Realistic recoil?

Harrelson · Post by **Harrelson** » 2007-08-03 06:54

i have fired an ak47 once and the closest rifle that matched that one in-game was the insurgent officer weapon back in .4

it felt right

NaZar3TH · Post by **NaZar3TH** » 2007-08-03 07:19

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5N9rIlfVzfI

some ak and m16 recoils there...

like seriously, its only a .223 in the m16. that dont have anywhere near the recoil of a 7.62x51 (G3).

its stupidly easy to do recoils in this game, ive done them myself in my mod.

meh...

MajorPwnag3 · Post by **MajorPwnag3** » 2007-08-03 15:34

Being how weak the M-16s are compared to many of the other armies' rifles and how they don't yet have any scoped variants (I know, it's coming in .7), I think it would be a good idea to get rid of the sticky recoil. I've fired an AR-15 and its recoil was about the same as the M-16 had in .4. I remember playing PR back then and always using the M-16 because it felt exactly right to me. However, since it is getting a scoped variant, the recoil really should be a little exaggerated, so nobody pulls off a 500m dolphin-diving headshot, like in vBf2. The unscoped versions, however, could definitely benefit from less pronounced recoil, and the sticky recoil just seems unnatural. I mean, wouldn't it take more effort to hold a 4kg rifle way up in the air than to let it fall back to a level position, anyway?

Kruder · Post by **Kruder** » 2007-08-03 15:43

Good idea,signed...

SuperTimo · Post by **SuperTimo** » 2007-08-03 16:45

I agree that its stupid that the gun stays up after recoil in game. i use an L98 with cadets regulary (exactly the same as an L85 only its not automatic but still firest the same round) with that u dont get that much recoil it does go up but it almost certianly doesnt stay there, if it does then there is somthing wrong with you as you push the butt right into your shoulder to stabilise the rifle.

Soulis6 · Post by **Soulis6** » 2007-08-03 21:22

.....

I'd just like to thank Vipers Ghost for actually reading the other posts past the first page on this thread first, instead of just posting their response to the OP.

pasfreak · Post by **pasfreak** » 2007-08-03 21:34

you know, there is a little thing called gravity, too.

so sticky recoil should be removed. you literally have to "hold" your gun up to match current game physics.

The Great Danton · Post by **The Great Danton** » 2007-08-03 22:36

I agree, this is a significant problem with the mod that takes away from the realism and game play.

Murderous · Post by **Murderous** » 2007-08-04 00:20

So you guys want the rifle to return to the position of the last fired shot automatically? Maybe I am just misinterpreting. I am active army, and believe me, the way that the rifle displaces in PR does a good job in making you aim again before your second shot. You cannot fire single round bursts into the same bullet hole over and over again. I think PR's system does a good job at making you wait and aim if you are aiming at a specific point. And the M-16/M4 does jump UP and RIGHT when you fire. Firing a 3 round burst, you aim at the legs at the target at 75 meters and: first round hits as aimed, 2nd hits right torso, 3rd round passes over the right side shoulder of target.

3===SPECTER===3 · Post by **3===SPECTER===3** » 2007-08-04 03:15

Murderous wrote:So you guys want the rifle to return to the position of the last fired shot automatically? Maybe I am just misinterpreting. I am active army, and believe me, the way that the rifle displaces in PR does a good job in making you aim again before your second shot. You cannot fire single round bursts into the same bullet hole over and over again. I think PR's system does a good job at making you wait and aim if you are aiming at a specific point. And the M-16/M4 does jump UP and RIGHT when you fire. Firing a 3 round burst, you aim at the legs at the target at 75 meters and: first round hits as aimed, 2nd hits right torso, 3rd round passes over the right side shoulder of target.

Yes, im not in the military, but the so called "Sticky recoil" in game is supposed to show how in real life you have to take aim again so to speak. even if in RL a gun doesn't hang up there after a shot, you would still have to aim at the target agian if you want to hit it. Know what im sayin?

