Is no zoom on ironsights really realistic?

[wookimonsta]

i believe the idea is, that if you focus on an area, you can see more clearly here and distinguish individual shapes easier than if you weren't focused on the area. Since we are looking at a flat screen instead of a 3d image, this does not come into effect. The idea of a zoom i think is to simulate this effect and basically allow something that happens in real life but not in a game.
a small zoom would seem to recreate this. as for the actual size of the zoom, im not sure, im guessing anywhere between 1.2 and 1.5, but a little bit of playtesting should be able to determine a good point if one wanted to find out.

[Arnoldio]

As wooki said... 1.5 at max, id say 1.35 so even people with lower resolutions benefit.

And why thefck, but really why the fck would you give 4x zoom to ironsights... Get some sense in your heads people.

[CanuckCommander]

As wooki said... 1.5 at max, id say 1.35 so even people with lower resolutions benefit.

And why thefck, but really why the fck would you give 4x zoom to ironsights... Get some sense in your heads people.

Um...because 4x is realistic in the sense that it allows you to engage targets at 200+ meters with iron sights, like you can in RL. Yea it equals the ACOG zoom, but you got to remember that the Iron sights doesn't not give you clear vision of the target like Optics do.

If you don't believe, then go ingame and try the MEC LMG vs say the M249 (ELCAN OR ACOG) at 200m or more. Have them shoot at each other and see which is easier to shoot and maintain on target (even assuming that they have equal ballistic properties, I'll bet than the M249 would win).

4x zoom would allow ENGAGEMENTS (Not sniping) at more realistic ranges for the iron sights, but this DOES NOT MEAN accuracy that would be offered by optical sights, such as the ACOG.

Now, all you guys are calling me nuts, including a DEV, but have you all tried it out? I have. Get this, just because you can see your target better, doesn't mean you'll become an "ultra-sniper" with your 4x iron sights.

BTW, Okita, do you know why red dots or even EOTECHs are used? What is the benefit of having a holosight picture? Well, it is so that the sight can superimpose and adjust to targets at almost any range, unlike traditional physical sights with permanent shapes and sizes. Even ACOG suffers from this because at long ranges, the Chevron is so big that it can cover up the entire target, making the sight ineffective. I would take an EOTECH with a magnifier over an ACOG any day!


Lastly, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't ARMA do some research to find that 4x zoom is the most realistic for a video game render to compensate for the focus of human eyes? That is why in ARMA you can always zoom in 4x, with optics or not.

[gclark03]

This mod would be a lot better if only marksmen, snipers, officers and a limited AR kit received scopes. The rest could use 4x iron sights.

[Hunt3r]

Correct me if I'm wrong but soldiers with ACOG or SUSAT's mounted on their rifles don't actually sight in through their scopes when room clearing. They simply shoulder it and look down the barrel/reciever.

When clearing with a SUSAT sight, you aren't supposed to look through the sight, BAC won't really work.

With ACOGs you clear rooms with BAC. When you look around a chevron is superimposed on your vision, once you stop moving the magnified image of the scope automatically appears along with the rest of the reticule and that's that.

EOTechs have a fixed size reticule btw, the outer circle is always 65 MOA, the dot is always 1 MOA, the M68 is always 2 or 4 MOA.

[ReaperMAC]

Now, all you guys are calling me nuts, including a DEV, but have you all tried it out? I have. Get this, just because you can see your target better, doesn't mean you'll become an "ultra-sniper" with your 4x iron sights.

0.6 anyone?

[talkinBEERmug]

I think Irons need a small zoom, I think as it stands right now Iron sights are only good for about 45m after that its trash.

Look at the animation the guy brings the gun to his eye, in RL people dont bring the gun to their eye they lean in to it, so the lean will be the zoom, so its not zooming its just pushing the players eye next to the sight like leaning into your gun.

[jmlane]

Not really a fan of this idea. I definitely find it hard to hit my targets with iron sights at longer ranges, but I think this is a matter of practice, not impossibility. Giving zoom would ruin sights for CQB, take away some of your precious FOV, and make infantry think they should always be shooting at targets from long range. I am fine with the current iron sight configuration.

[RHYS4190]

Adding a 1.5X zoom would not infringe on the ability to fight in close quarters fighting, in 0.6 we had a 2x zoom on curtain rifles and we never had a problem with them in close quarters.

In fact we liked them much better in close quarters then the iron sights we have now, and the zoom really helped compensate for the short comings of the monitors.

Adding the zoom is totally realistic, because it blowing up the picture and object to there actual size they whould be in real life,

[LEEROY_UK]

Adding a 1.5X zoom would not infringe on the ability to fight in close quarters fighting, in 0.6 we had a 2x zoom on curtain rifles and we never had a problem with them in close quarters.

In fact we liked them much better in close quarters then the iron sights we have now, and the zoom really helped compensate for the short comings of the monitors.

Adding the zoom is totally realistic, because it blowing up the picture and object to there actual size they whould be in real life,

I have to agree with you on this , i think a smalll amount of zoom should be applied to rifles with only iron sights.
IMO Blufor have a distinct advantage over the isurgent sides with there acogs on the ins maps and i think its a little unfair at times.

