Project Reality Forums

'[R-DEV wrote:Jaymz;821150'] You must mean when the person with the fastest twitch reflexes that put his mouse on a soldiers head won?

.

Yes, that's EXACTLY what I mean. The person that can split his virtual enemies dome quicker should win. Is there a problem with that? You guys LOVE throwing around the words "twitchy" and "reflexes" like they're bad words.

What else should it be then? Would you like us to key in some coordinates first and have our mouse auto-track to where we want to aim? We aim with a mouse, it's how PC FPS works. Some people will be faster and more accurate than others....its called skill.

I'm also fully aware of the engine limitations of BF2 for realism and how it was designed from the ground up for arcadey gameplay. I also understand and appreciate what you have done to take out .6 laser-beam guns, which I hated, (even though it was fun going 43 and 5 all the time with my SVD)


That being said, I think you guys are going WAY over-board with deviation. All you need is .756 deviation with a bit more settle-time at longer ranges and a bit more deviation from scope-sway.

You are basically making quick, non-camping, non-instaproning engagements a matter of TOTAL LUCK.

Two enemies meet 50-75m apart at opposite ends of an alley/street.

You have three choices

A. Run to cover and find another way to engage.

B. Insta-prone to achieve the best settle time and max accuracy and wait a couple seconds to shoot accurately your enemy.

C. Quickly shoulder your weapon and start putting fire on your target and hope that deviation gods smile upon you.


Right now, B is the correct answer

C should be the way we engage, but since the cone of deviations are set SO large, it takes skill out of the equation completely and simply makes it luck. If deviation cones weren't so large after WASD movement and insta-proning wasn't SO advantageous.

.75 had it right. Instaproning wasn't the best option, aiming at your target quickly was. .8 has bad instaproning issues, .85 will have it even worse.

random pants wrote:I think you guys are going WAY over-board with deviation. All you need is .756 deviation with a bit more settle-time at longer ranges and a bit more deviation from scope-sway.

That's what this is. It's 0.756 type accuracy with longer settle times, the maximum in which is only required for long engagements.

random pants wrote:Two enemies meet 50-75m apart at opposite ends of an alley/street.

That's a pretty wild west scenario considering that it assumes neither of them have support. Not to say it doesn't happen though, which is why I'll critique your options

random pants wrote:A. Run to cover and find another way to engage.

I'd put rounds down range then run to cover and report the enemy location on voip.

random pants wrote:B. Insta-prone to achieve the best settle time and max accuracy and wait a couple seconds to shoot accurately your enemy.

If it was totally 1v1 like you said, I'd crouch since it's only 75m and proning increases the chances of taking a shot to the head. Coupled with the fact I wouldn't want a fire delay after getting up.

random pants wrote:C. Quickly shoulder your weapon and start putting fire on your target and hope that deviation gods smile upon you.

retarded option.

random pants wrote:Right now, B is the correct answer

Nothing you listed short of A with my modifications was the "correct" answer. Bottom line is that you can't analyse how it will play out by mentioning one specific ,pistols at dawn, scenario.

random pants wrote:.75 had it right. Instaproning wasn't the best option, aiming at your target quickly was.

The difference in accuracy between crouch and prone is extremely similar between the posted values and 0.756. I've said this a million times in this thread. Prone is only slightly more accurate to promote its use for longer engagement ranges.

[R-DEV]Jaymz wrote: If it was totally 1v1 like you said, I'd crouch since it's only 75m and proning increases the chances of taking a shot to the head. Coupled with the fact I wouldn't want a fire delay after getting up.

Err... Hows that? Does your head get smaller when your crouched? Believe me, the chanse is just as big, exept the other guy has a bigger chanse of hitting you elcewhere on the body. Wich isnt all that good

when ur prone there's only one target they are shooting at...ur head

when u are crouched/standing they are more inclined to go for the bodyshot

As long as your head is in his "deviation circle" you have the same probability of being hit there. Even if you are standing on your head with your feet up your ***.

Waaah_Wah wrote:As long as your head is in his "deviation circle" you have the same probability of being hit there. Even if you are standing on your head with your feet up your ***.

Making yourself a smaller target is the only advantage for going prone at medium range with these changes. The main problem with instaproning was when it was done in CQB, which would not be useful with these changes.

