Jump to content
CMBelite-FR

M4 Vs AK74 recoil Build 2003

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

 

 

I uploaded a video comparing M4's and AK's recoil

 

so in this video you are going to see 

 

1) recoil at semi without " controlling" the recoil

2) recoil at full auto without " controlling" the recoil

3)recoil at semi then full auto but this time trying to control the recoil.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rpSKNHxE9M&feature=youtu.be

 

 

On my opinion i think that the recoil should behave like the one where i was controlling the recoil, looks much more realistic. I know devs (especially SgtRoss) wants to increase the firefights time, but at least reduce recoil in semi auto because even in semi, you will end up firing at the moon/sun looool thus no advantage using semi auto.

 

For those saying that Ak 74 has less recoil than M4, you're wrong xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

For those saying that Ak 74 has less recoil than M4, you're wrong xD

 

You were firing at the center of a wall 10 ft away from you for your experiment. I thought you were going to be firing at a target within practical engagement range, i.e; 50 - 150 meters.

Try doing the same experiment at that range and then you'll get it.

 

I can already tell the weapons not only jump during uncontrolled fire, but also shake and pull to the sides during controlled fire.

 

Since the M4 has a very noticeably faster fire rate, the AK74 will have the advantage in control

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically, AK 74 should have less recoil than M4 due to lighter ammunition load and proprietary muzzle break. But it should have more muzzle flash/ blast because of it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically, AK 74 should have less recoil than M4 due to lighter ammunition load and proprietary muzzle break. But it should have more muzzle flash/ blast because of it. 

 

If the weapons are made of the same composite, I could see this being true, but traditionally the AK family averages a heavier weapon than an M4/M4A1 carbine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You were firing at the center of a wall 10 ft away from you for your experiment. I thought you were going to be firing at a target within practical engagement range, i.e; 50 - 150 meters.

Try doing the same experiment at that range and then you'll get it.

 

I can already tell the weapons not only jump during uncontrolled fire, but also shake and pull to the sides during controlled fire.

 

Since the M4 has a very noticeably faster fire rate, the AK74 will have the advantage in control

 

that way it's easier to see the recoil pattern. Anyway, they both have the same amount of recoil. But i agree recoil is very exagerated in Squad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically, AK 74 should have less recoil than M4 due to lighter ammunition load and proprietary muzzle break. But it should have more muzzle flash/ blast because of it.

Once again you are correct and it is also so in game.

(Except for muzzle blast/flames. Ill get that sorted down the line)

And also a cookie for KCIV. You sir are also correct.

That being said, there are still many weapon handling and sighting upgrades to come over the next two years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again you are correct and it is also so in game.

(Except for muzzle blast/flames. Ill get that sorted down the line)

And also a cookie for KCIV. You sir are also correct.

That being said, there are still many weapon handling and sighting upgrades to come over the next two years.

If done properly, the US could have some upper edge due to low flash in low light condition ( A2 bird cage is very effective flash suppressor) while the insurgent (or other factions with AK 74) will have to deal with their muzzle break amplifying muzzle flash/ blast. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the A2 flash hinder also acts as a compensator so it should help with muzzle climb, that coupled with the fact that the AR platform is basically designed to mitigate muzzle climb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah the M4 in real life has much less kick than AK and other than advanced design, it's mostly because it fires a smaller round with less energy behind it than the AK.

I realize the devs have to find a balance between reality and fun. The U.S. had superior firepower and if all other things were kept equal, insurgents would be no match. This wouldn't be very fun in game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah the M4 in real life has much less kick than AK and other than advanced design, it's mostly because it fires a smaller round with less energy behind it than the AK.

 

AK74 is 5.45x39

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, this is the ak74 and its round is not significantly more powerful than the m4 5.56. Also, the m4 is lighter, and the ak74 is a heavier weapon, therefore the added weight will prevent muzzle rise more than the m4. So i think the devs have done a GREAT job in how the kickback plays out so far. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, this is the ak74 and its round is not significantly more powerful than the m4 5.56. Also, the m4 is lighter, and the ak74 is a heavier weapon, therefore the added weight will prevent muzzle rise more than the m4. So i think the devs have done a GREAT job in how the kickback plays out so far. 

