. I just got kicked from my first server for dominating with the tank lol.
 
I've heard plenty of horror stories about the Barret, which is why I unlocked the Medic kit.
 
I picked it up a few times, couldn't hit crap, i had better luck w/the M24

I've had the G3 for some time now, i use it in place of the M16, i prefer the AK101 & AK47 to the G3 though.

I'll probably get the PKM or G36C next
 
darkhorse said:
usually that gun only works well when you have a super low ping.
Click to expand...

I have a ping of 10-20 and it still doesnt work properly. It usually takes 3-4 shots on a non-moving target to even register one hit.
 
So I'm not the only person who finds it messed up.

Anyone know if it's gonna get patched so it actually works? The only thing it does well is blow up gas cans in 1 hit instead of 2.
 
NIGHTMARE2 said:
I unlocked the M95 sniper rifle. I prone, wait about 4 seconds, get my crosshair right on someones face, take a shot.

No one is dead.

I am not that far away so I'm not losing bullet height or anything. People just won't die. I get more blind luck shots when people are sprinting than I do when I line up and aim right at someone else who is sniping.

What gives?!

p.s. I just got kicked from my first server for dominating with the tank lol.
Click to expand...

i have seen video of this rifle being used in afghanistan and it is not pretty... seemed like any hit on the human body (esp torso etc) would be a killshot. i notice also it takes 2 shots minimum to get a kill most of the time which is ghay.
 
Banyan said:
i have seen video of this rifle being used in afghanistan and it is not pretty... seemed like any hit on the human body (esp torso etc) would be a killshot. i notice also it takes 2 shots minimum to get a kill most of the time which is ghay.
Click to expand...

imagine it being an automatic one hit kill.. EVERYONE would be a sniper since it would be so easy to get a kill...
 
I seem to have alot of success with the sniper rifle, I always aim at the neck/chest rather than the head.
 
Banyan said:
i have seen video of this rifle being used in afghanistan and it is not pretty... seemed like any hit on the human body (esp torso etc) would be a killshot. i notice also it takes 2 shots minimum to get a kill most of the time which is ghay.
Click to expand...

Same goes for the heavy rifles (both the 7.62 G3 and the 7.63 AK47). Even being hit in an arm could feasibly kill someone from shock and blood loss. "unpretty" isn't even the beginning.

Aside from that: I can get the G3 and the G36? I have got to get this game.
 
kevin1211 said:
imagine it being an automatic one hit kill.. EVERYONE would be a sniper since it would be so easy to get a kill...
Click to expand...

The M95 was 1S1K in Desert Combat and most people still didn't use it effectively. A n00b is a n00b whether he has an M24 or an M95...it wouldn't make that much of a difference.

Some of us, however, were unstoppable with it. I could take out a group of 8 within 10 shots (The last survivors tend to get a little squirly and start hopping all over the place, which is why I would miss at all).

The weapon isn't even good for what it was designed for. The M95 is an anti-material weapon, yet it still only penetrates armored glass in game (And even then it barely works). The weapon, IRL, is usually used to disable the drive-train of tanks. Putting that kind of round through a human would result in a crimson explosion. There would be a 4~5 inch hole left in the torso if that is where it hit.
 
My point is the M95, the unlocked weapon, is WORSE than the M25 and the SVD by FAR.

IT never registers hits and when it does it doesn't kill anybody. You're better off using the weapons you don't have to unlock.

What is the point in "leveling up" to get weapons that aren't worth a shit?
 
The M95 can shoot through things though, so you can snipe people in helis and tanks and wahtnot
 
HHunt said:
Same goes for the heavy rifles (both the 7.62 G3 and the 7.63 AK47). Even being hit in an arm could feasibly kill someone from shock and blood loss. "unpretty" isn't even the beginning.

Aside from that: I can get the G3 and the G36? I have got to get this game.
Click to expand...

The G36C to be exact. :p
 
NIGHTMARE2 said:
My point is the M95, the unlocked weapon, is WORSE than the M25 and the SVD by FAR.

IT never registers hits and when it does it doesn't kill anybody. You're better off using the weapons you don't have to unlock.

What is the point in "leveling up" to get weapons that aren't worth a shit?
Click to expand...

