Realistic accuracy?

PrometheusRising · Post by **PrometheusRising** » 2007-03-31 12:25

I've been reading this board for a while and one thing really surprised me.

People argue a lot about various realism issues - for example, those neverending G3 threads. But I never seen somebody discussing ridiculous accuracy of all ingame firearms.

I always thought that in real life combat it's rather hard to hit somebody with your rifle, statistics of fired shots/casualties show that. And I think that people who served the army would agree with this.

While in Project Reality every untrained insurgent with his grandpa's AK-47 fires with 100% accuracy. Of course, it depends on player's skill and lag, but initial shot goes right where your ironsight points. So i wonder, if this is intentional or the first shot deviation rate cannot be change without changing the source code?

For example, in Battlefield 2142 firing mechanism has been reworked and, IMHO, it looks much more sensible.

Sorry if somebody already asked this before. And, surely, this was not meant to be a criticism - I really like this mod, above are just some thoughts provoked be "reality" part of its name.

Soulis6 · Post by **Soulis6** » 2007-03-31 12:35

I agree.......sort of.

I think the guns should be 100% accurate, but scope drift should be present. It doesnt kill the game as it is now, but it does occsionally bother me. Thats just my opinion however.

mammikoura · Post by **mammikoura** » 2007-03-31 12:38

of course the shot goes where the iron sight points, thats how it happens in real life. The thing that is missing is that in PR all guns are 100% stable, no sway or anything like that. Sadly it's a problem with the bf2 engine, there isn't anything the devs can do.

I don't like the idea of increasing shot deviation, it just leads to the bullet going to random directions. So then hitting becomes more luck than skills, since it really doesn't matter if you aim for the head or not since the deviation will make the bullet go to somewhere else than the spot where you are aiming.

$kelet0r · Post by **$kelet0r** » 2007-03-31 13:04

Fishw0rk wrote: BF2 is just ridiculous sometimes. They added a ton of great new features compared to BF1942 (Commander, Squads, etc), but really dropped the ball when it came to brining back some of the core elements of infantry combat (scope sway, non-spam prone diving, etc).

ain't that the truth
and then they lock the modders out of making the changes they would like to make to simple things

BigPipe · Post by **BigPipe** » 2007-03-31 13:36

when you shoot full auto with any gun, the bullets don't go where the iron sights were pointing. it seems with full auto, some random deviation is brought it but in single shots, its accurate

El_Vikingo · Post by **El_Vikingo** » 2007-03-31 14:34

If you take a machine gun and place it on an unmoveable object (so the gun will not move a nm), will the bullets stray far from each other.

If Chuck Norris punched himself, would it be the end of the universe?

So many questions but no answers.

Accuracy depends on the players! Single shot > FullAuto (some people dont understand this)

GnaM · Post by **GnaM** » 2007-03-31 18:42

mammikoura wrote:of course the shot goes where the iron sight points, thats how it happens in real life. The thing that is missing is that in PR all guns are 100% stable, no sway or anything like that. Sadly it's a problem with the bf2 engine, there isn't anything the devs can do.

I don't like the idea of increasing shot deviation, it just leads to the bullet going to random directions. So then hitting becomes more luck than skills, since it really doesn't matter if you aim for the head or not since the deviation will make the bullet go to somewhere else than the spot where you are aiming.

Quoted for truth. We don't want some CS-type system where even when your sights are on target the bullets still fly off randomly...besides with the BF2 hitbox-trailing-behind-the-player bug, I think exagerated stability is just compensation.

Maistros · Post by **Maistros** » 2007-03-31 19:43

Putting your iron sights on a target in real life, does not equal a hit. It's now how it works. RANGE, is the most important factor. What are your iron sights zeroed at? 400? 300?

So how do you aim at a guy only 100m away from you?

The trick is not forming realistic accuracy.. the trick is adding in realistic ballistics and bullet rise/drop.

$kelet0r · Post by **$kelet0r** » 2007-03-31 20:02

on a slightly related note - I cry every time I play as an insurgent. They are castrated accuracy-wise compaared to their foes. The amount of times I carefully line up a heatshot only to see the tracer inexplicably fly off a metre wide of the target at close range

Sorry - frustrating afternoon on Helmand. The short view distances on a map which should have 1000m view distance, the deathmatchy gameplay coupled with the crippled insurgents who must fight a conventional force conventionally wrecks my head.

