Most of the weapons in here do not live up to their real life examples in terms of scale, power, and accuracy. I forget who said this, but I recall somebody comparing the Ronin M16 to a real Colt M16- the Ronin's M16 shots spread to a height of like two actors across 100 yards or so, whereas the real Colt M16 has an effective range of 600 yards. The bullets also travel much slower than their counterparts in real life and the weights are messed up as well.
BUT: You want to talk about the AK-47?
IRL, it's an old, nearly antiquated weapon made by the Soviets in the late '40s. Cheap, easy to maintain, fairly inexpensive (I've seen people in Europe selling them for like 50 Euros a pop, ffs) and using the standard 7.62mm round, AK-47s are fairly common among poorer insurgents and militias, along with terrorist groups. They maintain a high stopping power, and in close quarters they're reliable, but they have low accuracy to begin with, and this is marred by their high-recoil, so using them in long-distance engagements is like playing Russian Roulette with your enemies.
In CC, AK-47's are fairly damaging, moderately accurate, but their recoil is nearly non-existant, making them easy to fire in full-auto. Unfortunately they lack both stopping power and penetrating power, so it's not uncommon to fire an entire magazine at an armored target and only have about 5 bullets actually pierce.
*Side Note: Newer variants of the AK-47, such as the AK-74(SU), AK-102, and AN-94, are generally more powerful and accurate than the AK-47, but are more expensive and harder to obtain.
EDIT: Further study reveals that the AK-47 does not fire the "standard" 7.62, the 7.62x51mm round used by NATO, but rather fires 7.62x33mm rounds. My bad.
|