Well...it's worse than the M24, but not the SVD. I think the SVD sucks ass. But yeah, I had the same complaints; weapon unlocks apparently aren't supposed to be more powerful, they're supposed to give you more choices. And the tradeoff for this gun being able to shoot through armored glass (not armor...you can't kill people through tanks) is that there's some mechanism that makes it fucking impossible to kill infantry in less than 2 shots, and that's if they're prone, and you aim for the head. Or that's what my theory is; at this point, it's entirely possible for me to imagine they just screwed it up.
 
there is hardly any bullet drop in BF2 you can set up a lan w/ a friend and test it

at max view distance you can aim directly at their head and get a headshot

now w/ high latency that may change things but in all the online games i have played w/ sniper it is very easy to kill people

w/ the m25 and m95 (since they are the same in game except the 95 can shoot through bulletproof glass) you have to deal w/ a little bullet rise from the kick, so aim for the high chest @<200m and right for the head at further distance

the svd and type95 do 45 points of damage so it takes 3 shots to the chest which is pretty easy

and in general you should know not to shoot at people who are moving left or right, only take a shot if they stop or are moving toward/away
 
I remember someone posted the code for the M95 and stated that it has more bullet deviation than all the other sniper rifles, which is why it sucks.
 
kevin1211 said:
tanks?? how is that even possible???
Click to expand...

The round that the Barrett M95 fires is an anti-material penetration round. What that means is that it basically can go through just about any modern vehicle armor or concrete like a razor-knife through button. There have been instances of this weapon being uses to kill enemy personnel that are hiding in fortified positions by using thermal gear to see their positions behind walls.

Basically, a hit to the body from one of these weapons will almost always be a guaranteed kill. If it hit a limb it would either destroy it or blow it completely off. Hitting the torso would leave a hole that vary from 3~5 inches. A headshot would completely decapitate someone.

As I said earlier, they're built to penetrate tank armor efficiently. We're talking several inches worth of steel here. If they can do that then you can imagine what would happen if a human was shot with one.

model95.jpg


Bo_Bice said:
its a novelty weapon for a novelty class
Click to expand...

The typical opinion of someone who has never had a good sniper on his team.

I have defended so many flags from capture using the sniper rifle that it's ridiculous. Many times it happens to be the last flag. If it's taken then I'm usually far enough from the action that I can go steal another without being bothered. All snipers aren't score-whores...just most of them.
 
Saying that this weapon is meant to penetrate tank armor is correct but for WW1 days this weapon would put a black mark on a tank today or even during WW2. Even using this gun to shoot pilots out of a havoc are a little exreme seing how the glass is meant to take impacts form 12.7mm bullets and 20mm shell fragments.
 
Why would the militrary designate this is AP but only against WWI tanks...That's sorta silly.

Yes, this is armor pentrating. It's meant to disable vehicles, shoot through armored glass, and kill occupants within APC's. That's what it is meant to do.

You shoot someone in the torso with this, or the leg, you can bet they won't be going far.

Right now BF2 is simply heli whoring/bomber whoring/tank+engie whoring. Simple as that.

edit -- lets not forget commanding for the sole sake of artillery
 
The Barrett is IRL said to be able to kill a man standing in body armor, behind 40cm of concrete :eek:
 
The gun is just plain inaccurate. Take some time to find a non moving target like a stop sign and take some shots at it. You'll see the sniper rifle has a rather large spread for what it is supposed to be.

Hopefully in a patch they will increase the accuracy of the rifle and maybe add an adjustable zoom.

Also, there is no bullet drop. I've seen shots hit above a target before at ranges of 300-500m. It is just a firing cone.
 
I'd like to see accuracy increased across the board, or infantry damaged at least. Sometimes it takes me 1 clip from an AK from 5 feet away in someones back to kill em, sometime it takes 2 shots, sometimes it takes 3 clips. It's just too luck based.
 
WickedAngel said:
The round that the Barrett M95 fires is an anti-material penetration round. What that means is that it basically can go through just about any modern vehicle armor or concrete like a razor-knife through button. There have been instances of this weapon being uses to kill enemy personnel that are hiding in fortified positions by using thermal gear to see their positions behind walls.

Basically, a hit to the body from one of these weapons will almost always be a guaranteed kill. If it hit a limb it would either destroy it or blow it completely off. Hitting the torso would leave a hole that vary from 3~5 inches. A headshot would completely decapitate someone.

As I said earlier, they're built to penetrate tank armor efficiently. We're talking several inches worth of steel here. If they can do that then you can imagine what would happen if a human was shot with one.

model95.jpg




The typical opinion of someone who has never had a good sniper on his team.

I have defended so many flags from capture using the sniper rifle that it's ridiculous. Many times it happens to be the last flag. If it's taken then I'm usually far enough from the action that I can go steal another without being bothered. All snipers aren't score-whores...just most of them.
Click to expand...



Sorry buddy, thats not ment to go through tank armor. Its Anti-Light vehicle/armor as well as personel.

The M95 Barret has an effective Muzzle Velocity of 2800 feet per second with M2 or M33 Ball ammo which is the most common and widely used.

The .50 Cal Browning Auto has about the same figure. So basically what you just said is that the .50 Cal machine gun can be used as an Anti-Tank weapon which is total bull, even in WW2 standards only the lightest tanks would be threatend by the highest calibur infantry rifle. Even then the best thing to do was to try to track the tank. And believe me they were big suckers. So im sorry to wreck your wet dreams but not in this planet unless they turn it into a very effective rail gun will that be even denting Abrams and T-80/90 tanks. Concrete and a car body are a far cry from tank armor.