Why not? You make yourself a better target while your accuracy gets better.

egh...more deviation? i understand your reasons and i agree, but this starts to weigh against tactics and teamwork, the whole concept of tactics is to out maneuver your enemies. even now its starting to be like, ok i've maneuvered my enemy but now i need to wait 5 seconds before i can hit my target right across the street. and i die just because he hasnt been moving and just sitting in a corner shooting.

as for the instaproning problem...i dont see the issue, if theres a guy who turned the corner and theres no cover for me, i hit the dirt and shoot like crazy.

now unless of course you mean for the deviation advatages of going prone, in which case that needs to be fixed

Bringerof_D wrote: ok i've maneuvered my enemy but now i need to wait 5 seconds before i can hit my target right across the street.

Right acroos the street being a maximum of 100m or so? No, you won't have to wait five seconds.

Bringerof_D wrote:egh...more deviation? i understand your reasons and i agree, but this starts to weigh against tactics and teamwork, the whole concept of tactics is to out maneuver your enemies. even now its starting to be like, ok i've maneuvered my enemy but now i need to wait 5 seconds before i can hit my target right across the street. and i die just because he hasnt been moving and just sitting in a corner shooting.

Thats because everyone in the squad is so focused on killing. If you got a squad of 6 people that out manouvred the enemy 3 of them should just start spraying away (unless you want to sneak around with your squad, and if thats the case your argument doesnt hold up. Because if you did a good job you could take a good shot on the enemy without him knowing your there ) and get the enemy guy all confused. The other 3 should "charge" up the accuracy and take accurate shots at him. Theres no reason for 6 people to lay still, charge up the accuracy and take there shots.

I hope now will be better , what we have now in pr is this : - the time for zoom and stabilizing and then shooting from ak
âÌÏÎÄÉÎËÁ Ó ËÁÌÁÛÏÍ :: ÷ÉÄÅÏ ÎÁ ÓÁÊÔÅ RuTube

^ LOL

^ Lol x2, "Hit the deck chaps!"

These deviation changes sound pretty good on paper, but they really aren't that fun to play with and I think that's what the devs are missing out on. You can't make the game more fun by putting changes in this that nobody understands and then writing in forums so that people get it. I kind of got what they were saying, but then I played pr for a bit and was like no this isn't actually fun and engaging like they said it will be. Maybe the battles are going from a 3 shot engagement to a 15 shot engagement, but that doesn't make the game more immersive when you're actually playing it, it makes it more frustrating imho. Everytime I get a miss with crosshairs on the enemy I just get more and more put off from the game, it wouldn't be so bad but the fights are so long I just can't but get really annoyed after the 6th missed shot or so like c'mon man get it together soldier you can kill this guy easy. Imo the devs should put a HAT aiming system on the rifleman scopes so people know when to shoot and when they will miss.

how many shots are fired in war and how many actually hit something/one?

Dr2B Rudd wrote:how many shots are fired in war and how many actually hit something/one?

in war you have better graphics and feel that you realy shot somebody
in game - you see man and think: " Hmmm ok should i start shooting at him ?......emmm nah he is on walk and chanced stabilize and hit him is very small ...ok then i will just walk and try to find closer target enought for knife attack cos in close combat most of chances i will see my bullets flying all around 2 meters from enemy wich standing 5 meters from me"

[R-DEV]Jaymz wrote:Full six seconds is only required if they're 250m out.

Then I must assume that these values would be for 125 meters:

Reaches the minimum after 3.3 seconds?

Stand = 0.35m
Crouch = 0.25m
Prone = 0.20m

or am I wrong?

Dr2B Rudd wrote:how many shots are fired in war and how many actually hit something/one?

The weapons are accurate and if someone actually aimed at people with their guns they would kill them. The reason so many shots are fired is because the enemy is not seen or behind cover and soldiers will shoot anyways. As soon as the enemy reveals himself it only takes a second for a marksman to bring him down.

If the accuracy in project reality was boosted up, people might behave like real soldiers do and hide and take cover, because if they don't they will die. In this version though people clearly see each other engage for 10 rounds and nobody gets killed, so there's nothing to be afraid of. There's no fear that if you pop your head out for a few seconds, it's subject to be blown off.