Page 6 of 14
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-08-05 16:02
by VipersGhost
How are tracers preventing the inclusion of realistic ballistics!??!
I really don't think tracers are all that necessary. Seriously, not all guns even use them and I think the insurgents don't use them at all. Even if we scrap tracers all together, I'm fine with that. Lets just leave them in for the miniguns.
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-08-06 02:54
by zangoo
I have just tested smaller tracer sizes and they are small enough that it isnt star wars at all and big enough that you should be able to see them at longer range.
well the 4:3 was just the monitor it was running 1280x1024 iirc. the 2 diffrent range cards were made on 1280x1024 and 1680x1050 and no widescreen fixer.
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-08-06 22:24
by cyberzomby
Could you put up a screenshot? Sounds interesting!
I do think we really need tracers. For the ones who havent got there details up so high its easier to see where they are shot from, or shooting at.
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-08-08 19:48
by Psyko
Dude, wheres this server?
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-08-09 20:50
by Arnoldio
Well, on shorter distances, will tracers also suverely drop? If no, keep the tracer bug and get the ballistics in because for longer shots, you have to train and get to know the rifle so tracers dont mean a lot.
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-08-17 21:41
by Sabre_tooth_tigger
urm someone voted on this so I might as well comment or ask have you tried to submit your changes and see if they can go in 0.8 or is it allready too late
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-08-17 21:47
by krekc
1280x1024 = aspect ratio 5:4 not 4:3
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-08-17 21:58
by Mosquill
Sabre_tooth_tigger wrote:urm someone voted on this so I might as well comment or ask have you tried to submit your changes and see if they can go in 0.8 or is it allready too late
Ballistics won't be in 0.8, it's already too late as you said. And I doubt they'll be in 0.85 either.
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-08-17 22:01
by Sabre_tooth_tigger
doh, ok thanks for the response
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-09-15 22:04
by Brummy
VipersGhost wrote:How are tracers preventing the inclusion of realistic ballistics!??!
I really don't think tracers are all that necessary. Seriously, not all guns even use them and I think the insurgents don't use them at all. Even if we scrap tracers all together, I'm fine with that. Lets just leave them in for the miniguns.
zangoo wrote:
It appears that it is hardcoded in bf2 that all tracers go 75% the speed of normal bullets,
Now this isnt noticable in pr right now as the bullets are going about 1km/sec constant and have very little gravity but it is still there.
Herro.
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-09-23 20:18
by Scot
Tracers are hugely useful! Fire control orders such as 'watch my tracer' where the enemy are situated are used, and also the last couple of rounds are tracers IIRC to tell you when you are out ammo, so saying they have no use is silly.
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-09-30 17:29
by DeltaFart
I just want to ask this one question. When is it likely these will be done?
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-09-30 23:28
by zangoo
umm well, it wont really ever be done untill
A) We find a fix to the traer bug
B) devs trade realistic tracers for realistic ballistics
C) we do ballistics for some guns
about choice C
if we did this the gun that had ballistics Eg: snipers would be so bad compared to the other guns that no one would use them.
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-10-01 00:26
by Rudd
Sorry if this has been asked, is bullet drop the only thing that has been worked in? Is there any aspect of the more realistic ballistics that can be worked in without resulting in tracer bug, like bullet velocity or somthing?
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-10-01 00:52
by zangoo
you could work in gravity but time of flight is not possible without running into the tracer bug.
My 1 last pitch to the devs to forget tracers and put ballistics in....
From my tests with ballistics you wouldnt really need much deviation, More or less like 0.7 deviation as people can no longer just point and click they would need to adjust for bullet drop and flight time to hit the target, And if the tracer bug was left in you would need to learn not to trust your tracers making it even harder to just point and click. Creating longer firefights and allowing people to become better shots then their freinds by understanding the bullet drop for diffrent ranges. So in the end if ballistics was put in, My personal opinion would be that we could remove the crazy 0.8 deviation and go back to 0.7 deviation.
Also i think people should suggest ways they think could solve this bug, As i get alot of ideas about fixing/creating things from people suggesting possible solutions for problems in bf2, But just a idea.
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-10-01 01:03
by WildBill1337
ive been playing with the scoped assault rifles, and having those tracers fly at different speeds than normal bullets is really irritating. it screws me up sometimes when i try to lead targets. if im having the problem now, i dont know how ill fare with realistic bullet drop added.
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-10-01 01:14
by Rudd
perhaps you could make ur values less realistic until the point the bug is hidden, a little more realistic is better than nothing, especially after all the hard work you did
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-10-01 02:58
by zangoo
Currently the tracer bug wouldnt effect you unless you are shooting long range.
Say at 200m, m16 muzzle velocity is 940m/sec
lead = target velocity * (distance / projectile velocity)
Lead = 2.5m/sec * (200m / 940m/sec)
lead = 0.53m
Now say the target is moving at 2.5m/sec that is a 0.5m lead. There is more deviation then that, So currently the tracer bug doesnt effect shooting as deviation is larger.
Re: Ballistcs or Tracers?
Posted: 2008-10-11 22:03
by Sadist_Cain
I likes the idea of ballistics but im really not sure that saying "crazy 0.8 deviation" "and back to 0.7" is the right way to get your point across