Also saying that it shouldnt go through armored glass, also misinformed. Armored glass works just about the same as a flak vest. Now if you want to put one on and get shot in the chest, you'd be killed or hurt very badly. Its ment to take peices of shrapnel which are usually large and jagged and not moving at 2500+feet per second, not small, pointy, and having all its energy focused at one very pointy end objects like bullets. So while i dont know the exact armor specs of the glass on the planes and helicopters, theres a good chance its gonna penetrate. Either way a .50 round will penetrate the armor skin of most jets and helicopters problably to disable, which it doesnt in this game, so be happy at that.

However it still should kill in one shot to torso and do severe damage to anyplace else because of its size. Saying its gonna go through a tank? Or even the armor of any modern day APC idiocy. Use google.

heres a good read as well if this gets you off:
http://www.answers.com/topic/barrett-m82a1
 
Well as for it being designated AP. Many smaller weapons have AP rounds that doesnt mean it turns them into anti armor cannons. And why the 40cm of concrete may be correct i find it hard to believe that it is from a distance where a sniper is still considered to be so, because the .50 ball ammunition, a commonly used round, can penetrate 1in of concrete at 1640 yards. So 15.6 inches of penetration is only obtainable at a much shorter range.
 
It can take consistant 20mm hits from standard rounds. The armor-piercing anti-material rounds, however, are a far different story. The rounds come in an HE variety as well. They can disable modern tanks provided that vulnerabilities are taken advantage of (Treads, transmission, turret rotator, etc. etc.)

You're also overestimating the armor of the vehicles. The thickness of armor on vehicles varies from point to point. Specifically, the compressor sections of jet engines and the transmission sections of helicopters are vulnerable.

Fanatic said:
Also saying that it shouldnt go through armored glass, also misinformed. Armored glass works just about the same as a flak vest.
Click to expand...

Stop right there. When the hell did I ever say it shouldn't go through armored glass? I said it doesn't do it correctly in-game.

Reading comprehension is our friend.
 
WickedAngel said:
It can take consistant 20mm hits from standard rounds. The armor-piercing anti-material rounds, however, are a far different story. The rounds come in an HE variety as well. They can disable modern tanks provided that vulnerabilities are taken advantage of (Treads, transmission, turret rotator, etc. etc.)

You're also overestimating the armor of the vehicles. The thickness of armor on vehicles varies from point to point. Specifically, the compressor sections of jet engines and the transmission sections of helicopters are vulnerable.



Stop right there. When the hell did I ever say it shouldn't go through armored glass? I said it doesn't do it correctly in-game.

Reading comprehension is our friend.
Click to expand...


why not give us some evidence that you know what you're talking about? i hate it when topics like this come up because then the "experts" come out of the woodwork. i want to see some proof that this weapon (m95) was designed to put tanks out of commision... i DON'T think that was it's objective.

it doesn't even matter... just annoys me how some people think they know all.
 
According rules of engagment m95 is not supposed to be used against personnel. This weapon is designed to be shot at equipment. I watched a sniper competition and the snipers said that you are not allowed legaly to shoot a living target with it. But you can shoot at their equipment, guns, helmets etc, its a loophole. M95 has enough power to cause shell shock. Oh M95 wouldn't penetrate tanks armor, maybe a ww2 tank but not a modern tank.
 
in the middle of a war when is doing anything to the enemy on the battlefield illegal?

...
just curious

i have a video on the .50 cal sniper rifle but its in realmedia format, and i refuse to install that on my machine. if somebody wants it its 11.5MBs...pm me for a link (ill have one as soon as it finished uploading)
 
WickedAngel said:
As I said earlier, they're built to penetrate tank armor efficiently. We're talking several inches worth of steel here.
Click to expand...
The tests we did at Aberdeen Proving Ground, shown that .50 BMG API/SLAP did minimal damage to either the M1A2 and M2A2. Most effective damage of .50 BMG is to the Commander Display Unit (CDU) and CTIV sight, The Bradley took extensive damage to the IBAS unit, as well as the Driver's Hatch periscope.

There is a reason the .50 cartridge is considered a "light-armor" or "anti-material" round. It will not pierce 4 Inch plate of steel either. :rolleyes:
 
WickedAngel said:
We're talking several inches worth of steel here. If they can do that then you can imagine what would happen if a human was shot with one.
Click to expand...

Tank armor is made of depleted uranium...
 
Deadguy said:
yeah, you have never heard of a "war crime"?
Click to expand...

Still, I'm not sure I follow the logic here.
It's ok to kill someone with 5.56, which will do all sorts of nasty things inside you before you die shortly afterwards.
Blowing a big hole in them so they die instantly, OTOH, is bad.
...
?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top