Project Reality Forums

Truism wrote:Everything after your first paragraph made me cringe. Insurgent forces have barely won a single firefight with their AK pattern rifles in more than a decade of combat against western 5.56mm rifles. Sure the rifle isn't the primary determinant of this situation, but trying to claim the opposite is utterly ridiculous.

Who are you even replying to?

Woah, so much retardedness in this thread.

"Unfairrrr superior reactionssss keep you alive in firefight ((((((((("

"Too much action in a firefight......"

Woah, it's kinda like in a real firefight, eh?

Fucking retards.

Everything after your first paragraph made me cringe. Insurgent forces have barely won a single firefight with their AK pattern rifles in more than a decade of combat against western 5.56mm rifles. Sure the rifle isn't the primary determinant of this situation, but trying to claim the opposite is utterly ridiculous.

ComradeHX wrote:Who are you even replying to?

It doesn't even matter which carabine is superior to what. No they haven't won any because any sane soldier would fire from distance using their acogs for as long as they can or call in the A10 to do the work for them. The issue that is discussed here is that whether each weapon is simulated close enough to their IRL counterparts or whether its based on holywood movies

Not_able_to_kill wrote:Woah, so much retardedness in this thread.

"Unfairrrr superior reactionssss keep you alive in firefight ((((((((("

"Too much action in a firefight......"

Woah, it's kinda like in a real firefight, eh?

Fucking retards.

Could you help me to find the report and ignore button?

Beee8190 wrote:It doesn't even matter which carabine is superior to what. No they haven't won any because any sane soldier would fire from distance using their acogs for as long as they can or call in the A10 to do the work for them. The issue that is discussed here is that whether each weapon is simulated close enough to their IRL counterparts or whether its based on holywood movies




Could you help me to find the report and ignore button?

Right upper corner of his post:
Moderate Options >>> Report ....

It doesn't even matter which carabine is superior to what. No they haven't won any because any sane soldier would fire from distance using their acogs for as long as they can or call in the A10 to do the work for them. The issue that is discussed here is that whether each weapon is simulated close enough to their IRL counterparts or whether its based on holywood movies

From my reading of the Afghan conflict there is rather large amount of close quarters compound clearence. I even wonder if the bayonet has been used more in the Afghan campaign than any other for years.

We certainly did not base the deviation on hollywood, there were hours upon hours of trial and error, discussions, calculations etc. That weapon design (barrel length, bullpup status, calibre, et cetera) were taken into account is a testament to the work of K.Rivers in particular.

Beee8190 wrote:It doesn't even matter which carabine is superior to what. No they haven't won any because any sane soldier would fire from distance using their acogs for as long as they can or call in the A10 to do the work for them.

Neither option however is that probable in the real world I'm afraid. The Taliban/Insurgents are pretty aware of just how outmatched they are in a "clean" firefight against regular forces, so they try avoiding it whenever possible, using civilians as cover/life insurance/"heavy weapon filter" and IEDs to make up for their antiquated weaponry and low shooting skill.

I still find the deviation pretty ridiculous. When I can go prone immediately post-sprint, 75m away from my target and headshot them within a second, when he'd been crouched, stationary and sighted in on me 2 seconds before and misses every shot, something's wrong.
It also makes maps with non-conventional factions even more of a pain to play, the advantage of scopes is magnified if we're going for puns. I actually preferred to use irons/CQ sights most of the time pre-1.0. Now if you're up against enemies with scopes and your faction only has a few, you're royally fucked in most engagements beyond 75m.
By no means am I advocating reversion to .98 levels, but a middle ground needs to be found.
I'm repeating myself here I'm pretty sure, but this level of deviation puts less emphasis on teamwork and intra-squad co-ordination, more on individual skill and reflexes.

I cant really compare with the old deviation as I just cant remember it properly. What I remember is that it surely worked pretty well and I didnt have anything against it. But at the same time I really like the new bounce movements on the sides of the sight when shooting from 1.0. And I suppose this precise feature came to counterbalance the increase of accuracy right ?

Also I have another question : does supressed effect affects accuracy ?

KaB wrote:I cant really compare with the old deviation as I just cant remember it properly. What I remember is that it surely worked pretty well and I didnt have anything against it. But at the same time I really like the new bounce movements on the sides of the sight when shooting from 1.0. And I suppose this precise feature came to counterbalance the increase of accuracy right ?

Also I have another question : does supressed effect affects accuracy ?

Suppression doesn't seem to affect deviation, no. It does generally effect accuracy due to the difficulty in sighting your target, but if you had them lined up as you were being suppressed, and manage to get a shot off at them it will be as accurate as otherwise. If I'm wrong about this, I'd be glad to be, but I've killed at decent range while suppressed as I have been killed while suppressing my killer.

I like the recoil a lot, but it doesn't actually counteract the deviation. It makes it slightly more difficult to get repeated or automatic shots off at your target but other than that it doesn't offset the accuracy of your initial shots which is my main issue.

