Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Might I ask why you'd like an AR-15? 5.56 was made to serve military logistics, not marksmanship. Certainly this makes the guns and ammo cheap and widely available, but I'm not sure what's desirable about them if you have more stable options purpose-built for hunting.
Carbines are good for hunting in the woods. I would expect it to be similar in function/role as a 30-30 lever action carbine with a lower caliber and higher cartridge velocity. So maybe a flatter trajectory too with a bit longer reach.
AR-15's are also quite accurate and popular as ranch varmint rifles... one example:
http://www.snipercentral.com/rock-river-arms-varmint-a4/
A "wylde" chambered rifle can shoot 5.56 or .223 ammo. So either/or would be fine if the NATO 5.56 spec is viewed as distasteful or deemed too mil-spec-ish. It's basically the same as .223 with a bigger cartridge that gives more FPS velocity/accuracy.
Again though, to me, the AR's (which is not an abbreviation for Assault Rifle rather a reference to the Armalite rifle company) are just another type of rifle that may have had its origins in the military. No different than the bolt action Mausers, or the 30-06 M1 carbine from WWII, or the popular 5.56/.223 Ruger Mini-14 semi-auto.
At each progression, there are those that question the use for hunting. There was a time when bolt-action (Mauser) was considered too mil-spec for hunting and real hunting rifles should just be limited to muzzle loaders. ...two hundred years from now people will be questioning the use of laser rifles for hunting.
The fact is, these things just evolve with technology over time and whether or not a rifle has a pistol grip doesn't really matter. I have a turkey shotgun with a pistol grip. I like the pistol grips.
I was hoping they might add squirrel hunting before monkeys... Air guns and semi-auto handguns with magazines would be nice too.
Screenshot I found on theHunter: Classic community page from someone named Nicpus:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1125408270
I'd like to see a .308 one also (AR-10/LR-308/etc.), as that would be more useful for hunting up to elk-sized animals. (A lot of jurisdictions in real life allow use of these for hunting, though often limited to 5-round magazines, etc.; it's more a function of the "ethical" caliber of ammunition than the appearance or mechanism of the action of the rifle.)
Note that the Mosin Nagant was also the standard issue infantry rifle of Russia/the Soviet Union for a time, so military use doesn't seem to be a disqualifier for being used for hunting in this game...
Wow, I had never thought of pests like rats being added around the cabins... but yeah, that's a great idea! ...or raccoons, OMG how did I not immediately think of raccoons for a varmint DLC pack! Hunting pigeons and other pest/nuisance birds around the campsites with pellet guns would be a lot of fun too.
I think squirrels though do not necessarily fall into the pest/rat category, they have a legitimate hunting season just like rabbits. ...and it would be very different hunting for them in trees. I would love to see them added to the game!
We could put bipods on anything... It doesn't really seem like rifle aiming from a prone or kneeling position in this game gives any better stability than standing straight up. Which would be a nice thing if they updated in the future.
Semi-auto rifles can be hefty in the 7.5 to 8-ish pound range, where a semi-auto carbine is about a pound lighter. I've held a Browning BAR and the thing is just heavy and feels clumsy to me compared to my 30-06 bolt action. For this reason alone, if I was going to add a semi-auto rifle to my collection it would very likely be a Colt AR-15. It just feels more like what I'm used to weight-wise and it's not quite as long, so you don't hit it on branches so much when plodding through the forest.
https://www.browning.com/products/firearms/rifles/bar/current-production.html
https://www.colt.com/detail-page/clt-carb-lw-556-161-30rd
Now don't get me wrong... If I was hunting buffalo out on the savanna, those BAR 308 Safari models are just beautiful! For chasing coyote and raccoons through the woods; I'll take the carbine.
And to go with this, a .22 pistol and airguns (rifle).
I had a few additional thoughts about this after a hunting experience in COTW last weekend (and some time to write down some of my thoughts over the long weekend this week).
Short Version:
Some pros/cons vs. manually operated rifles
Pros:
1) Faster follow-up shots when needed (e.g. groups of aggressive animals, like boar)
2) Generally softer recoil
3) Often better (subjective) ergonomics
Cons:
1) Increased weight
2) Potentially reduced reliability
3) Generally harder/more expensive to get comparable accuracy/precision
Long Version:
First off, I think it might be a good idea to make sure everyone is on the same page terminology-wise.
The expression "assault _rifle_" in current usage is a military term with a pretty specific definition. The Wikipedia entry has about as good a summary as any other, which is a rifle that:
1) is capable of selective fire
2) uses an intermediate power cartridge (e.g. 5.56x45 NATO, 7.62x39, etc.)