The AK74 isn't THAT much heavier than the M4 especially considering how most M4s nowadays will have factory handguards swapped out for quad rails and inevitably will have optics and other accessories attached to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

good vid m8y :)   i think recoil needs sorting ingame as its all over the shop even while laying down.take a look at insurgency weapons and attachments/bi pods they got it down to a T theres recoil on them but its done right :) hope it gets fixed soon ish 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Safe to say both weapons need some work. Just had to  post this video because it seams this kid is more at home with an m4 than my Soldier in squad at the moment. 

 

 

Maybe I'm making assumptions. But are the operators in  Squad suppose to be trained to some degree, allowing relatively accurate mag dumps at 50m, which is not currently the case for the m4 and US army in game at the moment. Now I'm definitely not asking for a Call of duty esc' laser guns, but finding a middle ground where your character feels competent but weapons still feel real and have kick is essential and achievable with useful informative help like that illustrated by CMBelite-Fr. Completely agree however that weapons being fired on semi auto should never end up pointing towards the sun due to muzzle climb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

even looking at that kid, now get down to eye level and try to imagine the front sight post and the rear aperture... they would not be aligned and still on target. In fact he is bouncing all around, down, left, right. 20m out over half of his rounds would be off a man sized target.

 

Cause geometry yo... 

 

everything looks like a soft pillow fight when you watch it from 3p angle, get your head down to the sights and you are being bounced around unless you are shooting a .22

 

 

EDIT:

 

To illustrate my point with some actual data instead of just throwing words back at you.

 

I took a bunch of shots during the firing and drew his sight line like so:

 

nvefZhc.jpg

 

And here they are overlapped:

 

wakgtii.jpg

 

 

Now I hope that it is clear that once you extend those lines 10m, 20m 100m 300m...... like.... you won't hit anything.

 

The gun is moving regardless of how it looks from 3p perspective in a youtube video.

 

And this is only vertical climb, Imagine the spread in the horizontal plane too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

even looking at that kid, now get down to eye level and try to imagine the front sight post and the rear aperture... they would not be aligned and still on target. In fact he is bouncing all around, down, left, right. 20m out over half of his rounds would be off a man sized target.

 

Cause geometry yo... 

 

everything looks like a soft pillow fight when you watch it from 3p angle, get your head down to the sights and you are being bounced around unless you are shooting a .22

 

 

EDIT:

 

To illustrate my point with some actual data instead of just throwing words back at you.

 

I took a bunch of shots during the firing and drew his sight line like so:

 

 

 

wakgtii.jpg

 

 

Now I hope that it is clear that once you extend those lines 10m, 20m 100m 300m...... like.... you won't hit anything.

 

The gun is moving regardless of how it looks from 3p perspective in a youtube video.

 

And this is only vertical climb, Imagine the spread in the horizontal plane too.

 

None the less i never claimed the gun would not move. Also from those lines I did a little editing myself and am confident to say between 7 to 15 rounds would have been on target at 50m from that mag ( suggesting a range of 300m was a little bit of an exaggeration?). Finally contrary to the games current state you will find the weapon climbs vertically hard and a little horizontally right where as in reality it looks as if it should be jarring from left to right and have a small incline upwards  which you yourself even stated, quote " bouncing all around, down, left, right"..

Any who this is all speculative anyway as the games in such an early state, the weapons more than likely, will be changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm making assumptions. But are the operators in  Squad suppose to be trained to some degree, allowing relatively accurate mag dumps at 50m, which is not currently the case for the m4 and US army in game at the moment. Now I'm definitely not asking for a Call of duty esc' laser guns, but finding a middle ground where your character feels competent but weapons still feel real and have kick is essential and achievable with useful informative help like that illustrated by CMBelite-Fr. Completely agree however that weapons being fired on semi auto should never end up pointing towards the sun due to muzzle climb.

 

Well, whichever way you go, you're not ever going to be 100% on the money, so you best design the recoil in a matter that is consistent(hopefully) within the game logic. CoD and BF, these games are(nowadays) designed for a large amount of casual players who don't want to master the game that they purchased for 60 bucks, but some cheap rewards, instant action and easy mechanics. Which is why their weapons have no recoil that you'd have to counteract.

