Desire for realism, or difficulty?

[Sneak Attack]

i think the deviation is a good idea and makes perfect sense...BUT, for the BF2 engine, it works like ***.

i have many a time not been able to kill a guy from 20 feet away because the deviation from me moving the smallest amount threw me off as if i just ran a 10 mile race with a cross on my back, i just dont think deviation works with the cone of fire type game.

i think deviation needs to really be turned down, in .7 not only do we have to deal with horrible hit detection of BF2, and computer lag and internet lag and leading our targets. we now have to deal with deviation, all that together is just way to many missed shots or shots that just dont count when they hit. and to add to that we now often have to run to where we need to be for 10 or 20 minutes if our rally gets destroyed, and running all that way, taking 10 shots at a guy, having the first 5 shots miss because of deviation, the next 2 are ahead and behind him because you are trying to lead him and compensate for lag, the 9th shot hits but doesnt count because the battlefield 2 engine is an *** hole, and then the last shot finally hits but doesnt matter because he has ran around the corner, layed down with his SAW and crawled out from behind the building and mowed you down, its just inferiorating.

i was playing a few days ago on a server with only about 3 people, and it was booring so i lined my G3 scope up with a road sign at about 280-300 meters and walked away and watched TV for 30 min (to watch some entourage) and when i came back, the first thing i did without moving a hair was shoot the G3, and whata ya know, IT MISSED, i have 30 min for my deviation to go away and i stilled missed a road sign from 300m. i know it doesnt take that long for the deviation to go away so its something ells, and it wasnt me because i did that same thing 3 times in a row and 1 out of the 3 shots 1 hit the sign (and it hit it off to the side) which sounds like absolute horse pucky to me.

some one earlier said how satisfying it was to line up a shot from far away and have it count, which is true, but its about 10x more angering to line up a shot and have it not count because of hit detection or lag and now deviation!

we all ready have plenty of opportunities to miss our shots and have them not count, dont give us another, its like V BF2 all over again.

[CKneisel]

have to run to where we need to be for 10 or 20 minutes if our rally gets destroyed, and running all that way, taking 10 shots at a guy, having the first 5 shots miss because of deviation, the next 2 are ahead and behind him because you are trying to lead him and compensate for lag, the 9th shot hits but doesnt count because the battlefield 2 engine is an *** hole, and then the last shot finally hits but doesnt matter because he has ran around the corner, layed down with his SAW and crawled out from behind the building and mowed you down, its just inferiorating.

That's a cartoonish exaggeration. After steadying for 1 1/3 seconds, you will have enough accuracy to hit people at decent ranges. If you are finding that you cannot hit someone that's far away and/or partially covered even when steadying, then I suggest instead of constantly trying to snipe the guy and pissing yourself off (as I imagine most .6 complainer players do) you lay down suppressive fire. Or have your squad lay down suppressive fire. And then move to a position that you can actually kill the enemy from.

[Sneak Attack]

or i could just use my G3 which fires a 7.62x51 round for a reason, and that reason is deadly at a long range and everywhere ells in between . and if my squad is not by me (which happens alot if your leader doesnt have a rally up or the game is just starting or for many other reasons which everybody faces in a regular PR game)im SOL on that department.
if they are going to put scopes on all the rifles i would like a reason to use them, i dont want all my shootings up close with a G3 rifle, that would just be shitty. and suppressive fire doesnt work in video games, especially ones where you know the bullets dont count when they hit often or just miss alot. i OFTEN pop my head up while getting shot at in this game and am RARELY punished for the action, maby 1 outa 20 0r 30 times i do it i will get hit and even less of the time does that hit kill me right away, but if yer one of the guys that thinks it works, give er hell

[Haze]

they didn't have to break it down and manually clean it after each round..

Hehehe lol.
But on a serious not can it be done. Devs?

[h0mie]

This Thread tells exactly what im thinking! But try to bring a little "Comfort for the player" into the game, and all those "realism nazis" would start screaming...
I think a big Part of the PR community mistakes difficult for realistic, but this is still a game, in a small engine, but therefore it should be FUN in the first place and not just difficult / frustrating. Once more that Topic is exactly my opinion, great text!

[Outlawz7]

Agreed with Sneak Attack on most points, it gets really frustrating when the bullets just randomly miss. If the deviation got to zero after sitting still for a few seconds, then it would be kinda like 0.75 because everyone that's sitting still has now the accuracy of a sniper.
Then again, assault rifles are not sniper rifles, although I don't think soldiers fire a bullet in a direction waaay far off their target either after they have been aiming at it for a while.

[Truism]

Just about no one thinks deviation should be taken out all together. Everyone knows there's a reason for it blah blah blah. The question is over how much there should be and what a player can do to minimise it.

Then again, assault rifles are not sniper rifles

For our purposes, at the engagement ranges of pretty much everything in PR, they are. A soldier who has had time to prepare his shot properly on either on a small stationary target at 300 meters will not miss much. In PR, he will almost never hit. I am a staunch advocate of Deviation, but not the way it is now, as a highly unrealistic gameplay mechanism used to force tactics and styles of play that happen in real life for completely different reasons.

