Lower Accuracy

SethLive! · Post by **SethLive!** » 2007-07-20 00:08

I think a semi-good solution to this problem would be to greatly increase the recovery time on all of the weapons, so your aim would have to settle in when you stopped moving

VipersGhost · Post by **VipersGhost** » 2007-07-20 00:09

lol I know...when I heard Spearhead came onto PR I was sending him PM's like he was my Girlfriend or something. "Awesome to have you hear dude...blah blah blah"...thank goodness he never responded.

Rico11b · Post by **Rico11b** » 2007-07-20 00:19

VipersGhost wrote:
rico11b wrote:Funny how you said it would take 3 to 4 shots to down a deer, but you expect to hit on the first round while playing PR. Also the DEER aren't shooting back Sorry but I've never seen BAMBI with an UZI.
QUOTE]

I didn't say I exect to hit on the first shot..or did I? Shit it takes me a few for sure, sometimes you get a lucky hit but hey. Another thing, a bounding deer is seriously fast and leaping aruond like peppe le pew from Loony Tunes...if I can kill a deer doing that, I should definitely be able to hit a guy with 40 lbs of gear on thats running in a straight line.

You guys are passionate about the issue and thats fine but there just isn't a good solution out there to get what you want ATM. Sure the MOA could be added in, I was one of the biggest advocates of that to begin with...still I dont think it'd make that much of a difference. We need weapon sway, but not the faked kind. We need a lot of things.

Being that this is a game, I want to be a DAMN good soldier who is a freakin awesome shot, tough as nails, can fire any weapon, never gets jammed, and can easily drive that tank if I have the right suit on. Why would you want to be average? Shit I bet I could shoot someone in the head at 200yds with the AR-15 scoped...as long as I had a rest. I definitely want to be able to do that in-game.

You know what I do think would be a good compromise to this...zero the guns at 200yds. This would limit some rediculous shots I think, plus I really really like having to adjust for bullet drop...the kill is just so much more satisfying.

Also, when I'm standing or croutched....I'm pretty sure I'm no where near as accurate as if I was prone. Like I would bead down on a guy whilst standing...take a shot..it would miss. And I was DEAD on him...yet when I shoot the same shot as prone it hits(he didn't move and I'm not basing this on blood spurt...only the dust puff of my missing shot). I think there is some deviation in there based on stance. I know everyone, maybe even the devs say its not...but I'm pretty sure there is something in there cause I have definitely noticed it on quite a few occasions. Maybe I'll try some more from standing and test it out.

lol. If MOA could be modeled properly, I think you would see a difference in the markmenship of the players in PR. Also if the bullet velocity could be lowered somewhat it may add more bullet drop and that to would change things. Then it would take some "skill" to figure out the hold over needed to hit a distant target. If the weapons cone of fire were more inline with it's real life minute of angle, in addtion to bullet drop that would also make it harder for a cheater with an aimbot to get easy kills. Cause even with an aimbot the shooter wouldn't have complete laserbeam accuracy. Then when you got popped in the head at 300+ meters, you could respect it more cause you know that guy knows what the hell he is doing. Instead of point and click uberness. Also when you are being fired at and the rounds are passing very near you, your aim should be affected as well. That may help with to make suppressive fire more effective ingame. If they don't respect suppressive fire this is what will happen.

Here is something that happened last night. I'm on the SAW in the prone laying down HEAVY fire, and I do mean HEAVY fire. Through a hole in the stone wall. I just killed at least 4 grunts trying to rush thru, and I know 2 more are right outside. You with me so far? Then WHILE I am firing from about 60 meters away through that big hole in the wall, some guys sprints through does a nice jump into the air dive to instaprone and headshots me while my finger is still on the trigger firing right at him and the hole in the wall. See he ran right at me, he didn't get through the wall and turn he came right at me. My client side showed at least 4 puffs of blood. That should never have happened. Oh and I had a ping of 16 to 18. Most everyone on the server at that time had low pings as well. First of all, he was a fool for trying it, and second I was hitting him before he ever made his crazy dive thru the air to one shot me in the head manuever. But I guess I was the real fool, cause he got away with it and the server didn't reward me with the kill that should have been mine.

That uber aiming instaprone accuracy can't happen if the weapon ballistics are accurately modeled ingame. Oh sure it can happen but but only once in a blue moon. And when it does it should be due to a very lucky fluke. It shouldn't be the kind of thing that guys are more than willing to try cause they know they can get away with it. The fool that tries to rush a machine gun should get owned the majority of the time, but he doesn't. Why is that? That kind of stuff happens way to often in game.

Sorry, I'll shut up now.

causticbeat · Post by **causticbeat** » 2007-07-20 01:23

Erm. Especially with the increased engagement ranges in the recent/upcoming versions, its safe to say that weapon range/accuracy/ballistics are being scrutinized to an unprecedented degree. What im getting at is kenwayy and egg know weapons tendoncies/balance alot better than you do.

tekkyy · Post by **tekkyy** » 2007-07-20 02:59

Is accuracy recovery time hard-coded?
Does "moving the cursor" reduce accuracy at the moment?