Also I should've mentioned this earlier, I'm mainly talking about assault rifles here, I don't use Marksman, Sniper and other kits often enough to be able to form my opinion on them, but I imagine the same would apply.

To bullet point it once more, problems:
1) Scopes afford massive advantage over CQ sighted weapons, even more so than before
2) Transition to prone does not confer enough deviation increase
3) Speed/Stamina/movement do not confer enough deviation increase
4) "Settling" is too fast


Potential solutions:
1) Give scoped weapons slightly slower "Settle" time
2) 1.75x current penalty for going prone, maybe more
3) 1.5x current movement penalty, 2x sprint penalty if there even is one
4) See 1 or revert to .98's deviation and speed it up from there, about 65% of the way between .98 and 1.0

=MeRk= Morbo5131 wrote:Suppression doesn't seem to affect deviation, no. It does generally effect accuracy due to the difficulty in sighting your target, but if you had them lined up as you were being suppressed, and manage to get a shot off at them it will be as accurate as otherwise. If I'm wrong about this, I'd be glad to be, but I've killed at decent range while suppressed as I have been killed while suppressing my killer.

Yeah. Actually if suppression could affect accuracy I think it would finally take on its full meaning.

KaB wrote:Yeah. Actually if suppression could affect accuracy I think it would finally take on its full meaning.

It's hardcoded.

Until PR2.

Then I wouldn't mind testing something closer to pre-1.0 deviation.

If you're going to respond to this, do so outside of the quote, it makes it a pain to reply to.

T.A.Sharps wrote:Really?

The old deviation was a F'ing nightmare.

If you can't remember just go look up the threads talking about it, or...

The deviation was you never landed an accurate shot with your first round, in fact it always landed about 3-15 feet away from the center of your cross hairs no matter what. The Sniper rifle, even if you settled for 30 seconds, would land a round, at about 300 yards (point blank range), about 15 feet to the side of where your steady cross hairs were sitting for 30 seconds. And general fire fights you would settle, or go prone, and you would watch your rounds land everywhere but the guy you were aiming at, whether it was 10 yards or 200 yards.

Thats what it was like.

Maybe in 0.8 but we're well past those dark days. To repeat myself, I'm not even advocating reversion to .98 levels here, but somewhere in between that and the current values.

The "deviation" or shooting in general in PR is the most perfect it has ever been. It finally feels like you are shooting for real.

There's millions of factors affecting marksmanship in real combat - Stance, stability, adrenaline, fear, fitness, strength, skill, training, environmental factors, the list goes on. There's no way to translate all of that into a video game.

Shooting IRL is not an exact science, so I'm not sure why you think it should be in PR. If anything you had a random shot that still could of hit him, if you're not being over dramatic in what you report.

I never assumed it was an exact science IRL, but once again this is a game we're talking about and a lot of people have it down pretty well. The only factors that influence whether you're going to hit your target in this game are your familiarity with deviation, your reactions and aiming ability.

Unless this was a friend you were in communication with, that was actually trying to kill you, you have no idea what this other person was doing prior to you seeing him, nor do you have a clue as to what he was looking at, or how he was aiming in the confrontation.

Given that I was observing him for around 3 seconds in total before we engaged each other, you're wrong here. I don't know where he was aiming exactly but it was obviously towards me, but the sequence of events goes like this, to reiterate:
He's running from my perspective right-left
I crouch and scope up
I wait 1 sec to allow for deviation
As that's happening, he goes prone and turns towards me
I fire
Around half a second later, he fires 3 shots and hits me with 2 of them, killing me.
Neither of us were in cover for what it's worth.

Its also entirely possible IRL to land a snap shot (even from off hand aka standing) with a rifle after running. 75m (if that is right) is nothing when shooting a rifle IRL.

Again you're trying to compare a video game to real life. While PR tries to emulate it, it's a looooong way off. And what you describe is not likely true in combat conditions. By that logic I should've killed him anyway.

You, and a lot of others, are not thinking tactically is this situation.You don't take iron sight rifles and try to engage someone on open ground that can see you from 400 yards out, and hit you. You take their advantage and turn it into a disability. Bring them in close, then engage.

Often not an option depending on the map, your objectives etc. When you're close enough that scopes confer a disadvantage, you're usually close enough that hipfiring is effective. There's also the fact that a lot of scoped rifles now have CQ sights too. But I'm talking even within 100m of one another, the scope has the advantage and you'd be hard pressed getting any closer in a lot of maps.

Think about that next time you are sitting on a rooftop or running around a street. If you are anywhere that you can be in a scope from more than 50 yards (which in PR is probably more like 25) out, you fail.

This is exactly the problem. Using the example of Fool's Road, there's practically nowhere that doesn't match that criteria, save for the asylum, heli base and fortress.

