Deviation in sniper kits- proof

[Sabre_tooth_tigger]

Anticipate movement and let the target fall into the scopes sights.

Marksman is very easy to use, start with that then move to sniper if you really need to engage targets at 1000m

Check out the hat kit for a general idea of how it works.

[ralfidude]

nah nah, im not saying its impossible, i do try to do that and it works from time to time, but the point is that a sniper is able to shoot a moving target, making the whole "2-3 second make ur scope still" thing a total bullshit call.

[Waaah_Wah]

Hm.. I find it easy to use the sniper kit in 0.75. Tried it out on a Mestia server and i think i've hit everything i aimed at from 400+ meters

But then again, i only shoot when im sure that im gonna hit. So i was shooting stationary targets only

[Cyrax-Sektor]

Does the mosin have the same deviation when not waiting long enough/same settle time?

Not really. I can still hop the sights around to snipe out Land Rover gunners, and the bullet usually lands.

[Jaymz]

I'll never understand the logic that a person trained to fire accurately with a rifle that has been built and honed for further accuracy has to wait longer than the average rifleman for their reticle to settle. Not only that but you've completely removed the snipers ability to track on a moving target which (believe it or not) we actually do in the world....

First point was done so that snipers aren't charging into CQB and headshotting everyone.

Agree with second point, we can use the same turning deviation code that the DMR's have so they can track better in future builds.

[LeadMagnet]

First point was done so that snipers aren't charging into CQB and headshotting everyone.

Agree with second point, we can use the same turning deviation code that the DMR's have so they can track better in future builds.

Shhhh, you had me at "Agree"

[Masaq]

Now that you mention it, I did read a post saying Insurgents had less accuracy. It'd make sense, as they're not specially trained soldiers.

I think I'll take that War Veteran tip to the field when I'm planning on getting a Mosin next time. Maybe Officers get better accuracy as well.

That'd be because IRL the sniper would be adjusting windage, his zero and all the rest of it before firing. Those things can't be added in-game (or at least, not easily, and they're not in now) so, there's a long delay to represent that a sniper can't just point and shoot.

[nedlands1]

First point was done so that snipers aren't charging into CQB and headshotting everyone.

Agree with second point, we can use the same turning deviation code that the DMR's have so they can track better in future builds.

You do realise that the "turning deviation code" from the marksmen's rifles is exactly the same as the assault rifles? If you gave it to snipers, both the time to settle and the deviation added would be a quarter of the current value. Snipers will be CQC headshotting with the rest of their service rifle wielding brethren.

What should be done for the sniper's turning deviation, IMO, is a system not unlike the H-AT's. In fact, this should probably be done for all handheld weapons. With the H-AT, you can track moving targets. Problems arise when you try to track targets really fast (eg doing a quick 180 and trying to shoot something behind you). This is realistic. You can't do a quick 180 IRL and headshot someone at 200m. You need to steady yourself first.

@ralfidude
The baseline deviation for the marksmen rifles is 1/10 that of the conventional army's service rifles. The turning deviation (ie the random deviation due to moving the crosshair) is exactly the same as the conventional army's service rifles which is in turn the same as their baseline deviation. This means that the overall deviation, for a marksmen rifle, when tracking a moving target (ie the baseline deviation plus the turning deviation), is 55% that of a service rifle ([1.2+12]/[12+12] = 0.55). You could loosely say that a marksmen rifle is just as effective as a conventional army's service rifle, when dealing with a moving target at double the range (ignoring lead, drop and just thinking of accuracy of course).

[ralfidude]

i think that the whole thing he said that a gradual movement of scrosshairs should be less than a fast 180 turn deviation, that was a sound idea. But the way it is rightnow is impossible... Snipers were a threat before, and there was a good reason to it, they should be feared, i never actually heard of any complaints about it before, so it shouldnt have been changed so drastically. I dont know, i wanted to know what others thought, this thread is not going to change the Devs mind abotu this and i dont expect them to, but it would be nice if they reconsidered, its rendering the kit rather useless in fearce combat where my squad begs me for help but i cant hit a damn thing...

[OkitaMakoto]

its rendering the kit rather useless in fearce combat where my squad begs me for help but i cant hit a damn thing...

No offense at all intended, but if you cant hit anything with the kit, don't take it.

Until this 'problem' is remedied maybe you should pick another kit to focus your efforts on. I myself stay away from snipers and stick w/ Medic and occasionally Auto Rifleman.

