While firing tank rounds....

Rico11b · Post by **Rico11b** » 2007-07-29 18:08

My driver (Wolfe) and I noticed that the tank's main gun has more deviation in it than the assault rifles do. Also the coax gun has more deviation than the assault rifles. Why is that? The tanks and Bradley’s in Real Life are "VERY" stable firing platforms. Far more accurate than any assault rifle. Seems kinda backwards to me to have assault rifles more accurate than tanks. Those weapons systems really are point and click. Well there is more to it than that, but you get the idea. Is this on purpose or is it something that just got over looked? I'm not sure if deviation is the correct word or not, but you guys get what I'm trying to say I hope. I’m certain we could use MOA here if we wanted. Anyway MOA/deviation is much worse on the tank guns than on assault rifles in game IMHO. Even though the tanks are very accurate in game. Just my observations.
And no I wouldn’t want the tanks accuracy changed. There accuracy is fine where it’s at, I’m just pointing out that the assault rifles aren’t normally as accurate, as a stable firing platform like a tank especially while it is sitting still.

Maybe they could just copy the accuracy stuff from the tanks to the assault rifles. Then that might get the rifles closer to RL. Not even sure if that’s possible, but I’m just trying to help by tossing out ideas that might get a DEV to go Ah Ha!

R

El_Vikingo · Post by **El_Vikingo** » 2007-07-29 18:46

Becuase you can zoom in, have a high rate of fire where you can see more tracers, you're steady so you can actually see them...

Rico11b · Post by **Rico11b** » 2007-07-29 20:27

El_Vikingo wrote:Becuase you can zoom in, have a high rate of fire where you can see more tracers, you're steady so you can actually see them...

Yes, I agree with ya. But it still seems to have a good deal more spread than the assault rifles. Even at medium distances. Even trying to pop off one round at a time, there seems to be more spread of the shot group than with the rifles.

You are correct about the zoom. It can give you a much better view of what is happening downrange, along with the steadiness.

Seems like I remember some one saying that they modded the files to turn off rifle recoil to do some testing. I wonder if they could turn off the recoil inorder to accurately test and adjust the shot groups to see how far off it may be. Or how close. I don't know anything about modding files like that so I can't test for myself. I wouldn't even begin to know what files to mod

R

robbo · Post by **robbo** » 2007-07-29 20:49

Yeah im ok with the inaccuracy of the Coax but the Main gun is a different story when the Challenger 2 comes into play i want lightning accuracy

Post by **Dunehunter** » 2007-07-29 20:49

Hm, I've used the coax as a kind of uber sniper rifle before. Pretty stable when you fire short bursts and are on flat ground.

Rico11b · Post by **Rico11b** » 2007-07-29 21:03

dunehunter wrote:Hm, I've used the coax as a kind of uber sniper rifle before. Pretty stable when you fire short bursts and are on flat ground.

Yes it is as stable as a stone on any footing. Both the main and the coax are as stable as can be, it's the spreading of the rounds downrange that I'm referring to. Neither of the barrels move when the rounds are fired, so that makes it easy to see what is happening with the rounds as they travel downrange. The bullets and main gun shells seem to have more spread to them than assault rifle bullets do. Even at medium distances, which would be at max range for assault rifles. At least ingame anyway.

Shining Arcanine · Post by **Shining Arcanine** » 2007-07-29 21:50

These vehicles should have next to zero shot deviation and almost perfect accuracy. The recoil of their weapons is close to being negligible when you consider the ratio of their mass to their ammo's mass and at the same time, their computers adjust for it.

sekiryu · Post by **sekiryu** » 2007-07-29 22:01

Deviation in the main gun? Those things shouldn't have any deviation at all.

Rico11b · Post by **Rico11b** » 2007-07-29 22:02

Shining Arcanine wrote:These vehicles should have next to zero shot deviation and almost perfect accuracy. The recoil of their weapons is close to being negligible when you consider the ratio of their mass to their ammo's mass and at the same time, their computers adjust for it.

That's kinda what I was getting at. But it "SEEMS" that the tanks have a larger spread to their shot groups than the assault rifles. That's all I'm trying to say.

And i was wondering is someone could do some testing and comparisions to check it out. That's why I mentioned modding files to get rid of recoil ONLY for testing purposes to see what is going on with the shot group spreads. I'm not able to do it or I would have already.

El_Vikingo · Post by **El_Vikingo** » 2007-07-29 22:05

I guess they're zeroed in at 300m?

chudley · Post by **chudley** » 2007-07-29 22:17

Machine guns have spread, thats what makes them effective, it would be no use firing all thos bullets if they went through the same hole. A rifle in the British Army is as accurate as the person pulling the trigger.

