Aim to fire transistion

[nick20404]

The aim to fire transition should be allot quicker, now when you aim your weapon it takes at least 2 seconds before you can fire after pressing the aim button and that is very unrealistic soldiers train to be able to react quickly and aim steady, currently you have to aim, than wait a seconds or two, than fire.



As you can see in this training video it takes less than a second for him to get the scope and and fire his shot.

[Anhkhoa]

"Gameplay issues" the 1337 no recoil quick aim = noob rambos

[Rudd]

Nice videos (if it wasn't youtube it would be good to extract the sound )

but iirc the time for sighting in ingame is also portraying that ur eye must focus to the scope sight, which can't be portrayed any other way afaik.

Though I wouldn't mind the scopes being sped up a little, but atm I'm very happy with the speed gameplay wise.

[Mary.au]

"Gameplay issues" the 1337 no recoil quick aim = noob rambos

Not necessarily, if the time to brings the sights up was decreases, but the time for minimal deviation remained the same then even the fastest 1337 snapshot pr0's still wouldn't be able to hit anything unless they wait.

[PR.IT Stek_WAR]

what you say is already on this project reality: if you shoot right after you've targeted will notice that your shot will be very inaccurate!


instead expect a couple of seconds you'll notice the difference in accuracy!

[Psyko]

i think your wrong. aimpoint takes about a second to scope and fire (and just like these guys, it mightnt be accurate, but once you get a shot off in the right direction, it counts just the same) , acog takes 1.5 - 3 seconds. and these guys seem to be using aimpoints.

so post up soldiers using medium to long range scopes, who ARNT using the emergancy battle site on the top for a proper comparrison.

[Smegburt_funkledink]

what you say is already on this project reality: if you shoot right after you've targeted will notice that your shot will be very inaccurate!


instead expect a couple of seconds you'll notice the difference in accuracy!

This has nothing to do with what the OP is talking about. Read:

The aim to fire transition should be allot quicker, now when you aim your weapon it takes at least 2 seconds before you can fire after pressing the aim button....

2 seconds is a bit of an Exaggeration...

[Hitperson]

things like EoTechs should be faster to aim though.

[nick20404]

This is mostly a problem in urban combat maps or close combat, if it could be changed it could stop things like both people diving to the ground 5 feet away from each other and opening up. Its kinda lame that you have a better chance of living like that.

If you had a quick aim and a decent accuracy in close combat you wouldn't have to hop around like a idiot or dive on the ground, close engagements would end quickly and realistically, and longer range combat would not change much as I am not suggesting the guns be more accurate but be ready to fire effectively quicker.

And you can never tell me you have not come around a corner ran into a full enemy squad and they all dive onto there belly's and light you up.

[gazzthompson]

most of them videos they used red dots, which in game are fast to draw.

in the last video he is using a ACOG, now im no expert on the matter but i highly doubt he is aiming down the sight, but drawing the weapon up and shooting "down the barrel" or what ever the technical term would be. which is best represented in game as hip firing because of the lack of shouldering the rifle but not looking down sighs (which i doubt is possible, hence why we dont have it)

[Anderson29]

that first video looks like the range in ft. richarson ak...where i was stationed. ill have to take a closer look.

which is best represented in game as hip firing because of the lack of shouldering the rifle but not looking down sighs (which i doubt is possible, hence why we dont have it)

unaimed shoulder fire is in game.....there is no hip fire though. so if maybe if we have more accurate unaimed fire there would be no need to look down the sites for engagements less than 30m....and add a slight zoom to aimed irons, that way you can at least see a 300m man sized target. if i remember correctly the front site post is the same width as a man sized target at 300m.

[Zimmer]

Okay do as I say:

Take a rifle and stand in a relaxed position then take your sight up as you see a old lady take the sight up as fast as possible and begin shooting. Now did you hit? "Your sick ******* aiming at a old lady and trying to shoot her."/supposed to be funny

Now on a serious note the long draw time is to deflect that you need to find your target in PR. Its alot easier in a Computer games and you must remember Soldiers arent more superhuman then you guys are sure they have polished some skills, but aslong as your not ready on scope you will suffer to a 3-5 seconds delay to get a accurate shot also in RL. The deviation is the random things that can happen wind heartbeates and so on. The scoping time is the time it takes the soldier to find the enemy in the scope and all the "get used to stuff."

I ahve tried with a saloon rifle to take it up fast and pull the trigger and I surely need around 3-4 seconds take the rifle up to my shoulder find target and fire. That was on 5 meter I need up to 7 seconds on 50meter(taking up rifle from no scoped stance.

