Realistic ballistics & zeroing rifles

[Jaymz]

Jonny mate,

I'm the one responsible for the way the rifles are currently "zeroed". Back when this change was made I spent a lot of time in game testing and concluded that those values were to be used for these reasons.

1. BF2 Bullet drop is linear, it's something that we have to deal with

2. Because of no.1, all we can do is limit how effective/accurate a rifle is at any given range.

3. The values were concluded as follows from military advice I obtained through regulars on these forums and our MA team. Weapons are often zeroed to the particular situation of a given mission but these values are quite common.

Carbines: 100m (1.0)
Rifles: 300m (0.3)
DMR/Sniper:600m (0.1)



Now, I knew you'd mention moving up that sight picture. That was one of my first suggestions when I embarked on this escapade to get more realistic ballistics in PR. But my dreams were shot down because I wasn't (like you are currently not) taking into consideration the sheer amount of work that would have to go into doing that.

We'd have to edit every single weapons textures just to move the sight picture up and you also have to bare in mind that the vBF2 weapons we still use can't be edited. If they could we most certainly would not be using that retarded AK sight that looks like your eyeball jumped out of its socket and slid up the reciever.



So,

[*]all bullets follow realistic and believable ballistic tragectories

pics or it didn't happen

Nah seriously. Your drag idea seems pretty cool. I'm sure you'll definitely be able to get a better ballistics model than me because you definitely seem to have the knowledge of physics to do so (plus, I'm just a sound guy ). You just need show us some in game results. Then I can see a bright future for Jonny

[VipersGhost]

You know what I like about Jonny and Nedlands...they are heavily invovled with the general community with their work. Reminds me of Jaymz's early work with the sounds; then after all of the cheers and moaning about it, we'd have a diamond from the dust. Keep up the good work fellas...editing the bullets' initial angle is the key to the gate right now.

Imagine realistic ballistics to the game...that would be so sick. The Delta force game's had decent ballistics early on "I think" and that ONE aspect made for an incredible amount of depth to the game. It eliminated point and kill shooting and brought in the *player skill* aspect that was lacking. Shooting is a skill and it'd be cool to see some really good shooters rise from the ashes. Kind of distinguishes guys a little more on the battle field and makes it personal. Your squads marksmen would really have to be a marksmen beyond just picking up the kit.

[nedlands1]

Oh, you mean moving the actual model. I understand what you mean now.

I meant moving the sight picture on the screen so that when everything is lined up the angles work out right.

I don't think the entire model needs to be changed, just moved so that in-game it forces the barrel to be angled up. Just moving the sights down the screen angles the sights down, and so angles the barrel up when aimed at a target. The bullet spawn point can be lowered, we already know how to do this, so that with the right values from my spreadsheet we can zero the rifles.

I am not thinking of the sights as a model, but a 2D overlay on the screen when you zoom in. If the whole overlay is lowered it has the same effect as angling the barrel up relative to the sights.

@ Morgan:
I find out 3/jan/08.

Ahh I think I understand what you are getting at + I've had some sleep . When you say, "moving the sights down the screen", you mean that instead of the sight picture being central, it would be slightly down. This would result in more space at the top of the sight and less at the bottom.

With regards to the change of angle, I know it's possible to do with a vehicle (see FH2 mortar or my unreleased M250 smoke grenade launchers I made (oh wait):twisted but currently I'm not sure how to do it with a "handweapon". Changing the starting position of the projectile is easy too. Yes, it may be a little funny having rounds come out a few centimetres lower that originally but it should be a quick fix for making the space between the scope and barrel.

EDIT: @ Jaymz: When you say "BF2 Bullet drop is linear" you are talking about the rate of change being linear right? I am very sure that the actual drop is parabolic.

[BloodBane611]

I really hope that acceleration due to gravity over time is linear, while velocity over time is parabolic. If not, this is one screwy physics equation.

I think this is a fantastic idea, really stresses the need to practice and improve yourself, rather than any random dude popping out of the woodwork and nailing you in the eyeball from 300 meters away.