 

If you want to talk about reality, if you were a soldier, you would try to have every shot land in the target zone by readjusting the gun after the recoil impulse is gone, but should this automatism, however realistic, be done automatically because you're a trained operator? I think not  I've played a multitude of shooters in the past, and I would argue that, for any kind of "realistic" game you need "high" recoil even though the rifles may have less of a kick because it serves a number of important purposes for it's gameplay:

 

1) The higher the recoil, the more distinguished a rifle feels. Outside of their ammo capacity, I believe very few weapons in CoD handle differently. If you exaggerate the recoil on a "medium" recoil level gun, you can feel a noticeable difference when using a high recoil battle rifle or a low recoil sub machine gun or PDW. And although none of these are being used as standard rifles for infantrymen in most armies, they are nowadays more and more incorporated into the loadout of squads for specific purposes for certain armies(Germany does it, eg.), not to mention a number our insurgent factions may be able to use whichever gun is common(like you see in PR, Talis, Militia and Ins using a variety of very, very different weapons) in a certain theatre.

2) It rewards weapon mastery and skillfull play. The more accustomed you are to recoil, the better you fare. It's not down to whoever the targeting system decided to give more shots on target but your own ability to hold steady/counteract the recoil.

3) Potentially single shots could see more use if the recoil from an 2, 3 or 4 -round-burst would throw you off your target. And this isn't unrealistic, mind you. Depending on stance, you will miss a large amount of your shots even if the target is "only" 50m away, due to the rifle tilting and/or misaligned sights that're obscuring the target after the shot has gone off, due to muzzle climb and what not. I guess you could emulate all of that to a degree, but doing so would make gunplay be heavily influence by getting lucky and being able to get a number of clean shots in before your sights misalign(or else).

I'm going to admit though, that unfortunately I've never been trained enough to the point where I can say that you can get rid of these factors by training, nor have I ever been allowed to dump a mag onto a single target, but I've heard others saying that you may get the first 3 rounds in on a human target at 50m, but after that you can't say reliably at which total you're going to end after a mag. And the G36 is a weapon with fairly low recoil(muzzle climb) and which sights cannot misalign(tilting also isn't too much of an issue).

 

So in a nutshell, while vertical recoil may be low at face value, there's more to it than that and putting in all the "realistic" stuff that happen after you shoot a round are probably going to hurt gameplay more than having "unnecessarily high" recoil to simulate all of the factors mentioned in 3). I guess some of our community's current servicemen could tell you better than I do, and could prove me wrong, but even if they would say "oh yeah, I'll get 30 out of 30 on target with one burst, no biggie", I would argue that high recoil is better than low recoil for reasons of gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, whichever way you go, you're not ever going to be 100% on the money, so you best design the recoil in a matter that is consistent(hopefully) within the game logic. CoD and BF, these games are(nowadays) designed for a large amount of casual players who don't want to master the game that they purchased for 60 bucks, but some cheap rewards, instant action and easy mechanics. Which is why their weapons have no recoil that you'd have to counteract.

 

If you want to talk about reality, if you were a soldier, you would try to have every shot land in the target zone by readjusting the gun after the recoil impulse is gone, but should this automatism, however realistic, be done automatically because you're a trained operator? I think not  I've played a multitude of shooters in the past, and I would argue that, for any kind of "realistic" game you need "high" recoil even though the rifles may have less of a kick because it serves a number of important purposes for it's gameplay:

 

1) The higher the recoil, the more distinguished a rifle feels. Outside of their ammo capacity, I believe very few weapons in CoD handle differently. If you exaggerate the recoil on a "medium" recoil level gun, you can feel a noticeable difference when using a high recoil battle rifle or a low recoil sub machine gun or PDW. And although none of these are being used as standard rifles for infantrymen in most armies, they are nowadays more and more incorporated into the loadout of squads for specific purposes for certain armies(Germany does it, eg.), not to mention a number our insurgent factions may be able to use whichever gun is common(like you see in PR, Talis, Militia and Ins using a variety of very, very different weapons) in a certain theatre.

2) It rewards weapon mastery and skillfull play. The more accustomed you are to recoil, the better you fare. It's not down to whoever the targeting system decided to give more shots on target but your own ability to hold steady/counteract the recoil.

3) Potentially single shots could see more use if the recoil from an 2, 3 or 4 -round-burst would throw you off your target. And this isn't unrealistic, mind you. Depending on stance, you will miss a large amount of your shots even if the target is "only" 50m away, due to the rifle tilting and/or misaligned sights that're obscuring the target after the shot has gone off, due to muzzle climb and what not. I guess you could emulate all of that to a degree, but doing so would make gunplay be heavily influence by getting lucky and being able to get a number of clean shots in before your sights misalign(or else).