I agree snipers are still touchy, but dont get so down as if the DEV's don't care. Just because ten DEV's dont comment doesn't mean they are oblivious to the goings on of the forums. Keep your chin up

[bosco_]

I already wondered what was up with my aiming when my shots kept missing running insurgents on Archer yesterday... phew

[LeadMagnet]

I'm sorry but the whole "we can't give them the same settle time as assault rifles since that'll throw off CQB" is total bull. First of all in any of the other mods including vanilla when have you ever seen a sniper with a bolt action rifle run into a CQB situation and walk away with at best, more than 1 kill? The mechanics of engaging a target while scoped in at close quarters negates any threat of a sniper becoming a force to be reckoned with close in. How about you actually test it before just dismissing it outright.

As for Masaq, I'm well aware of what you can do with a sniper rifle having carried one for 17 years. Once you have your scope zero'd in on a range it's extremely quick to make adjustments in the field and/or corrections using your spotter. It is not a constant process that needs to be mimic'd every bloody time you fire. As it stands right now a sniper has a better chance of being outshot at range by a rifle which is entirely ludicrous. Either give the kit the respect it deserves or remove it outright.

[Cyrax-Sektor]

Masaq;638928']That'd be because IRL the sniper would be adjusting windage, his zero and all the rest of it before firing. Those things can't be added in-game (or at least, not easily, and they're not in now) so, there's a long delay to represent that a sniper can't just point and shoot.

That clears things up, thanks. I thought, as usual, PR would differentiate itself from BF2 with more realism to make it a game of its own.

[VipersGhost]

I'm sorry but the whole "we can't give them the same settle time as assault rifles since that'll throw off CQB" is total bull. First of all in any of the other mods including vanilla when have you ever seen a sniper with a bolt action rifle run into a CQB situation and walk away with at best, more than 1 kill? The mechanics of engaging a target while scoped in at close quarters negates any threat of a sniper becoming a force to be reckoned with close in. How about you actually test it before just dismissing it outright.

As for Masaq, I'm well aware of what you can do with a sniper rifle having carried one for 17 years. Once you have your scope zero'd in on a range it's extremely quick to make adjustments in the field and/or corrections using your spotter. It is not a constant process that needs to be mimic'd every bloody time you fire. As it stands right now a sniper has a better chance of being outshot at range by a rifle which is entirely ludicrous. Either give the kit the respect it deserves or remove it outright.

QFT ^

Also at shorter ranges 100-500m I think I sniper could naturally make the adjustments needed to drop a target on the move if in a pinch. Much like anything at a high skill level...a 6th sense gets developed and can be used instead of mechanics. Just an off hand opinion, though I for sure know Hathcock didn't do the math manually when he shot that "glint of light" and put a bullet through the enemy Snipers Scope/eye socket.

As a side note. I had problems with the Chinese sniper rifle back in .6 at ranges of 500-600m. I would prone...wait and then shoot dead on and miss! I think the sites could be off or there is a bug somewhere. The other rifles seemed fine though, I never saw the same issue as with the Chinese.

It seems like controversy is surrounding the small-arms handling/deviation. I think we should start really focusing on bringing in the experts/vets when it comes to these issues. Lets make some changes...then run those by our team of experts and then see how they match up. Once its acceptable we can play test it using the testers. As of now, it seems like we are just hacking away at it with little expert input getting through and into the game.

[Masaq]

As for Masaq, I'm well aware of what you can do with a sniper rifle having carried one for 17 years. Once you have your scope zero'd in on a range it's extremely quick to make adjustments in the field and/or corrections using your spotter. It is not a constant process that needs to be mimic'd every bloody time you fire. As it stands right now a sniper has a better chance of being outshot at range by a rifle which is entirely ludicrous. Either give the kit the respect it deserves or remove it outright.

Many players of video games aren't aware of that, and given hollywood and game representation of insta-headshot snipers running around with M95s everywhere, that's not suprising.

Unfortunately the engine can't easily be forced to make a player zero their rifle for a set of ranges, allow them to switch quickly between those ranges, and then allow them to make adjustments for windage and other conditions. Notably because we don't have wind or humidity or temperature variables in-game, nor do we have a proper model of ballistics in-game.

So, the choice (as I understand it) currently is to either allow snipers to fire as quickly and as accurately as a well set-up, competent sniper in the field should be firing, or use the deviation delay to force some metaphorical modelling of the processes required.

It's a comprimise, granted. Possibly a better one would be to have a long "time before ready" delay on switching to the optical sights and a much smaller deviation time.