The same goes for the gunner on a tank, and the computer corrections it makes. They are also trained to fire with no computer assistance and stillare extrememly accurate.

I think PR have got the balance right but it would be nice to have to adjust your aim for range, like in real life.

Rico11b · Post by **Rico11b** » 2007-07-29 23:10

El_Vikingo wrote:I guess they're zeroed in at 300m?

lol

Shot group size isn't determined by the range at which a weapon is zeroed, that is determined by how well the weapon is made and assembled. Also how the ammo is made. Higher craftsmanship equals higher accuracy. Most of the time anyway.

Rico11b · Post by **Rico11b** » 2007-07-29 23:18

chudley wrote:Machine guns have spread, thats what makes them effective, it would be no use firing all thos bullets if they went through the same hole. A rifle in the British Army is as accurate as the person pulling the trigger.

The same goes for the gunner on a tank, and the computer corrections it makes. They are also trained to fire with no computer assistance and stillare extrememly accurate.

I think PR have got the balance right but it would be nice to have to adjust your aim for range, like in real life.

Every projectile that is fired from a barrel has spread. Even if you lock a rifle barrel into a gun vice it will have spread. "Spread" is not built into a rifle, and "spread" is NOT what makes a MG effective. Even if it were possible (which it isn't) to fire all bullets into the exact same hole at say 3 to 400 meters, they all couldn't hit the same hole because of recoil.
Please don't waste time commenting on such things only to demonstrate that you are not fully versed in the subject. My question was more directed to the Devs than to the masses. Sorry to come off like a butt, I don't mean to.

sekiryu · Post by **sekiryu** » 2007-07-29 23:30

So, even a fin-stabilised sabot coming out of a smoothebore has spread?

Guerra norte · Post by **Guerra norte** » 2007-07-29 23:46

Just pretend you forgot to index your ammo, that the LRF gave a multi return due several reflections or that that target did not block the laser pulse due to cone spread.

PROBLEM SOLVED..

Rico11b · Post by **Rico11b** » 2007-07-29 23:47

sekiryu wrote:So, even a fin-stabilised sabot coming out of a smoothebore has spread?

Simple answer is yes it has spread. Even if it's only 10 to 15 inches at 1000 meters it still has spread. Meaning the next shot will probably hit some else on the target, but most likely NOT the same whole as the first one. Meaning that if you fired 3 or more they won't all hit the EXACT same spot on the armor time after time. However, Fin-stabilised sabots don't have spin imparted on it by the barrel, which is why it has a need for the fins in the first place.

Rico11b · Post by **Rico11b** » 2007-07-30 00:05

Guerra norte wrote:Just pretend you forgot to index your ammo, that the LRF gave a multi return due several reflections or that that target did not block the laser pulse due to cone spread.

PROBLEM SOLVED..

What does the LRF have to do with the projectile? The laser won't make the projectile travel any straighter, it will just give the computer better info to make a more accurate shot prediction. The laser and the computer give a better probability of a hit that is all. It is still not perfect because it doesn't have to be. Tanks are big targets, so why would you need a smooth bore cannon with accuracy 10 times greater than is necessary to get the job done. It would cost 10 times as much as it does now. Let's all remember that most all weapon systems are supplied by the LOWEST bidder for the contract. You get what you pay for. Let's think about what that means. That means I got the cheapest weapon money could buy. Soldiers don't get to make the purchase decisions, politicians do. That's why the soldier has got to be at the top of his game, and make do with what he has got. It's the human factor. The soldier makes the weapon, not the other way around.

[font=&quot]You want 10 times the accuracy needed for the job, you gonna pay 10 times the price. Bullets and other projectiles are NOT lasers and they will never have the accuracy of a laser, cause they don't have to.[/font]

El_Vikingo · Post by **El_Vikingo** » 2007-07-30 00:05

Rico11b wrote:lol

Shot group size isn't determined by the range at which a weapon is zeroed, that is determined by how well the weapon is made and assembled. Also how the ammo is made. Higher craftsmanship equals higher accuracy. Most of the time anyway.

It's BF2.

Post by **Outlawz7** » 2007-07-30 00:10

Thing is, you can't get a stable shot with the gun due the slightest bump, tank drives over/into, requires you to waste precious time reaiming.

I used the .50 on the Land Rover, had no problems with driver driving like crazy on Basrah, but with a tank, its damn frustrating...and if tank doesnt have a driver, it doesnt shake, so you can aim better...which explains the damn solo tankers being better against a crewed tank....come on

Rico11b · Post by **Rico11b** » 2007-07-30 00:12

El_Vikingo wrote:It's BF2.

You are so right!

I shouldn't get worked up about this, but after all I'm told this a realism mod. So I want my weapons to "seem" realistic.

I'm sorry, I'll hush for now

R