I'm going to admit though, that unfortunately I've never been trained enough to the point where I can say that you can get rid of these factors by training, nor have I ever been allowed to dump a mag onto a single target, but I've heard others saying that you may get the first 3 rounds in on a human target at 50m, but after that you can't say reliably at which total you're going to end after a mag. And the G36 is a weapon with fairly low recoil(muzzle climb) and which sights cannot misalign(tilting also isn't too much of an issue).

 

So in a nutshell, while vertical recoil may be low at face value, there's more to it than that and putting in all the "realistic" stuff that happen after you shoot a round are probably going to hurt gameplay more than having "unnecessarily high" recoil to simulate all of the factors mentioned in 3). I guess some of our community's current servicemen could tell you better than I do, and could prove me wrong, but even if they would say "oh yeah, I'll get 30 out of 30 on target with one burst, no biggie", I would argue that high recoil is better than low recoil for reasons of gameplay.

Much truth to this post, and I think the biggest factor here is that it IS a game. Because yes while in real life the rifle isn't moving that much even for 50m, you *aren't* going to be hitting shit. And I forget average engagement range in Afghan but I know it was above 100m, and that average bullets it took to kill on insurgent was somewhere above 1000 and or more. Maybe it was taking into account other factors that may not see much use in Squad or any game.

 

Anyways that is kind of the point it is a GAME, it cannot always use real life circumstances to properly simulate real life, sometimes you have to use different methods to better balance or even to make it much more similar to modern combat. The way recoil worked in PR and currently, (for the most part) works here creates an atmosphere that promotes more teamwork and the specific type of gunplay conducive to what the game is going for, PR a bit more so though considering TTK or at least time spent in a firefight before you manage to actually kill.

 

As for the teamwork thing, no one standard Army guy is going to be the most accurate with a rifle especially in firefights, and at those distances. Wasting an entire magazine and then being out of action keeping an enemy down isn't going to help when it might take more to kill an enemy, and if your whole squad did that you'd be with your pants down while the enemy has their members focused on being accurate, 6 guns shooting slowly trying to widdle you down is much more effective, and with the way the guns currently work you are more likely to have people want to bunch up because they're guns aren't laser pointers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.) I agree, to a point. PR, for example, already had high recoil and barely anybody complained as it was still kinda manageable. The weapons in Squad feel way worse, M4 especially has way too much vertical recoil. I still don't understand why it has so much more recoil than the AK.

Besides vertical recoil we have rate of fire, calibre, sideways recoil, single bullet kick etc. to differentiate between weapons.

2.) It's literally just pulling your mouse down, rest is up to RNG which you can't control. It's hardly a skill and in many times it very much is down to whoever RNG decides to give more shots on target.

3.) I'd love to see this, but unfortunately besides high recoil weapons also suffer from high kick after every shot. This makes target reacquisition take too long and single fire not nearly as effective as it should be. Not only this, but lack of visual feedback where you have little to no indication if you landed your shot or missed. I never see any bullet impacts when I'm shooting at a guy running down a hill (I'm not just talking about blood/ dust spray, but also impacts from bullets hitting dirt etc.).

I think the whole weapon mechanics should be refined a lot. As it is currently it simply doesn't fit in with the stamina, stances and relatively fast movement speeds.

1.) I agree, to a point. PR, for example, already had high recoil and barely anybody complained as it was still kinda manageable. The weapons in Squad feel way worse, M4 especially has way too much vertical recoil. I still don't understand why it has so much more recoil than the AK.

Besides vertical recoil we have rate of fire, calibre, sideways recoil, single bullet kick etc. to differentiate between weapons.

2.) It's literally just pulling your mouse down, rest is up to RNG which you can't control. It's hardly a skill and in many times it very much is down to whoever RNG decides to give more shots on target.

3.) I'd love to see this, but unfortunately besides high recoil weapons also suffer from high kick after every shot. This makes target reacquisition take too long and single fire not nearly as effective as it should be. Not only this, but lack of visual feedback where you have little to no indication if you landed your shot or missed. I never see any bullet impacts when I'm shooting at a guy running down a hill (I'm not just talking about blood/ dust spray, but also impacts from bullets hitting dirt etc.).