Then, snipers could fire rapidly and aim quicker once they were zoomed in on their scopes, but if they switched back to first-person view to run/move then they'd face a delay while they "re-calculated windage, distance" etc etc.

This would make people walk around with their sights up, but they'd be ineffective due to the slow-mouse-movement-while-using-scoped-view addition, so they wouldn't be able to run-and-gun for CQC.

[Alex6714]

I was playing Brit sniper on Basrah yesterday (got a 20:0 K/D ratio

Thats uncanny. I also went on basrah, thought I would whore the sniper and got 20 kills for 0 deaths sneaking around the east.

[VipersGhost]

I read through the book "Shooter"..nothing to do with the movie. It was the bio of the current (I think) USMC top decorated sniper with some 60+ kills. It was initially all about how Commanders don't understand the effectivity of a sniper in the urban environment of current warefare...thus many times Snipers are poorly implemented and put use in the old sniper ways of recon and hiding etc. The issue was that here you have a sniper who is incredibly lethal at ANY range and how do you use him? So the guy finally got his wish and put to test his sniper theory during a massive wargame with international observers etc (it wasn't geared towards snipers as they were just a footnote in the big ordeal).

So its an urban environment with a massive Op-force rolling in to secure a city controlled by a smaller force including the Sniper's team. Well this guy implements a team of highly mobile run-gun snipers. Now remember there is probably no one that can move and acquire a target quicker than a sniper...its not like they have to sit and do the math to make a shoot at 300m, ask the old Russian ladies (history reference). So his small team of mobile snipers knew their ground and just jumped from location to location just plain killing out right. No recon, just dropping target after target and literally running. They would drop several targets and while the force got its act together and tried to root the snipers out they would be gone already. The day ended with the head sniper getting like 65 wargame kills alone...eventually their OWN commander gave them up because they brought the ENTIRE Op-for grinding to a halt and couldn't get their wargame proceeding for the observing commanders.

The Sniper then got a chance to bring his ideas to the iraqi battlefield. He worked with a full squad and was entirely lethal. At times he was a glorified, extra deadly DM so to speak. His philosophy revolved around highly mobile snipers. They could engage heavily getting lots of kills and then get out while the Op-For gears up to finally take them down. Eitherway, he didn't always have a spotter with him as sometimes they were ambushed (convoy) and he would use his range finder for longer shots. The guy was in many close engagements and could engage VERY quickly...any calculations he did were in his head and processed instantly or he just used his HIGHLY tuned instincts as he engaged multiple targets with ease.

So, the thing is...a sniper is deadly accurate and a VERY quick draw at any range. The reason they suck at CQB is because they have a bolt action. This should be the only penalty for them. This extra settling time isn't a realistic disadvantage. If a sniper is in CQB then he gets one very accurate, deadly shot...fine he should be able to be suppressed INCREDIBLY easily and killed. If he can take a quick killshot at short range and runaway...then FINE, thats entirely within the skill set of the worlds most highly trained anti-infantry tool.

At times it seems as if we are trying to force snipers into a recon-scout role of old. We should leave the tactics to the CO's and SL'ders and snipers themselves not force them through game mechanics. The Sniper in the book used the back of his humvee as his mobile shooting platform (they stopped to shoot). Imagine doing that ingame. Also think of a highly mobile sniper squad darting in and out of the allyways and roof tops dropping targets left and right and then retreating only to do it again from a new flank. Thats what this guy did IRL...we should allow for that.

[101 bassdrive]

Im sorry, but I dont get the CQC excuse nor the fact that factors like wind etc. would have to be calculated.
wouldnt the sniperrifle still be useless at close range because
- you dont know the point where you zoom in since you dont have a crosshair
- your sight moves slowly once zoomed in
- you have a very limited field of view once zoomed
- you have a long reload time?
for wind factor and the like
- that itd apply for all weaopons, scoped or not. at any range

isnt managing the bulletdrop and bullettime challenging enough?
I mean, ive been laying on the SE hills of kashan firing at targets running from south bunker. the distance was 450m. after 10 shots I finally got one, by firing half a bodylength over the target and predicting is movement by 10m atleast. as said, the distance was 450m. I thought theyre zeroed at 600? and that those bullets travel at 800m/s?
it certainly confuses me

[LeadMagnet]

Possibly a better one would be to have a long "time before ready" delay on switching to the optical sights and a much smaller deviation time.

Then, snipers could fire rapidly and aim quicker once they were zoomed in on their scopes, but if they switched back to first-person view to run/move then they'd face a delay while they "re-calculated windage, distance" etc etc.

That's a winner in my books.