Fortunately now the iron sights are more accurate in the latest updates, seemingly.

I've noticed no difference but that's after a 4-month gap in playing. Regardless, the scope will be more precise because any adjustment to your view through a scope is multiplied when using ironsights.

I dislike the 1.x deviation. The firefights are non-existant and that was something I cherished in .95 up to 1.0. When you got a confirmed kill in a firefight it felt like a gift from God. Getting a kill now makes me feel nothing. There is no difficulty. No one suppresses anymore because there is no need. You take a couple shots and the enemy is dead. I believe the current system is too arcadey.

Before, it was difficult to get a kill alone with deviation while moving and that is why PR was so great. It forced the squad to work together to kill effectively. Now it just takes one sprinty guy to take out five guys. I've noticed more loners in 1.x and I believe deviation plays a sizable role in it.

The current deviation encourages people to just sprint around. The worst part of it? The attackers seem to have the advantage. I've watched entrances to buildings from the inside to have an enemy sprint through it and three round burst me when I had the better position. Another is the people who drop to prone after sprinting and instantly kill you from 20m away.

What is the point of ammo bags anymore? I cannot say since 1.x release that I've given one to a squad member for ammo. The only time I use one is when I'm in a mortar squad or I ran out of grenades. I will use two magazines max before I die. Suppressing isn't necessary like it used to be.

I thought the previous deviation was to simulate a tired soldier being shot at. The system now makes it seem like you're at a gun range for a shoot. It's like the soldiers are robots. I noticed in one of the tooltips on the loading screen about Rambo. Sure, we're not at Rambo levels yet but I believe we're too close for comfort.

Thanks for reading.

I did like when volume of fire was a thing. Now a days you can literally wait half a second and hit your target fairly reliably over distances you wouldn't think about shooting with the old deviation. All blufor weapons have become sniper rifles with very little settle time. I think it was done to appease the newer crowd, ease of accessibility and less difficult time scoring kills has surely snagged new players.

I'm also spent on trying to use AKs, rubber armed Russian soldiers are no longer entertaining to me.

The ak74 is really good, the recoil seems just right to me, much easier to get multiple rounds on target at medium range than an m16 or c7.

Serious? The AK-74 still feels like it has much more side-to-side recoil than the m16/c7. I was testing the C7 on full auto a few days ago and the rate of fire combined with the tight spread is ridiculous compared to what the AK-74 is capable of (though I know this is partly due to engine limitations).

Sometimes I wonder why engagements in real life last so much longer than in PR. Is it because the deviation is unrealistic, making weapons too accurate in a firefight? Or is it because people don't value their lives, rushing enemies and taking other risks? I have a feeling it also has to do with the movement. People in PR run around like crazy, constantly changing positions, even when defending a building, whereas in real life people tend to keep to one spot longer.

Speaking of movement, is it possible to simulate momentum in BF2? I noticed that in PR you can come to a dead stop after sprinting, and zig-zag and made 360 degree turns without losing any speed whatsoever. Definitely makes the game feel more arcade-like.

Idk it may just be me but i find the ak74 way easier to keep on target that the c7.

As for momentum it is there, if you sprint and then do a 180 and then another 180 you can feel yourself slid a bit.

fatalsushi83 wrote:Serious? The AK-74 still feels like it has much more side-to-side recoil than the m16/c7. I was testing the C7 on full auto a few days ago and the rate of fire combined with the tight spread is ridiculous compared to what the AK-74 is capable of (though I know this is partly due to engine limitations).

I believe the high RoF on full auto 5.56 rifles hasn't the full recoil kicking in, wasn't that it?

Sometimes I wonder why engagements in real life last so much longer than in PR. Is it because the deviation is unrealistic, making weapons too accurate in a firefight? Or is it because people don't value their lives, rushing enemies and taking other risks? I have a feeling it also has to do with the movement. People in PR run around like crazy, constantly changing positions, even when defending a building, whereas in real life people tend to keep to one spot longer.

Well, besides the ones you mention, there's a number I can list up just at the top of my head:
-Distance: You'll have to gauge the distance to the target, and account for bullet drop/rise and zero in the weapon accordingly. If I would, for example, aim for the head of a target 100m away using a rifle sighted for 200m, the bullet would fly over his head. If I have a gun sighted for 100m and I try to hit someone behind a small wall on 200m, and I don't account for it, I'll hit the wall.
-Shooting errors: Though the deviation kicks in to simulate a person getting ready to fire, there is no sway to be found in the game, and after a period of time, only the bullet spread is making you inaccurate(unless you move again). In reality, your gun is always moving a bit around, tilts to the side a little, you tire out after a while, etc.
-Grass doesn't disappear after 30m.
-Suppression works like a charm.
-Participants will seek to break off from an engagement if they are caught in a bad spot. Those in a favourable spot will not go on the offense to pursuit those breaking off.