But I am all for accurate weapons.

Haze · Post by **Haze** » 2007-07-20 03:11

Greenie Beanie wrote:Of most weapons? I reckon firefights are over too quickly (even in dug in positions and at range) It would be nice to lower the accuracy of most guns to draw out firefights.
Thoughts?

I find the weopon accuracy nice and the stalking and evading nessesary to gain good position can and does draw out the firefight IMO. Going in straight up the guts is next to instant suicide.

Harrelson · Post by **Harrelson** » 2007-07-20 05:49

Wolfe wrote:PR draw distances and weapon accuracy in .6 are so high that it's dramatically changed the dynamics of fighting, and not necessarily for the better imo.

There's no such thing as a firefight anymore, which was the best part about the game. I remember in .4 and .5 on maps like BiMing where China would own the east side of the bridge city and USA would own the west side; fighting it out just 50m apart that would last 10, 20, 30 minutes or more. In the .6 versions, weapon accuracy is so high and you can see so far that infantry either doesn't get close to flags or they're gunned down in seconds at close range by 1 or 2 soldiers.

The net result is that infantry is killed/pushed off flags within 30 seconds, unlike previous version of PR where, especially in city fights, they could last 30 minutes which I thought was MUCH more fun. The only time flag battles last more than 30 seconds is when someone parks an apc or commander truck nearby and the zerging begins.

Every gun is so hyper-accurate that they perform better than sniper riffles; they shoot just as far, just as accurate, but faster and quieter. Half the guns have scopes which make it even worse. These guns aren't used like this in real life are they? It makes everyone a super human, super accurate sniper who can kill you with 1-3 shots within 2 seconds at any distance or movement with any gun.

It's to the point where a standard issue solder with a standard issue gun can not only target an enemy bunker at 200+ meters, but he can target the 12-inch viewing slit and not just fire at the soldier inside, but realizably target his head. Unless you're a sniper, that should be impossible.

If there is armor on the map, and the flag is out in the open, the capture of the flag is determined by whoever has more tanks. That's a very dull way to play a map.

For those who say "weapon accuracy matches reality", I'm no expert, but it doesn't take one to count the number of head-shot kills during a round (many while you're running full speed) and realize that it's beyond the level of ridiculous. I think some may like it because they can kill better than ever at any range with virtually any weapon, but it's not realistic and it's not good gameplay imo.

My suggestion is to:
Slightly lower the accuracy of all weapons

Remove scopes from most weapons except sniper riffles

Remove the zoom from iron sights when iron sights are used

Increase the cone of fire while moving, standing, and the time it takes to decrease the cone of fire while standing still.

Introduce new maps specifically designed with PR in mind.
More city maps like Ejod but with larger city areas so that tanks cant snipe into them from every direction; force them to enter the city.

Remove "bowl" style maps like Oman, Daqing, and Kufrah where flags are too close together and winning is determined by a few tank drivers/gunners.

On large maps like kashan, make the flag capture order more logical (instead of slowly traveling clear across the map for each objective which negatively thins out forces too much), reduce the number of central bunker flags from 2 to 1, randomize aircraft/vehicle spawns (so that the enemy doesn't kill the A10 then perfectly time a pass over the airfield 20min later to destroy it 5 seconds after it spawns in the runway)
The effect of this would be:
Longer, more intense, realistic exciting fire fights

Sniper riffles will now have purpose again

Support mg's will be more effective, since it will no longer be possible to zero in on the enmey's mg's sound, step out from behind a rock and head shot him with 1-2 bullets from 150 meters away.

More "front line" battles that mirror realistic fights
Anyone who played Forgotten Hope mod for BF1942 remembers they had the same issues; they wanted realism but good gameplay. They settled on mg's being inaccurate at long range; even single shot, and designed maps that forced tanks to have infantry support by designing terrain with plenty of places for infantry to hide and sneak up on a tank to tnt or landmine it.

As infantry, you didn't dare cross that bridge for fear of the mg42 on the other side. Only way to defeat him was a sniper or a mass charge and hope that some guys survived.

i completely agree. atm i dont bother playing infantry maps, they're too arcadey. maps like bi-ming and mestia and (the afghan poppy field map) play like vanilla with enemies coming from all directions and proper confusion. its ridiculous

there were some good maps like falluja where enemies were on one side and you couldn't put a rp in their secure zones because it was protected by hills. the result were superb head-on infantry battles. i think the problem with infantry maps is map design. putting a rp behind secure enemy lines is arcadey and frustrating for the other team

tekkyy · Post by **tekkyy** » 2007-07-20 06:25

Haze wrote:I find the weopon accuracy nice and the stalking and evading nessesary to gain good position can and does draw out the firefight IMO. Going in straight up the guts is next to instant suicide.