The Great Danton · Post by **The Great Danton** » 2007-08-04 03:53

If recoil was made more realistic, the shooter would still have to re-aim for his target after firing his shot. This change would not be hard to implement and would not alter game play. The notion that making recoil more realistic would make it possible for a player to hit the same spot over and over without re-aiming is ridiculous. There would still be deviation and the shooter would still need to aim. This would simply get rid of the unrealistic climbing that occurs when a gun is fired.

Post by **KingofCamelot** » 2007-08-04 07:02

Maybe its just my personal belief, but are you guys really that lazy?

In game you can counter recoil by pulling down on your mouse, which simulates tensing your arms, etc, in real life. Basically to me it sounds like you guys don't want to have to actively counter the recoil in-game.

You've all said it yourselves, that in real life it is you that counters the recoil and brings the gun back to where it was before...so why should it be any different in-game, why should the character do it for you when its a pretty simple task to do with a mouse?

Just my 2 cents. Does not represent any other Dev's opinion.

Lucid Nightmare · Post by **Lucid Nightmare** » 2007-08-04 07:15

[R-DEV]KingofCamelot wrote:Maybe its just my personal belief, but are you guys really that lazy?

In game you can counter recoil by pulling down on your mouse, which simulates tensing your arms, etc, in real life. Basically to me it sounds like you guys don't want to have to actively counter the recoil in-game.

You've all said it yourselves, that in real life it is you that counters the recoil and brings the gun back to where it was before...so why should it be any different in-game, why should the character do it for you when its a pretty simple task to do with a mouse?

Just my 2 cents. Does not represent any other Dev's opinion.

+1

Harrelson · Post by **Harrelson** » 2007-08-04 16:57

that doesnt make sense to me

its like having a soldier jump then having to figure out how to come down for himself

if i press space bar, i jump and come down then surely if i pull the trigger and send a round i should expect the weapon to "behave" itself

VipersGhost · Post by **VipersGhost** » 2007-08-04 17:57

IRL you dont have to pull a gun back down!? On full auto yes, but there isn't very much full auto in this game due to realistic engagement ranges. So again 80% of the game is single shot where you DONT pull the gun down IRL....and 20% of the game where IRL you would have to pull the barrel down.

IMO it seems counter intuitive to make a recoil model that supports 20% of the realistic game and leaves the other 80% out to dry with an unrealistic recoil model.

CAS_117 · Post by **CAS_117** » 2007-08-04 18:19

It can't be that hard to have the barrel fall back down could it?

Waaah_Wah · Post by **Waaah_Wah** » 2007-08-04 23:17

I agree that the gun should come back down something like 40-60%. With that said i dont have big problems with aiming now. The recoil seems a little unrealistic though

Rico11b · Post by **Rico11b** » 2007-08-07 21:01

I kinda think what they are trying to say is that only half of the recoil is being played out in game. Meaning that when a round is fired from the weapon it causes the muzzle to climb a bit, but then gravity does not do it's job and pull the muzzle back down again. You fire a round the muzzle will move to the rear and upward, then it will fall. Hopefully (with the help of gravity) it will fall back near the original aiming point but not always.

It will only come back very near to the original aiming point when the weapon is properly held and the body is allowed to accept the recoil without flinching. That's almost impossible to have the aiming point come back to where is was unless you are in a good prone supported position, and allow the recoil to happen and flow through you without fighting it. Also you can't anticipate the recoil cause that will throw your accuracy way off. But there isn't any way to model this kind of stuff in game.

pasfreak · Post by **pasfreak** » 2007-08-07 22:26

Yeah, IMO gravity does most of the work for you.
take a look at the Baur H-AR in 2142. Recoil in PR needs to be like that. People will still have to pull down full auto, to offset recoil, but seriously. We're not lazy, were being practical. Recoil just needs to be normal.

If it comes back down about 3/4s, simulates gravity but forces the shooter to reacquire target

AnRK · Post by **AnRK** » 2007-08-08 13:46

caboose wrote:
3. It fires a 5.56. Not a bazooka round.

Sorry to be pedantic but wasn't the whole point of bazookas to have no recoil whatsoever? See what your getting at though. It'd be nice if there was some way of having the natural balance of the weapon during firing but also having to control it during sustained fire.