Now I know 7 seconds is slow and that soldiers have 1337 red doth sigths and can take it up faster and take a shot, but it dosent take 7 seconds in PR either so its quite realistic, when you add on all the factores. Then you ask why dont add on deviation? Well its easier to see and aim at a targe twhen already scoped and if you move in PR you will get full deviation even scoped.

[nick20404]

Okay do as I say:

Take a rifle and stand in a relaxed position then take your sight up as you see a old lady take the sight up as fast as possible and begin shooting. Now did you hit? "Your sick ******* aiming at a old lady and trying to shoot her."/supposed to be funny

Now on a serious note the long draw time is to deflect that you need to find your target in PR. Its alot easier in a Computer games and you must remember Soldiers arent more superhuman then you guys are sure they have polished some skills, but aslong as your not ready on scope you will suffer to a 3-5 seconds delay to get a accurate shot also in RL. The deviation is the random things that can happen wind heartbeates and so on. The scoping time is the time it takes the soldier to find the enemy in the scope and all the "get used to stuff."

I ahve tried with a saloon rifle to take it up fast and pull the trigger and I surely need around 3-4 seconds take the rifle up to my shoulder find target and fire. That was on 5 meter I need up to 7 seconds on 50meter(taking up rifle from no scoped stance.

Now I know 7 seconds is slow and that soldiers have 1337 red doth sigths and can take it up faster and take a shot, but it dosent take 7 seconds in PR either so its quite realistic, when you add on all the factores. Then you ask why dont add on deviation? Well its easier to see and aim at a targe twhen already scoped and if you move in PR you will get full deviation even scoped.

I agree at some points, but some things are wrong, It doesn't matter if you have red dot sights or anything, I have done exercises like this before with an AK and an ar15 both with iron sights, You don't need that much time for what I am suggesting I am suggesting this for close combat purposes, waiting 3-4 seconds in close combat to fire in PR means you are dead, the other person is gonna jump into prone and spray away LIKE ALWAYS, this makes close quarters battles really lame and unrealistic.

In no way am I suggesting that you can just aim you gun in a second and hit a target at 400+ meters, This is purely a suggestion on reflexes and aim in close combat, I think when you have your sights up the aim should be perfect but the gun should always be deviating into random directions to simulate breathing and other things.

It is realistic and it's a good way to get rid of all that close combat bunny hopping and snake diving.

[Ace42]

You don't need that much time for what I am suggesting I am suggesting this for close combat purposes, waiting 3-4 seconds in close combat to fire in PR means you are dead, the other person is gonna jump into prone and spray away LIKE ALWAYS, this makes close quarters battles really lame and unrealistic.

In no way am I suggesting that you can just aim you gun in a second and hit a target at 400+ meters, This is purely a suggestion on reflexes and aim in close combat, I think when you have your sights up the aim should be perfect but the gun should always be deviating into random directions to simulate breathing and other things.

It is realistic and it's a good way to get rid of all that close combat bunny hopping and snake diving.

Indeed, the main problem is that people run-and-gun like rambo, which the devs don't want, so they've upped the max and move-dev to make it impossible. The resulting problem is that the deviation reduction is painfully high ATM, which *unrealistically* turns firefights into a game of "chicken" about who holds off firing longest on sighting before opening up.

I appreciate a lot of the players equate "tactics" in the game with good ol' fashioned Quake style "corner-camping", but as I have said elsewhere, that's an illusion, it's neither realistic or "tactical", and IMO it detracts from gameplay. The fact that it's spilled over to damaging CQB is kinda disappointing too.

If it was up to me, I'd dramatically increase the move-dev, and dramatically decrease the "recovery rate" when croched / prone and stationary. The effect in game would be "move, can't hit **** at at all. The second you crouch still, you're good to go".

Possibly link this in to "sighted" (IE not firing from the hip), so that you have to be scoped to recover quickly; and naturally change the balance of the deviationss depending on the specific gun being wielded (more user-friendly ones have lower max deviation, quicker recovery - for example light weight ones, carbines, AKMS, iron-sights vs med-range scopes, etc etc). This was covered in the other thread.

[arjan]

after seeing this, in my opinion deviation is realy fake in PR, the ''cones'' or what are they called should be more tight i gues?

[Tirak]

Hello, Your topic has been discussed several times before, in the top right hand corner of your screen there is a button which reads "Search" and at the top of the Suggestion Forum there is a topic labeled "Attention! Already Suggested Suggestions", before posting a suggestion in the future, please use these tools to avoid duplicate threads.

Thank you,
The PR Team