El_Vikingo · Post by **El_Vikingo** » 2007-03-31 20:07

That's why Ins. should wait and hide to lure te enemy in.

(I shot down a Cobra with a RPG today, I know the trick to get super accuracy!)

coolhand · Post by **coolhand** » 2007-03-31 20:13

El_Vikingo wrote:That's why Ins. should wait and hide to lure te enemy in.

(I shot down a Cobra with a RPG today, I know the trick to get super accuracy!)

That's exactly how I play as them. Lure the US inside the city, and camp out. Those AK-47 are deadly, even on full auto, so long as you get the first bead on someone -50m away. Lure them in that close and that AK does one hell of a job.

It might just be me, but I feel as if the M16 is a much more accurate gun in single shot vs. the AK (might be the sound or 'feel' of the gun to me). I find it much harder to single shot an AK than the M16... however, if the target is close enough, A full auto AK shot in burst does a fine, fine job.

$kelet0r · Post by **$kelet0r** » 2007-03-31 20:15

on Basrah absolutely. Hit them hard and retreat.

on Helmand, well the British have every advantage and the insurgents are forced to play using vanilla BF2 quick respawn tactics which is just horrible gameplay

Jedimushroom · Post by **Jedimushroom** » 2007-03-31 20:24

I got major kills on AlBasrah about half an hour ago.

I stuck some IED's on the north entrance, but just behind the wall so they couldn't see 'em. Then I camped on the rooftop and waited...

FINAL SCORE: 2 APCs 1 HMMWV 3 M1A1s and a cobra

El_Vikingo · Post by **El_Vikingo** » 2007-03-31 21:04

Jedimushroom wrote:I got major kills on AlBasrah about half an hour ago.

I stuck some IED's on the north entrance, but just behind the wall so they couldn't see 'em. Then I camped on the rooftop and waited...

FINAL SCORE: 2 APCs 1 HMMWV 3 M1A1s and a cobra

You got a cobra with C4!?!

With the Cobra's being used with BF2v tactics, sometimes you can reach them with your hands!

GnaM · Post by **GnaM** » 2007-03-31 21:30

coolhand wrote: It might just be me, but I feel as if the M16 is a much more accurate gun in single shot vs. the AK (might be the sound or 'feel' of the gun to me). I find it much harder to single shot an AK than the M16... however, if the target is close enough, A full auto AK shot in burst does a fine, fine job.

I don't know how it is implemented in-game, but IRL the AK-47 is only supposed to be accurate to about 150-200 meters...at least if you're trying to hit a specific single target. On the other hand, the M16 can be accurate to 400-600 meters thought the 5.56 is easily blown off course by wind resistance. Even at 100 meters the AK is only accurate to 4-6 inches while the M16 is accurate between 1 and 3 inches.

Wasteland · Post by **Wasteland** » 2007-03-31 22:03

The AK (AFAIK) does not have a random deviation "fire cone". It just has more recoil. The bullet should still go where your iron sights line up to minus bullet drop.

Personally I think some degree of deviation is in order. It's too easy to snipe guys from hundreds of meters away with your single shot. Pretty much if you can see them, someone's going to take cover, win the fight, or die.

WRT the "I want to be able to score a headshot if I aim at the head", IRL you wouldn't aim for the head at any kind of range, you'd be going for the center mass.

I think with some bullet deviation you'd get some real fire fights, with a squad unloading on another squad down the street.

I realize that IRL bullets DO go where the iron sights line up to. But you almost never get a perfectly centered post. In game it's ALWAYS centered.

Animalmother · Post by **Animalmother** » 2007-04-01 00:15

I say take single shot away from the AK47, and make it so that when you click, it fires a minimum 3 shots like in americas army.

GnaM · Post by **GnaM** » 2007-04-01 01:40

^LOL, no thanks. In real life the M16A2 doesn't do that; both AA and PR got it wrong. Even in burst mode if you let go of the trigger before all 3 shots are fired it will only fire 1-2 shots.

The AK-47 doesn't do that either. All implementing that feature would do is make it nearly impossible to hit distance targets with the AK because if the first shot didn't hit, one would have to wait for the other 2 shots to fire (which would be even further off target) and move the mouse back triple the distance against recoil to get off another properly aimed shot. In FEAR all the automatic weapons worked like this and in the end I prefered the pistol over SMG's and AR's as a result.