Soldiers do not suppress one another because they are inaccurate, but rather because they are very, very accurate if not under pressure - suppression creates pressure so that soldiers can't prepare their shots. The reason soldiers are so eager to make each other inaccurate like this is because there are no respawns in real life - soldiers miss in this way on purpose as a tactical decision. This is also why soldiers don't bum rush enemy positions much - RL's harsh respawn rules.

Soldiers stick together in real life for a hell of a lot of reasons, such as the ability to effectively use suppression to flank. They don't stick together because they can't shoot straight and need 18th century style massed musket volley fire to engage effectively.

The long and short of it is that I can't help but feel that deviation is being souped up way past what it should be to try and influence parts of the game other than marksmanship. The difficulty scale in this area has been ramped to something near impossible - there is no amount of skill on the part of the play that will allow him to outperform another player in a firefight at range (which sucks pretty hard when you want to get good at it). Because both players will have to wait 3 seconds before firing, both players have 3 seconds to line their shot up (and more often than not, still miss) - in this way deviation acts something like a skill neutraliser. Additionally, the minimum deviation combined with the strict deviation rules for movement mean that more often than not ranged firefights if they happen in the open (and don't baw about cover, because two soldier who are on the move seeing each other happens a lot) are basically two people sitting prone and still, rolling dice at 1.3 second intervals. It doesn't get much more lame than that.

Deviation needs to be reworked, and proposed alternatives to random cones of fire investigated.

[IAJTHOMAS]

Am I correct in my assumption 'deviation' (which most people seem to complaining of) isn't the same as 'recoil' in game?Recoil being the upward movement of the weapon after firing, which can be countered with the mouse, wheras deviation is the simulated inaccuracy of your soldier firing after running, jumping, moving, firing etc?

(Just trying to clarify how the mechanics of shooting work ingame.)

My main issue here is the no that my bullets don't hit dead on, but they sometimes miss by an obscene amount where the bullet would have had to have exited the muzzle at near 45 degree angle to the direction the weapon is pointing in. Its a bit odd given a miss is a miss, but seeing a bullet land several meters from a target is somehow more frustrating to me.

Still seen an update saying the cone is being reduced, so this may make me happier. Deviation is always a thing you have to get a feel for, rather than just look at the numbers, can't really get a sense of how they interact.

[h0mie]

They don't stick together because they can't shoot straight and need 18th century style massed musket volley fire to engage effectively.

ymmd!

[Ecko]

Well written post, as most have said.
But your main argument tends to be that the deviation system is based on 15 year old airsofters.
This is completely untrue, PR has an enormous amount of active soldiers playing. I'm pretty sure if they thought something was ridiculously out of wack they would be the first to let the devs know. I think the devs are smart enough not to base a realism game on the statements of another game. The only thing airsoft has in common with PR is that both games encourage tactical movements and teamwork.

[Alex6714]

The only thing airsoft has in common with PR is that both games encourage tactical movements and teamwork.

I would agree, but for the speed at which you can bring up the weapon, reload (sometimes) and basic things alot of the time it would be very similar. Most airsoft guns are as heavy or heavier than their real counterparts and obviously optics are almost if not exact. Airsoft is in different conditions though, but the one thing airsoft can´t be anything like are the recoil, ballistics (airsoft would be worse I would think) etc.

[Sadist_Cain]

Airsoft pellets don't kill you though

I fail to see how playing games since wolfenstein 3d can make you know the difference between realistic and unrealistic combat. I'd trust the opinion of a Soldier on these forums with minimal gaming experiance over that any day.

The difficulty vs realism question... There are definitely some things in game that are easier to do irl but these things are made more difficult to try and best simulate the actions and behaviour of a trained soldier in combat, being shot at, getting scared etc. you'll often find that following military training guides and using proper tactics are what works best in this mod as is real life

Same for insurgents, they should never try to go head to head with other armys, fire a few shots then run away that's how it should happen, place ieds for ambush etc

[Wolfe]

Instant gratification.

That is the bottom line. We can theorize about realism all day long but in the end these arguments are dictated by each person's tolerance of instant gratification. This is exactly why two people who claim to want realism will fall on opposite sides of the issue; one side prefers to spend time fighting while the other side prefers to spend no time killing.

So before we can have an honest debate of realism, we must first have an honest discussion of motivations because it seems that some people play PR to supplement their ego by thinking it somehow translates into real life just because "reality" is in the title.

[Rudd]

I really enjoyed reading the OP post, kudos to you as well

difficulty and realism don't go hand in hand imo, but when I get killed, I want it to be because som1 was a better shot or had better tactics rather than because he insta proned or whatever- so realism is important to me in that way.

But PR has to preserve gamplay as well, while at the same time as simulating a battle between hundred of soldiers when only 64 or less are actually playing...as well as contending with BF2 limitations

And Wolfe is right...that this is done via player tolerance.

So, I have no idea anymore lol, your thread has got me confused but pondering

[Solid Knight]

You shouldn't try to factor in emotion for the player. In example: you can't shoot very well because you are scared. The problem with this claim is that there is no universal response to fear nor is there a universal condition for fear. It varies. Some people can perform extremely well when their scared. Some people completely break down. Some people aren't even scared to begin with.

