.300 Magnum is of limited use

[NeRo]

Hi,

I would like to know why is .300 Canning Magnum of so limited use...
It is only ethical for tier 7-8-9 - I just shot a normally top gold red deer and it's deranked because of the "too powerful" ammo. It is pretty ridiculous because in real life .300 is one of the most universally used caliber and you can pretty much load it for anything from a squirrel up to a buffalo. 7mm rem. mag. categorization of the game is roughly how .300 should work IMO. (Maybe only shift it 1 categ higher)

Just a note but .30-06 being 1 tier lower than 7mm does not make a lot of sense to me either, however it is somewhat less annoying but I do not see what you could use 7mm for that 30-06 you can not as long as you stay within 200-300m range.

Yours,
Bence

[LokkNar]

That's just how the game is. I mean, 7.62x54R is a tier lower than .30-06, which is also wrong. And I wouldn't hunt boar with .223, except for piglets maybe. It is much better than before though - in the old system you had no minimum calibers, so shooting a roe deer with .338 was unethical, but shooting a water buffalo with .223 was perfectly ethical. It's still not perfect, but it's a vast improvement over the old system.
EDIT: The ballistics system is weird anyways.

[NeRo]

Maybe it should align a bit more to real life laws and ethics?
I mean I see no problem shooting a roe with a .338 and it is actually rather common I guess.
Not being able to shoot a RED DEER (we talk about a 200-250kg animal) with a .300 is absolutely nonsense. It IS actually mainly intended for heavier built deers and boar for medium to long ranges, both of what for in the game it is non-ethical. I don't see any game balance reasons either because e.g. 7mm is a jack of all trades in the game (which aligns well to how it should be so it's perfectly fine)
What's wrong with ballistics in your opinion?

[LokkNar]

Originally posted by NeRo:

Maybe it should align a bit more to real life laws and ethics?
I mean I see no problem shooting a roe with a .338 and it is actually rather common I guess.
Not being able to shoot a RED DEER (we talk about a 200-250kg animal) with a .300 is absolutely nonsense. It IS actually mainly intended for heavier built deers and boar for medium to long ranges, both of what for in the game it is non-ethical. I don't see any game balance reasons either because e.g. 7mm is a jack of all trades in the game (which aligns well to how it should be so it's perfectly fine)
What's wrong with ballistics in your opinion?

Tell that to the devs. It's a widely discussed issue. Since we don't hunt for meat or hides here I think there should be no maximum caliber for anything.
I was probably being a bit ambiguous - I meant the TERMINAL ballistics, although I am currently conducting a study on bullet drop and so far it seems that the dlc cartridges - Eckers, M1, Martensson - behave nearly identical from all rifles, whereas the stock cartridges .243 and .270 don't even have an actual ballistic trajectory, but more of a hump.

[McSqurl Nugget]

Originally posted by NeRo:

Hi,

I would like to know why is .300 Canning Magnum of so limited use...
It is only ethical for tier 7-8-9 - I just shot a normally top gold red deer and it's deranked because of the "too powerful" ammo. It is pretty ridiculous because in real life .300 is one of the most universally used caliber and you can pretty much load it for anything from a squirrel up to a buffalo. 7mm rem. mag. categorization of the game is roughly how .300 should work IMO. (Maybe only shift it 1 categ higher)

Just a note but .30-06 being 1 tier lower than 7mm does not make a lot of sense to me either, however it is somewhat less annoying but I do not see what you could use 7mm for that 30-06 you can not as long as you stay within 200-300m range.

Yours,
Bence

game balance, red deer are class 6. nothing about the weapons in game correspond to real life use. If that was so all we'd need is 2 rifles, .243 and .30-06, those will take down everything in the game, with the exception of birds but that's a waste of time in my opinion, until they put in turkey and others.

This integrity sheet should help you see what weapons are usable on the various animals.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NjzGrdT3XqzoOTbTg4u3PgTILjIjjrEWYI8j3_jfmKM/edit#gid=342458106

[NeRo]

Thank you for the sheet, this will be quite useful actually - I was reading after it a bit and in game the weapon descriptions show what tier they are ethical for, but having it all in one set is certainly cool.

I can still pick a 7mm and a 223 and shoot just about literally anything for diamond rank, except for birds as you mentioned.
Why you couldnt do that with e.g. a 30-06 223 or 300 223 setup and what game breaking news it would bring if you can already do this?

[McSqurl Nugget]

you can kill everything, at least on paper, with the .223 and 7mm. 7mm struggles with Moose and Bison/Buffalo though.

Since the changes with classes from Scoring 2.0 patch and with Weapon Pack 4 out now I only carry 3 weapons, unless there's rabbits in the map, then i add the .22 pistol

.223
M1 (or .50 cal Minie Ball for fun)
.300

[Firpo]

They should raise the prices for taxidermy for overpowered rifles at least for full body trophies.

eg you shot a coyote with a .223 -> "Oh hey, nice clean shot, let´s say 1500?"
you shot a coyote with a 9,3 -> "Wow what a mess! It will take days to fix it, that will cost you at least 4500"

[eagle74]

IMO both the 300 & 338 should be allowed for class 6-9, maybe 5-9. It sure would make load outs more flexible.

[Machin Shin]

its called diversity... a thing which is highly neededing in games do not get boring

[NeRo]

Originally posted by Aegis:

its called diversity... a thing which is highly neededing in games do not get boring

Imho putting real life guns in a game and force you to use them unrealistically, that doesn't bring diversity. There is one jack of all trades gun already (7mm mag), if it's for diversity and balance sake then why can you shoot EVERY big game with that one, and not with any other standard medium cal guns like 30-06, 300, etc.

[NeRo]

Would it not be much more diverse if you had several overlapping guns with different designs (maybe slightly different lower and higher ethical ends - but a perfect overlap is fine too).
In classic I have spent quite some bucks to grab a lot of bolt action rifles I liked the look of and more often than not I chose a different gun for each hunting session. In the end of the day they had very similar performance and I don't think that is a problem.

[McSqurl Nugget]

Originally posted by NeRo:

Would it not be much more diverse if you had several overlapping guns with different designs (maybe slightly different lower and higher ethical ends - but a perfect overlap is fine too).
In classic I have spent quite some bucks to grab a lot of bolt action rifles I liked the look of and more often than not I chose a different gun for each hunting session. In the end of the day they had very similar performance and I don't think that is a problem.

already have this. haven't you looked at the integrity sheets?

[Papa]

Devs want it that way and it's ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ sad... Classes and ballistics piss me off. I dont care about progression or difficulty, all I want is realism

[NeRo]

Originally posted by f0u666:

Devs want it that way and it's ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ sad... Classes and ballistics piss me off. I dont care about progression or difficulty, all I want is realism

Yeah exactly my thoughts. If you ever had or seen a gun in your life these things cripple your experience. Just wanna be able to pick up the .300 and shoot a....wild boar?! as any normal person would do e.g.
223 being "ethical" for wild boar, 243 being "ethical" for red deer during rut...these are considered as crime in real life in most countries, just fyi