3) feeds ammunition from a detachable box magazine
4) has an effective range of at least 300m
Note that while most assault rifles have pistol grips, a few do not, an example being the Chinese Type 63 rifle, which looks something like an SKS but uses an AK-based select fire action with 7.62x39 detachable magazines. Also note that most civilian rifles cannot technically be "assault rifles" because they are semi-auto only.
This is as opposed to the term "battle rifle" in current military usage, which is a rifle that:
1) uses a full power cartridge (e.g. 7.62x51 NATO, 7.62x54R, etc.)
2) feeds ammunition from a detachable box magazine
Note that some battle rifles, like some versions of the FN FAL and M14, are semi-auto only.
In contrast, the expression "assault _weapon_" is a political term whose definition changes from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and largely has to do with what a firearm looks like (often "features" like pistol/vertical grips, etc.). For example, in some places an AR-15 is considered an "assault weapon" while something like a Mini-14 is not, even though they are generally the same in functional description, semi-automatic 5.56x45/.223 rifles using detachable magazines, and are equally deadly if using the same barrel length and cartridge.
Now, moving on to why rifles like this may be useful, to be concise I'll use the term "modern sporting rifle" (MSR) that seems to be used a lot these days in the firearms community to refer to the type of rifle you describe.
One of the primary reasons I believe that many people who use MSRs prefer pistol grips is just due to ergonomics. Anecdotally I have read or heard many comments about preferring one grip angle over another, and qualitatively it would appear that the angle to hold a pistol grip would produce less wrist strain than a traditional straight grip stock or semi-grip stock that you would see on many bolt-actions. Many if not most MSR designs make changing the grip to suit individual preferences (e.g. hand size) quick and inexpensive. Having been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan where I carried an M16 or M4 practically everywhere I went, I find the USGI A2-style pistol grip to ergonomically fit me pretty well, but I've seen many preferences for an even more vertical grip angle, and if nothing else the market for replacement grips shows that many people want that kind of flexibility. Even many of the modern bolt action rifles for military and competition shooting use thumbhole stocks or other designs that allow for a pistol-like grip.
The other part of the discussion goes back to the origins of MSRs to the military rifles on which many of them are based, which pertains to the ability to make rapid follow-up shots if required. The first military assault rifles like the German StG 44 were designed with an in-line stock layout to direct the recoil straight back into the user's shoulder to reduce muzzle climb and make them controllable during automatic fire, but this also necessitated the pistol grip and elevated sights to make them comfortable to hold and use. Also, assault rifles use energy from the firing of the round (through recoil, blowback, or gas operation) to cycle their actions, which absorbs that energy instead of directing it all into your shoulder the way a manually-operated rifle does. As a consequence of this, semi-auto MSR derivatives tend to recoil softer and move less off of the desired sight picture when fired than an equivalent bolt action rifle.
One related trade-off is weight. The parts of a semi-auto generally have to be made more robustly for a given cartridge and barrel dimension, so an MSR will tend to be heavier all else being equal, though this can be mitigated by using lightweight materials, etc. This can make it more annoying to carry in the field for extended periods but conversely the additional inertia also helps to again reduce the felt recoil when actually shooting it.
Also, the dimensioning and manufacturing of the parts has to balance between reliability, accuracy/precision, and cost. With a manually operated action, you have to move the parts yourself, so therefore it's on you to verify the cycle of operation is going correctly, and you can try to muscle the action if it starts getting dirty and misbehaving. In a semi-auto where it has to do it by itself, making the parts and their fitting to tighter tolerances makes it more consistent shot-to-shot and therefore more precise but conversely increases the sensitivity to dirt and fouling increasing the friction between parts. This can be overcome by changes in materials, mechanical design, etc. but generally will increase cost to do so.
The COTW scenario that made me think about this involved some boar hunting in Hirschfelden. This was in a heavily wooded area, and there was a group of about 8-9 boar feeding. The terrain and foliage would have kept me from seeing them more than maybe 80-100m out. I was using the bow for stealth and was trying to call in a closer subset of 3 of the group into range. Right when I shot the closest male, two other animals that had been sneaking in out of view charged out and hit me before running off. I was able to use a medkit but was then hit by one of the female stragglers who hadn't realized what was happening as quickly before I could line up for a shot.
In real life, there wouldn't be any opportunity to "heal" yourself in a few seconds, and hogs would probably do something more severe and messy than just head-butting you, so, if there were a chance of a three animals running at me in the space of a few seconds like that, I probably wouldn't be able to work a bolt action fast enough to confidently hit all of them and would prefer to use something that would allow me to stand a chance of stopping them.
It stands for armalite rifle.