I'll preempt any claims of "but you're in a combat zone and bullets are whizzing which scares most people". The fallacy of this claim is that you're not always in that situation. You could be four blocks down from the fight, not getting shot at, no enemies in the area, shooting at hostiles who have no idea where you are. It's basically shooting range conditions for you. Why would you be penalized for an emotion you're not feeling to which the response to said emotion isn't even universal or near universal?

My suggestion, leave this factor out of the game.

[PlatinumA1]

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOM , Headshot!

Post warned for useless/unhelpful content.

[Truism]

You shouldn't try to factor in emotion for the player. In example: you can't shoot very well because you are scared. The problem with this claim is that there is no universal response to fear nor is there a universal condition for fear. It varies. Some people can perform extremely well when their scared. Some people completely break down. Some people aren't even scared to begin with.

I'll preempt any claims of "but you're in a combat zone and bullets are whizzing which scares most people". The fallacy of this claim is that you're not always in that situation. You could be four blocks down from the fight, not getting shot at, no enemies in the area, shooting at hostiles who have no idea where you are. It's basically shooting range conditions for you. Why would you be penalized for an emotion you're not feeling to which the response to said emotion isn't even universal or near universal?

My suggestion, leave this factor out of the game.

I agree completely with this post. I think if we tightened deviation cones when "prepared" ie. prone, no movement, minimal devation penalties for shooting (I strongly feel mouse movement shouldn't be penalised on most weapons), we'd see more camping to use that accuracy. The difference between this and 0.6 deviation is firstly that only stationary, prone, zoomed in players get it and secondly that the game has changed quite a bit in other areas since 0.6 in ways that discourage 0.6 running and gunning. Sprinting is a pain, jump dodging doesn't work, suppression effects encourage fire and maneuvre tactics/covering. We aren't playing the same game that we were then, and I think blaming deviation for everything that was wrong with that version would be glib. We should give tightened accuracy another chance.

[PRC_Heavy_Z]

Instant gratification. That is the bottom line. We can theorize about realism all day long but in the end these arguments are dictated by each person's tolerance of instant gratification. This is exactly why two people who claim to want realism will fall on opposite sides of the issue; one side prefers to spend time fighting while the other side prefers to spend no time killing.

So before we can have an honest debate of realism, we must first have an honest discussion of motivations because it seems that some people play PR to supplement their ego by thinking it somehow translates into real life just because "reality" is in the title.

I'm sure for certain people, ego can be a part of the issue. I can't think of anyone who would play a "realistic" game just to prove they could replicate the actions of the game in reality. However, I agree for a lot if not most of the people the issue is time.

Regarding time. The rounds in PR 0.8 are averaging more than one hour each depending on map (EX. look at the battle-recorder files for TG or other servers). To actually get a good game going, the player has to be in the game at the beginning or close to the beginning of the match. Otherwise, he/she isn't going to get a well organized squad and the experience will most likely be rather frustrating. This means the player probably have to wait even longer before actually getting a good match going, I'd say averaging half a hours or more. Thus, to play just a good round of PR, it'd take ~1.5 hours. And since most people would like to play at least 2 rounds, for some it get too time consuming. It's not something one could do during a mid-day break or have a quick round when bored anymore.

So I think what we're dealing with is relative realism w/ respect to time...

on one side we have the 20min vBF2 spam round and on the other we have 3+ hours of waiting punctuated by few moments of intense firefight\action. Personally, I'd like a 45min round w/ one or two major moments of action.

[cyberzomby]

I would agree, but for the speed at which you can bring up the weapon, reload (sometimes) and basic things alot of the time it would be very similar. Most airsoft guns are as heavy or heavier than their real counterparts and obviously optics are almost if not exact. Airsoft is in different conditions though, but the one thing airsoft can´t be anything like are the recoil, ballistics (airsoft would be worse I would think) etc.

haha airsoft is worse! With the replica ( they are not guns ) I played with I could see the little pellets arch in front of me ( I think I got to 20/30 meters ) It was one heck of a day though! As close to military as you can get without making a big commitment. Like you said, the replica's are true to life in most brands. And you somewhat learn how the real life military operates and moves. You also get a feel of (not even close to real life but you know ) what its like getting attacked.

Like Heavy_Z says PR is almost like a MMO to me! Altough I cant say that if I drop in halfway a game I cant get a good experience. Not everytime but most of the times its still good.

I think the team did a nice job of getting a system like this in the game. It simulates all the factors you cant force on players. And the people who want to have the 100% accuracy should play a more arcade like game. PR isnt so much about winning its more the experience ( to me it is anyway )

[[DVB] Avalon.ca]

i think altering reality to make reality is counter productive. you want too make people vaule thier lives in the game. make the spwan times longer. if you had to wait 2- 3 mins every time you died, folks would thing twice before running like a crack head into battle. couple that with knowing that your enemy has a better than average chance ( "A Trained Soldier" ) who is capable of hitting a target more often that not might be a good incentive to keep your head down or flank.