ironsights delay? zoom?

[.:iGi:.U.G.H.]

I understand, but i think

1. Rifles with optics should have a huge advantage

2. EVERYONE would have unzoomed iron sights, so it would be an even playing field. You wouldnt have a harder time of hitting them than they would on you.

But wouldn't that just mean people play the classes with optics much more than the the classes with iron sights? I know i'd think twice about it.

[xgayox]

But wouldn't that just mean people play the classes with optics much more than the the classes with iron sights? I know i'd think twice about it.

I guess so, but arent the sniper/marksman classes pretty much both filled up all the time as it is?

[causticbeat]

But wouldn't that just mean people play the classes with optics much more than the the classes with iron sights? I know i'd think twice about it.

give more classes optics, give optics more realistic recoil/sway, even if the sway is fake.

say rifleman and medic have optics, i certainly wouldnt mind seeing half of my team rifleman or medic. Let the ******** whore those kits all they want. Its better than the great Spec Ops plauge of .4. And the rest of the kits have enough of a motivator that would be worth giving up the optics for (grenade launcher, AT launcher, Engineer duties, etc etc). Keep in mind the optics arent making your bullets any more accurate, and if we had better (more precise) 2d ironsights, there would be alot more of a reliance on skill of shooter

[bosco_]

In .6, US and MEC assault rifles will have optics, too. The Grenadier will get optics aswell.
So the balance should be fine.

[Jedimushroom]

There is no animation on the 249SAW.

It was just a delay (1 second) added to the ironsights. Thats why it looks so jittery.

I'm pretty sure there is, he brings it just under his face (from the right hand side) and then raises it into the iron sight position, and in my opinion it looks awesome.

And if all EA had to do was delay the ironsightings to make it look so cool AND reduce prone spamming why did they not do it?

If this is true however, it wouldn't be that hard to implement a 1 second wait to all guns. Would it?

[77SiCaRiO77]

it would make sense... its not like the SAW is some gun that for some reason takes longer to sight than any other weapon...

I recently downloaded the Infiltration mod for UT, and their ironsights are the thing i miss the most when i get come back to playing PR after a bit of playing Inf. that and the free aim.

IMO, PR needs to take off the "iron sight zoom"

As much as people argue that its because you can "focus" your eyes when you sight in blah blah blah, the fact that two of the games that are considered the most realistic shooters (Red Orchestra and Infiltration) dont have it should be a sign.

well, in RL you dont have fog and draw distance thats the why of the zoom

[{GD}StevenGarcia]

IMO, PR needs to take off the "iron sight zoom"

+1

[Guerra]

In reality, you can aim WAY farther and people appear MUCH bigger than they do in the game.

Zooming in while aiming is not realistic in and of itself, however, the fact stands that a monitor will never replicate the kind of perception the human eye has in reality.

So I think the small "zoom" or "focus" is perfectly fine and it would be wasted effort to change it when other things need addressing.

[hoc_xfirestormx]

wait, just making sure i understand correctly:

medic guns are going to have scopes!? this would be a dream come true for me. im the resident medic usually, as any respectable ground pounder is (maybe that last part isnt true, but the rest is).

[fuzzhead]

the ironsite zoom is not such a simple issue guys...

the main reason its there, is to hide some poor features of the bf2 engine.

main issue for me is what caustic mentioned, that bf2 wont render a target at a distance that you could see IRL without the zoom.

if you just get rid of the ironsite zoom, you will fuck over all classes that dont have a scope, where in real life they would still be able to effectively engage targets, in PR they now dont see the enemies drawing...

I myself love ironsites much more than scopes, and think a move to 'only scopes' would be a bad one.

Of course I agree, there should be no zoom on ironsites, but in order to do that we have to fix some problems that the bf2 engine has.

The key thing here is, is it possible to fix, and is the time invested in fixing it, worth the reward of no iron site zoom. That question I cant answer cause Im not a coder...

Good discussion, but try to look at both sides, and keep in mind this has already been discussed thoroughly by the devs...

[eggman]

In .6, US and MEC assault rifles will have optics, too. The Grenadier will get optics aswell.

not true. will happen eventually, but not for v0.6.

And for those of you flogging the iron sights issue .. ffs .. drop it already.... the iron sights zoom in PR is about 1.1x zoom, just there to reflect a narrowed focal point on targets in front of you.

slower more realistic transitions to iron sight (like the SAWs) is something I'd like to see on all weapons, hopefully we'll get to that soon .. it's a laborious animation task.

[noir-colombia-]

who the hell edited my topic name without permission?

[Robbeh]

In .6, US and MEC assault rifles will have optics, too. The Grenadier will get optics aswell.
So the balance should be fine.

I seriously hope the grenadier does not get optics... that would stop anyone wanting to go rifleman

[Bob_Marley]

eggman']not true. will happen eventually, but not for v0.6

This news makes Bob a sad panda.

I'll be an even sadder panda if I hear that the US will be getting scopes in 0.6.

[daschewy]

Its a shame you all can't do 3d ironsights, Id think it'd be allot better than having to use optics. But I guess you can only work with what you have.