I've shot a good number of weapons so far, and I hope to shoot more. But one thing that is always constant is that shooting is a skill that must be practiced. You don't wake up one morning being able to drill a hole in a penny in timbuktu.

[Jaymz]

ask KoC or Katarn lads, I'm not 100% sure on some of those questions tbh.

[nedlands1]

Current system as it stands. Projectiles are under the influence of gravity, have an initial velocity which they set out on and act as though they are in a vacuum. This means that they travel in a parabolic path. Acceleration due to gravity is constant throughout the whole ordeal. Since it is constant, vs time it is constant. Velocity is constantly changing (due to the round slowing down, speeding up and changing in direction as velocity is a vector not a scalar like speed). Speed however, vs time, follows a parabolic path. If fired upwards slightly, the round keeps on slowing down until it reaches the top it then speeds up on the downward path.

What Jonny and me have been looking at is implementing drag into the system. This would mean the rounds travel more like their real life counterparts. Zeroing is another aspect which is important too for a realism mod.

[VipersGhost]

So Jonny have you guys figured out how to get the bullets come out at an angle, then the physics of drag and gravity come into play thus creating the same basic trajectory of a RL bullet??

I know this was kind of the big deal at one point being that moving the site pictures down wasn't really an option.

Just curious as I would LOVE to see an improvement to the ballistics.

[BloodBane611]

Out of curiosity, what are the damage values you sent the devs?

[BLUFOR-73]

jonny for r-dev. i support your work 100% to make things more realistic & fun

[GeZe]

The damage values I have PM'd the DEVS are definately applicable

Did you get similar damage values as mine? (or did you not use M16 as the base)

GeZe;581270']If we take M16 damage values [(1712 J): 36] as a base, the rest of the damage values should be (calculated by energy)

G3 (3352 J): 71 - currant damage is 55
QBZ-95 (1773 J): 37 - currant damage is 39
AK-47: (2016 J): 42 - currant damage is 42

As you see, AK-47 damage is exactly the same as currant, no complaints. QBZ-95 damage should be slightly lower. But the big thing is G3 damage, it is seriously underpowered. It now has realistic recoil, so I see no problems upping damage to more realistic levels.

[nedlands1]

So Jonny have you guys figured out how to get the bullets come out at an angle, then the physics of drag and gravity come into play thus creating the same basic trajectory of a RL bullet??

I know this was kind of the big deal at one point being that moving the site pictures down wasn't really an option.

Just curious as I would LOVE to see an improvement to the ballistics.

I figured out how to move the scope up but changing the angle between the sights and scope has thus eluded me.

* by moving the start position of the projectile down

[VipersGhost]

I figured out how to move the scope up but changing the angle between the sights and scope has thus eluded me.

* by moving the start position of the projectile down

So does moving the start position still require editing of all the Weapon Models site-picture. Does that surpass the issue of EA models being off limits?

[nedlands1]

So does moving the start position still require editing of all the Weapon Models site-picture. Does that surpass the issue of EA models being off limits?

Nah, all you do is just add a single line of code to bring the projectile's start position down a few centimetres. As the distance required is so small, people wouldn't really notice the difference. There are no changes to the model whatsoever with this tweak so there is no infringement with EA.

[DeePsix]

This looks and sounds interesting! Good work Johnny and Nedlands! I hope things work out and we can get some actual ballistics. In my wildest fantasy I would see bullets ricocheted off armor and skip along walls and the ground. And I can watch the wind and gravity move my bullets as they fly downrange. Maybe when PR upgrades to the BF3 or BF4 Engine in 2025...

Seriously though, good work you guys!

[VipersGhost]

Nah, all you do is just add a single line of code to bring the projectile's start position down a few centimetres. As the distance required is so small, people wouldn't really notice the difference. There are no changes to the model whatsoever with this tweak so there is no infringement with EA.

So let me get this straight...you have found a way to input realistic bullet trajectorys in PR now...as in the bullet fires...goes up a short bit and then slowly decends in a nice long parabolic arc??

It doesn't just come out and immediately start dropping?


So if my rifle is zero'd at 200m and I shoot at a guy 50m...I'll actually have to shoot a little low (crotch) to hit him in the stomach?

If thats the case..wow!