Weapon aiming does not fit reality

[cipher]

To be fair, though, the deviation is much more reasonable than in previous versions. I just think there's much more that needs to be toned down.

[gazzthompson]

It's my fault for exaggerating, I suppose.

If you're seriously going to tell me you never have issues with clearing out a room using even an unscoped rifle, I don't know what to say. If you've never been prone and exchanged shots with another guy within 100m and missed repeatedly even though your crosshairs were lined up perfectly, I don't know what to say. As you said, I must just be terrible at this game.

I always try to play on servers that I know may have actual team coordination. But most of the time it never happens. In these cases, the sniper kit is useless. The fact that you want it removed is nothing short of entertaining, though. That reminds me of the old Counterstrike game where people would whine about campers because they get dropped by the guy in the bushes while they're runnin' & gunnin'. As for the idea that you can be a sniper and mark the map for your team...I wonder if you've ever actually tried to do this. All you're doing is putting up vague indications of contact that are invalid 30 seconds after they're put up. It just turns into a mass of redundant markers indicating the general area of hostile contact. It's even more irrelevant because everyone already know the enemy's over there; why else did you pick that position in the first place. The sniper's reconnaissance is meaningless without a full fledged mumble-operation running. Take my word for it.

As for the rest of it, a squad with 5 riflemen and a sniper has more firepower than a squad with 5 rifleman and a designated marksman. I'm not sure the marksman rifles even have more zoom than a ACOG. Try to think of it this way, in real life a designated marksman rifle has a real scope on it. The sniper rifles just simulate what an actual marksman rifle does. If someone storms our position, it's nothing to just pick another kit off the ground. There's nothing lost because if I wasn't using it, some guy would just be in the mountains with it screaming about how the medics keep reviving his kills. I know the comment about "forgetting what the squad leader says" must have flipped your switch, but I think we can agree that only 5% of games involve a squad leader that has any idea what they're doing...

The game simulates trench warfare with various factors like the suppression effect, the fact they kept the BF2 medic system, and the overdone deviation. What your xfire video didn't take into account is that if you crossed over the line of sight of a guy behind that building, you would be dropped before the full second elapsed and your sights came up. It's best to let them come to you in this game, unless you get a thrill out of being the squad getting chewed up and constantly whining about how your team "isn't doing anything". Like I said before, there's nothing wrong with that except the frustrating methods that are used and the fact that it penalizes people that had nothing to do with the bunny hoping or whatever else. I think if they left it be, and focused on the community side of PR, with things like training modes and more structure on the server side to encourage team networking, the same result could be had, while keeping rush tactics viable.

Of course ive had issues clearing a room unscoped, but the issues are fair and few between. but no, i have not been prone and missed repeatedly at a guy 100m away because i never go prone to shoot somebody.

"The sniper's reconnaissance is meaningless without a full fledged mumble-operation running. Take my word for it."

i dont have to take your word for it, i agree 100%, thats why i exclusively play on mumble servers (PRTA,TG). also i squad lead 90% of the time, im always very aggressively in my leading and constantly use "rush tactics" . they seem to work most of the time so i dont know what to say.

[Mikemonster]

Gazz, I want to play with you next time I see you - I try to SL like that and it always ends in a heroic failure. Your style is my cup of tea and i'd like to learn.


Cypher:

The game simulates trench warfare with various factors like the suppression effect, the fact they kept the BF2 medic system, and the overdone deviation. What your xfire video didn't take into account is that if you crossed over the line of sight of a guy behind that building, you would be dropped before the full second elapsed and your sights came up. It's best to let them come to you in this game, unless you get a thrill out of being the squad getting chewed up and constantly whining about how your team "isn't doing anything". Like I said before, there's nothing wrong with that except the frustrating methods that are used and the fact that it penalizes people that had nothing to do with the bunny hoping or whatever else. I think if they left it be, and focused on the community side of PR, with things like training modes and more structure on the server side to encourage team networking, the same result could be had, while keeping rush tactics viable.

My method of Sl'ing at the mo is to take defendable structures, and leap-frog the map. I believe (could be wrong) that that simulates a real battlefield though to be honest. Although when I started SL'ing in PR my style was basically to try to Blitzkrieg the opponents, which hardly ever worked (my squad would usually make it there, killing half the enemy squad, but then we'd all get picked off at CQB by people hiding in rooms.

CQB irritates me because I see it as a stalemate. Take two good players, put them on opposing teams, stick them on a floor of a T-building, and the one that wins will be the most patient one. but i'm beginning to think this is fairly realistic. That said I managed to lonewolf-kill an enemy squad the other day on Falleujiah ina 'dive' server. Basically I killed the last two guys by going prone and covering a doorway with my AK. The AR that I shot last knew where I was and knew I was out of nade range, so he just 'Deployed' and side-stepped into my fire (the med-kit was inside the room I was in, he couldn't have revived anyone).

I suppose part of the problem is the wall/bullet physics in BF2. You can't just shoot through some drywall to get to a camper. (although Grenadiers are a VERY nice tool to have).

