can’t understand why russian assault rifles can’t attach vision modules , they deserve better
1 Like
Which assault rifle do you mean?
Every weapon that can have a scope (not red dot) can attach a vision module.
If you can’t attach a scope, it’s just intended.
AI76 & AT-WAD , same category as AG4 / AG5, but redot only . I love those two ,but unable to have vision module makes me keep using AG5 
1 Like
Probably that way by design. If a 1-4 scope and a vision module were available for both, use of the AG4 and 5 would largely evaporate overnight.
1 Like
To be clear however- as small arms assault rifles, a 1-4 scope and a full vision module ‘should’ be available on both the AI- 76 and the AR- WAD. Not having them available for play balance is just silly. A more accurate method of delineating between the various weapons is to use real- world considerations such as rate of fire, and weapon / ammunition weight. Unfortunately, the game has become easier rather than a challenge and these two weapons suffer as a result. Your post hits that nail on the head. While I’m sure some exist, I currently know no players who have learned the use of vision modules but still prefer the AI over the AG4 or 5. Seeing clearly at night is everything and has it all over some extra ammunition.
I agree and disagree…somehow.
Keep in mind that AI-76 is a basic game weapon, the at-wad one of the first DLC weapons.
The AI-76 seems to have been thought as close range weapon for 7.62, while the AG4 was more for mid to long range.
That’s why just the AI-76 has 3round burst, while the AG4 can also be used as sniper with a rifle scope and single shot.
This kind of balance has been outdated with all the dlcs that came later.
At least, that’s my opinion about that.
DLCs have nothing to do with it. All three weapons are based on real- life small arms. They’re made for the same general purposes and have comparable effective ranges and attachments. Applying artificial game restrictions on them to make them ‘different’ is what’s silly. The fact that developers can introduce an artificial game mechanic and prevent the player from attaching a scope and a vision module to a weapon which can mount them IRL does not mean automatically that they should. The player should have freedom of action to do that and decide for themselves.
I disagree with that in general.
I’m not surprised in the slightest.
1 Like
Yeah, why not.
In my eyes it’s more the opposite:
Give the devs the freedom to create what they want to create. It’s their descition… And it is in fact.
We don’t always have to be glad with their descitions, but we should respect them in general. For everything else we may request for a change… And we did in many cases and we were heard in many cases… Not always exactly as we wished… But that’s again up to the devs.
And of course: every one has a different taste and a different opinion. And that’s ok.
I don’t question the ability of the developers to decide. I question their decision itself in this case. They should have left that up to the player. But that’s only my opinion.
1 Like