[jmlane]

RHYS4190, so if the x2 zoom on rifles was liked so much, why was it changed to have no zoom?

I never had a chance to play with iron sight magnification (joined during 0.85), so I can't really comment on whether or not it would be more balanced in long distance firefights. I am just concerned that forcing us to have a magnification when we aim down our sights would reduce FOV and reaction time in CQB, due to the time required to switch from leaning in over the sights (zoomed view) to holding the rifle at the hip (unzoomed, unobstructed view). I would see no problem in adding an optional x1.5 - x2 magnification to iron sights, toggle-able by the camera key.

I am primarily concerned with the repercussions of a permanent magnification on CQB because those are the engagements in which I most frequently get wounded by the enemy. I typically play medic, so I am 99% of the time using an unscoped rifle in PR. I would be very concerned with any changes to iron sights that would restrict my FOV and reaction time. Adding a mandatory magnification when looking down the sights would reduce my reaction time because I have to switch firing stances to get a better unobstructed view of my surroundings.

It may not make sense in terms of weapon balance to allow for a toggle-able zoom when leaning in on iron sights, but it would help all non-optic rifleman land more killing or disabling blows on enemies at a distance. Right now, all I ever really hope to do in long range engagements is contribute suppressing fire on enemy positions, in hopes that it will give my optic equipped squadmates a chance to line up a clean hit. I suspect this is by design, which doesn't really bother me all that much—it encourages tactics and maneuvers, and shifts the rifleman's focus away from engaging targets in the distance, in hopes to rack up more kills.

[gclark03]

Hold on.

The last time PR had 4x zoom ironsights, there was no deviation. We don't know how it will work with 0.86 deviation. Why not try?

[Double Doppler]

that would make the scopes redundant

[Arnoldio]

that would make the scopes redundant

Omg, read the whole thread through, guys are talking about x 1.2-1.4 magnification, compared to 4x (or how much its is ) scopes.

[Wizrdwarts]

Omg, read the whole thread through, guys are talking about x 1.2-1.4 magnification, compared to 4x (or how much its is ) scopes.

He's referring to this post:

Hold on.

The last time PR had 4x zoom ironsights, there was no deviation. We don't know how it will work with 0.86 deviation. Why not try?

[RHYS4190]

RHYS4190, so if the x2 zoom on rifles was liked so much, why was it changed to have no zoom?

I never had a chance to play with iron sight magnification (joined during 0.85), so I can't really comment on whether or not it would be more balanced in long distance firefights. I am just concerned that forcing us to have a magnification when we aim down our sights would reduce FOV and reaction time in CQB, due to the time required to switch from leaning in over the sights (zoomed view) to holding the rifle at the hip (unzoomed, unobstructed view). I would see no problem in adding an optional x1.5 - x2 magnification to iron sights, toggle-able by the camera key.

I am primarily concerned with the repercussions of a permanent magnification on CQB because those are the engagements in which I most frequently get wounded by the enemy. I typically play medic, so I am 99% of the time using an unscoped rifle in PR. I would be very concerned with any changes to iron sights that would restrict my FOV and reaction time. Adding a mandatory magnification when looking down the sights would reduce my reaction time because I have to switch firing stances to get a better unobstructed view of my surroundings.

It may not make sense in terms of weapon balance to allow for a toggle-able zoom when leaning in on iron sights, but it would help all non-optic rifleman land more killing or disabling blows on enemies at a distance. Right now, all I ever really hope to do in long range engagements is contribute suppressing fire on enemy positions, in hopes that it will give my optic equipped squadmates a chance to line up a clean hit. I suspect this is by design, which doesn't really bother me all that much—it encourages tactics and maneuvers, and shifts the rifleman's focus away from engaging targets in the distance, in hopes to rack up more kills.

A 1.5 or 2.0x will just help enlarge and correct the picture at no determent to your FOV and your ability to fight in close quarters.

Crist we just want a 1.5x or a 2.0x just to help out stretch the image back to a appropriate realistic size, and here are people who want to put a 4.0x on the iron sights.

[Double Doppler]

What happens?
You arent 'zooming' in. If something should be changed in PR, stuff around your target should be blurred slightly when aiming.

Now that would be very cool. A bit like brothers in arms hells highway?

[Tomato-Rifle]

I think its fine, maybe add 0.5, or something small like that.

[jmlane]

Point a finger towards some distant object, or shape.
Now focus in the end of your fingertip, that's your weapons sight.
Now focus on the object you are pointing, and imagine using your fingertip as your weapons sight.

What happens?
You arent 'zooming' in. If something should be changed in PR, stuff around your target should be blurred slightly when aiming.

I agree with Engineer, as a counter to the zoom is realistic argument. I do not think that blurring your peripheral vision in PR really is necessary. Your vision is already blurred, if you have a big enough screen; otherwise, you have a lack of FOV detail at a lower resolution. Both make up for not having blurred peripheral vision in-game.