[Shaheed]

Like i said before i like the idea of the deviation system in pr, but i have to agree with cyphers first post.
PR is still a FPS, not roleplay-game. i find out that u can dominate infantry-fights if u use the right tactical behavoir, the right rhythm between moving, hideing and camping and of course the right rhythm when u are aiming and shooting. but i thing there are still to much situation, especially in infantry-fight at close and middlerange, where luck and camping is more effectiv than hard-earned aimingskill. Second example are the aa - rockets used at dogfight from jets and choppers. just camp high, wait, have luck u see the enemy first ----> 80 % win. no skill only luck. back to topic i think the deviationsystem have to be tuned or recalibrate so that skill will most of the time win against luck. and for every one who will now start to discuss thats not counterstrike or quake or what ever..... it's still a FPS!! this means aimingskill is just one of the most important skills and if some one is more skilled then u accept it and practice and don't cry for deviation so u stand a chance to luck him down.

[RealKail]

The deviation system in its current form works for open medium to long range fights. However, as has been stated, it's horrible for CQC fights. When you're close enough to headbutt your opponent and your shots are still missing because of the over-tuned deviation, that's unrealistic and highly frustrating.

[declan54321]

The deviation system in its current form works for open medium to long range fights. However, as has been stated, it's horrible for CQC fights. When you're close enough to headbutt your opponent and your shots are still missing because of the over-tuned deviation, that's unrealistic and highly frustrating.

I agree.

I've just had a great idea; most weapons have a backup sight on top of the scope. This is used in CQC situations or when the the main sight is unusable. PR already has a two-mode system for weapons, for example deployed and undeployed machine-guns. What about two mode for rifles as well? One mode for long range (scope), then another weapon slot for CQB (backup sights). Create two different deviation models for each, suited to the respective environments.

What does everyone think?

[Mikemonster]

Actually today I cleaned up in CQB - Firing from the hip (using mostly a full mag) is extremely effective and 100% accurate for me at close range. Somehow I got a feel for it (and even switched from single to full auto to hit a running guy - M16 with Hamas is great!).

But I tried mopping up with a Scoped G3 (looking through the sight) on two unsuspecting guys and missed with three bursts Be wary.

but that mid-range where you both scope in and wait.. It's not ideal. I usually try to headshot them to win, mostly it seems to work. Other times I just run off which is probably also good.

[badmojo420]

I agree.

I've just had a great idea; most weapons have a backup sight on top of the scope. This is used in CQC situations or when the the main sight is unusable. PR already has a two-mode system for weapons, for example deployed and undeployed machine-guns. What about two mode for rifles as well? One mode for long range (scope), then another weapon slot for CQB (backup sights). Create two different deviation models for each, suited to the respective environments.

What does everyone think?

I think there is already a system like this in place. When you are not scoped in, you're using the backup sights.(Hip firing) Of course, the deviation and recoil are so terrible that they're currently ineffective, but I think if they were improved, CQB would improve also.

I do understand what you mean though, adding in another weapon slot for the peep sights that are on the top of the acog. But, the problem is most kits are already full in terms of usable slots. So that's really not an option, which has been stated by the devs before when this comes up.

Actually today I cleaned up in CQB - Firing from the hip (using mostly a full mag) is extremely effective and 100% accurate for me at close range. Somehow I got a feel for it (and even switched from single to full auto to hit a running guy - M16 with Hamas is great!).

Firing from hip isn't 100% accurate unless you're right in their face.

[reozm]

Will the deviation be replaced with sway in Arma II: PR? I've been wondering the same thing: how come the scope lies to me? Of course, after reading this thread I know why (silly engine).

Also, could it be possible to increase time to prone? Right now in BF2 you just hit the ground... which in real life would hurt. If they could make it take time and sway (well, not sway since it's not possible) to prone like it does in real life, there'd be a lot less "instaproning" incidents.

[badmojo420]

I recorded a short video to illustrate my frustrations with the inconsistencies when it comes to hip firing. If we're so damn accurate with the sight up while moving, why can't we be more accurate firing from the hip?



weapon: aks74u
target: 25m away

[Doc.Pock]

I agree.

I've just had a great idea; most weapons have a backup sight on top of the scope. This is used in CQC situations or when the the main sight is unusable. PR already has a two-mode system for weapons, for example deployed and undeployed machine-guns. What about two mode for rifles as well? One mode for long range (scope), then another weapon slot for CQB (backup sights). Create two different deviation models for each, suited to the respective environments.

What does everyone think?

i think its being worked on by masaq. not sure though, could be just for arma

[Saarna]

If they could make it take time and sway (well, not sway since it's not possible) to prone like it does in real life, there'd be a lot less "instaproning" incidents.

Going prone already resets deviation to maximum, so there's no hope of hitting any intended target for several seconds.

As for back ups, as far as I know they're in when they're all done (like the grenadier sights were in 0.95):

[Mikemonster]

Firing from hip isn't 100% accurate unless you're right in their face.