Exactly.
I think those long firefights IRL was not in the open.

Greenie Beanie · Post by **Greenie Beanie** » 2007-07-20 06:30

Mate even behind sandbags/in bunkers theres no hope most of the time the first shot fired will hit you. And you cant hop on a emplaced SAW and keep em pinned because as soon as u start firing at their positions they drop down n plug you

tekkyy · Post by **tekkyy** » 2007-07-20 06:33

Harrelson wrote:i think the problem with infantry maps is map design. putting a rp behind secure enemy lines is arcadey and frustrating for the other team

I think rally points should be larger, easier to spot and compromise.

Maybe it should show on 3D HUD within x metres.

At the moment its like "lets hide it beind a rock".

I don't think thats the point of rally points.

tekkyy · Post by **tekkyy** » 2007-07-20 06:36

Greenie Beanie wrote:And you cant hop on a emplaced SAW and keep em pinned because as soon as u start firing at their positions they drop down n plug you

If I understand this correctly, they had YOU pinned already.
Thats too bad.

Greenie Beanie · Post by **Greenie Beanie** » 2007-07-20 07:08

That was a different scenario than the first one, as i am dead already.
cbf explaining

spartan117gw · Post by **spartan117gw** » 2007-07-20 07:29

create a zoom breathing animations or somthing. that way when u scope in it takes more skill.

{9thInf}GunnyMeyer · Post by **{9thInf}GunnyMeyer** » 2007-07-20 07:32

One suggestion I have heard WAY too often in this thread is taking out the scopes. They are already unrealistic as it, taking them all the way out would just be dumb. As far as I've been informed, every 03 MOS Marine is issued some sort of alternate sight on their rifle. I do not know about the other MOSes, but the Infantrymen all get sights. The reason why the Marines swapped over to the M16A4 is so that this kind of customization is possible with all the rails added to it. This means the Rifleman, Corpsman (not sure about them as I don't thik they are allowed to have weapons but I'll bet they manage to get em anyway), L-AT, and possibly more of them should ALL have scopes. Try and prove me wrong cause I'd like to know why the Marines swapped to the A4 if this wasn't the reason.

Anyway, you CANNOT take the scopes out for realism sake in any shape or form. They are a part of the Infantryman's life in the Marines and the Canadian military. Scopes stay if you are to follow the book(s).

Post by **Jaymz** » 2007-07-20 10:59

{9thInf}GunnyMeyer wrote:One suggestion I have heard WAY too often in this thread is taking out the scopes. They are already unrealistic as it, taking them all the way out would just be dumb. As far as I've been informed, every 03 MOS Marine is issued some sort of alternate sight on their rifle. I do not know about the other MOSes, but the Infantrymen all get sights. The reason why the Marines swapped over to the M16A4 is so that this kind of customization is possible with all the rails added to it. This means the Rifleman, Corpsman (not sure about them as I don't thik they are allowed to have weapons but I'll bet they manage to get em anyway), L-AT, and possibly more of them should ALL have scopes. Try and prove me wrong cause I'd like to know why the Marines swapped to the A4 if this wasn't the reason.

Anyway, you CANNOT take the scopes out for realism sake in any shape or form. They are a part of the Infantryman's life in the Marines and the Canadian military. Scopes stay if you are to follow the book(s).

give that man a can of coke!

And all I hear about is people whining that they're getting sniped at 600m+ by riflemen.......I would like them to come on a server with me and try take me down in three shots at a distance higher than 400m. That said, in urban engagements (i.e Iraq) lots of troops are issued reflex sights like aimpoints and eotechs.

Post by **M.J.Patterson** » 2007-07-20 11:48

causticbeat wrote:What im getting at is kenwayy and egg know weapons tendoncies/balance alot better than you do.

I don't know... thats quite the statement if its being directed at Rico11b

I think the rifles probably are as accurate as they are in-game but I'm skeptical in that it would be so easy to produce that accuracy in a live-fire fight when the target is shooting back at you. Perhaps thats another thing.. project reality can never truly simulate actual combat stress, hunger, fear, exhaustion, etc...

VipersGhost · Post by **VipersGhost** » 2007-07-20 16:13

spartan117gw wrote:create a zoom breathing animations or somthing. that way when u scope in it takes more skill.

I'd be REAL interested in seeing what Spearhead the animator would have for input on this. Seriously it would be AWESOME to have this in there, but could you do it just for grunts and not the marksmen\snipers? Could you lessen its effects whilst prone? Those are important issues.

Rico11b · Post by **Rico11b** » 2007-07-20 16:21

causticbeat wrote:Erm. Especially with the increased engagement ranges in the recent/upcoming versions, its safe to say that weapon range/accuracy/ballistics are being scrutinized to an unprecedented degree. What im getting at is kenwayy and egg know weapons tendoncies/balance alot better than you do.

Is this comment intended for me, or the guy that started the thread? You didn't quote anyone so I'm assuming it for the thread starter.