I think the whole weapon mechanics should be refined a lot. As it is currently it simply doesn't fit in with the stamina, stances and relatively fast movement speeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.) I agree, to a point. PR, for example, already had high recoil and barely anybody complained as it was still kinda manageable. The weapons in Squad feel way worse, M4 especially has way too much vertical recoil. I still don't understand why it has so much more recoil than the AK.

Besides vertical recoil we have rate of fire, calibre, sideways recoil, single bullet kick etc. to differentiate between weapons.

 

1) Perception, rate of fire. 900 RPM weps in PR have a distinctly lower recoil on full auto because of the engine, even if each individual shot has the same or slightly higher recoil compared to weapons with ROFs at 600 and lower. The AK74 uses a caliber with has less recoil than 5.56.

 

 

2.) It's literally just pulling your mouse down, rest is up to RNG which you can't control. It's hardly a skill and in many times it very much is down to whoever RNG decides to give more shots on target.

 

The only thing that'll ever matter in a game in which fully automatic rifles are the main killing machines is how good you'll be at adjusting recoil. It may not be much in terms of skill, but it's way better than having people shoot at one another with guns that kill in 2 or 3 bullets that have no recoil. I'm opposed to going for spray patterns like Counter-Strike, and I'm opposed at increasing the spread for every bullet by 20%(like BF2), so unless you have an idea, I think high recoil is the best that you can go for to have a certain level of skill involved as well as deny full auto sprays half across the map.

 

 

3.) I'd love to see this, but unfortunately besides high recoil weapons also suffer from high kick after every shot. This makes target reacquisition take too long and single fire not nearly as effective as it should be. Not only this, but lack of visual feedback where you have little to no indication if you landed your shot or missed. I never see any bullet impacts when I'm shooting at a guy running down a hill (I'm not just talking about blood/ dust spray, but also impacts from bullets hitting dirt etc.).

I think the whole weapon mechanics should be refined a lot. As it is currently it simply doesn't fit in with the stamina, stances and relatively fast movement speeds.

 

It should be possible to give weapons lower recoil on semi. No reason to think that it's impossible imo unless someone from the Dev team says it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is the M4 on singlefire when playing? Wouldn't this be the preferred mode at pretty much all ranges except extreme cqb?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is the M4 on singlefire when playing? Wouldn't this be the preferred mode at pretty much all ranges except extreme cqb?

It is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greetings gentlemen,

 

first post yay! So let me first post an introduction of some sort.

 

Been playing Squad for two days now, learning the ropes and enjoying the great team work on the UK servers (and often on the German server). I come from tactical (military) sims like OFP in 2001 up to ArmA3, SWAT 3 and some others. I work as an CTO in the firearms industry and am a long range shooter myself.

 

Now after the "new guy" stuff is communicated, let me respond to the recoil discussion.

 

There are those people that like the recoil to be player controlled and those that like the game to take care about the shooting drills. In a competitive shooter e.g. CounterStrike recoil is part of the learning curve to be good. CS is not meant to be realistic or immersive.

 

Squad however, just like PR, is a realistic interpretation of modern military conflicts in form of a game with a huge immersive factor to it. Recoil control should not be part of the player "action". Not saying there should be no recoil, it should be realistic from a trained soldiers perspective.

 

A 5.56 does not have much recoil in single fire to begin with. Follow up shots are quite easy to accomplish on medium engangement distances (up to 300m) on a man sized target. Fully automatic fire should increase the "area of effect" depending on the shots fired. Considering the training, the muzzle climb would be translated in a increased "cone of fire" instead of a vertical rise.

 

I understand the Devs would like to increase the length of a firefight. Increasing the firefight duration by ridiculous recoil in fully automatic seems like a bad idea. The problem is the full auto fire on distance in the first place, unless you are suppressing enemy positions it does not really make sense. With the current recoil you are already handicapped with single fire, not being able to see your own bullet impact. Since there is no vapor trail to spot as far as I am aware of, it will make long range engagements pretty damn difficult.

 

In CQB engagements it should not be a CS style of gameplay, I am too old to be competitive in that genre anyway, so I'd rather prefer a tactical/realistic approach to firearms handling in Squad.

 

This is just my opinion, of course and since I am more of the sniper guy, for apparent reasons, I suck in CQB twice as much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×