You're correct. But in CQB you are always right in their face, I've noticed that if I have a full mag and run into someone, in the time it takes them to sight in I have already hit them, and if they're lucky they might get one shot off at me before they are gunned down with my next two bullets (or a lucky headhsot).

I recorded a short video to illustrate my frustrations with the inconsistencies when it comes to hip firing. If we're so damn accurate with the sight up while moving, why can't we be more accurate firing from the hip?



weapon: aks74u
target: 25m away

Good video, although I believe that that is a problem with the engine, not the deviation system in PR. To me that 25m distance looked more like 10m, and that's where the confusion comes from a lot in PR I believe. BF2 engine makes things look deceptively close when they aren't (or maybe that's just the human brain under pressure/focus).

I just measured 25m on the street outside, and those groupings (for a soldier under pressure) looked about spot on for what i'd expect (although i'm no expert).

But then the range at which you were firing was medium-range to me. Close range is almost point-blank (CQB) for me, and for me long range is any range where you know you can't reliably hit the head.


Something to note, when I was using the M16A2 that Hamas use (full auto), I noticed that it had a tiny grouping on full auto. Occasionally I picked up the kit of the IDF guys I killed to patch up (they had shot me once and i'd shot them 3x), and the IDF Tavor has a HUGE grouping, it's not nearly as 'easy' to fire from the hip. (Unless it was just that the M16 is faster firing? I doubt it.. the Tavor had a larger spread and wasn;t as easy to use.. bit of both probably).


Edit: If people are struggling with close-range/hip shots, try and play a couple of hours on a fast-paced Skirmish and see how good you get. The deviation is surprisingly low at very close range. But even then it can be very frustrating. One thing i've learny is that the sights are over-rated in CQB.. If you have full auto they arent really necessary.

[badmojo420]

The 25m distance was just for reference. The point was to show the difference in bullet spread between the two modes.

The game is still very playable, and no doubt most of us have gotten used to the deviation system and have learned to compensate. I'm just wondering why we're putting ourselves through this randomness? For what purpose are we punishing hip firing? In the video you can even see how much more accurate it is to run, insta-prone, scope and fire full auto, than it is to stop and burst fire from the hip.

Deviation is a good thing to have in PR, but I just don't see the point in making it worse for hip firing.

[Vincento94]

My m16 red dot is like a sniper lol

[Arc_Shielder]

I recorded a short video to illustrate my frustrations with the inconsistencies when it comes to hip firing. If we're so damn accurate with the sight up while moving, why can't we be more accurate firing from the hip?



weapon: aks74u
target: 25m away

I honestly don't see what you're trying to prove with that video. Half the times (if not more) you're not aiming, and the couple of times you do, one you're doing it wrong. 0:53 you aim your weapon clearly below the window and at 1:30 you nail it when you finally aim relatively at its center.

So considering the only true effort you did, it went out alright considering the abrupt moves.

[Punkbuster]

Once they release PR:ArmA II it will be 100% realistic, so don't worry. It is just the BF2 engine limiting everything!

[badmojo420]

I honestly don't see what you're trying to prove with that video. Half the times (if not more) you're not aiming, and the couple of times you do, one you're doing it wrong. 0:53 you aim your weapon clearly below the window and at 1:30 you nail it when you finally aim relatively at its center.

So considering the only true effort you did, it went out alright considering the abrupt moves.

Did you even read any of my posts in this thread?

The video was made to show how much bigger the grouping is when you fire from the hip. I alternated between aiming normally and firing from the hip to show the differences.

[Mikemonster]

Hmm, I don't know about RL firing but surely firing from the hip should be less accurate than sighting in and leaning into the recoil?

I found that the extra spread is an asset in CQB, means with full auto there is a higher chance of a hit.

I am still in a love/hate relationship with deviation, I suppose we all are. (Mojo I know you arent on about deviation mate).

[badmojo420]

The spread can be a good thing sometimes, I'll agree. There have been times where I'll rush into a building and fire wildly all around and kill everything in sight. But, then there are times where you're walking by a window and an enemy pops up and you fire, only to hit the wall all around the window like some sort of cartoon sketch. I would rather reward the calculated shooters than the suicidal rushers who spray and pray.

Think, a technical's 50cal when driving around fast or sitting and taking careful shots. Driving around fast doesn't work because the weapon is too accurate. If there was deviation it would be easier to hose down players on the move. So, I'm thinking that maybe with more accurate hip firing we'll see people miss because they're not aiming, rather than missing because they got unlucky with the bullet spread.

Your point about recoil is true if we actually fired from the hip like in the movies. But, to me the 'hipfire' mode in PR represents a soldier in proper firing stance, just without his head behind the sights. You can still fire the weapon it in the same manner, you would just have to rely on watching tracers or impacts to tell if you're on target.

Edit: And if you don't agree with my idea of what not sighting in represents, this guy has about the same amount of trouble dealing with recoil when hip firing or shouldered.