Project Reality Forums

Perhaps the sway would only be triggered by physical movement (WASD), or triggered by firing.
The swaying animation would last for the estimated amount of time until deviation reached it's minimum. (Physical movement would cause a long sway, whereas a firing sway would only last a shorter amount of time)

The reticle wouldn't reflect the actual point-of-aim for players, but it would still provide a visual deviation. (The reticle could swing off from where the bullets would actually land, but in close quarters it would be minimal enough to ignore while walking because you could aim accurately enough in those small spaces since the sights would only sway so much. Over longer distances, the sway would become more prominent.

If the ring in which the reticle would 'sway' matched the ring of max deviation (I guess at 300m, since they are 'zeroed' for it), then the reticle could sway independently and would match the amount of deviation a bullet could have at that range (of course, the bullet will still not come out where the reticle is pointed, but it would be much harder to aim when the reticle is off the 'center' of the screen, since you could try to fire where the reticle is but 'deviation' would cause you to miss since you haven't bothered to settle.


Preferably, the reticle overlay would actually stay in the middle of the screen, and the landscape viewed through it (and where the gun would actually be aimed) would sway, so that players can't just put a mark on their screen to tell where the bullets should land even when swaying.

IMO, a sway-pattern would act most basically as a 'visual' form of deviation, where it still causes the player to shoot off target, only it becomes more 'obvious' as to why, and will make players feel a bit more comfortable knowing when to shoot.



Just shooting the breeze, not sure if any of the above is possible, or whether it'd be good for gameplay.

Celestial1 wrote:Perhaps the sway would only be triggered by physical movement (WASD), or triggered by firing.
The swaying animation would last for the estimated amount of time until deviation reached it's minimum. (Physical movement would cause a long sway, whereas a firing sway would only last a shorter amount of time)

The reticle wouldn't reflect the actual point-of-aim for players, but it would still provide a visual deviation. (The reticle could swing off from where the bullets would actually land, but in close quarters it would be minimal enough to ignore while walking because you could aim accurately enough in those small spaces since the sights would only sway so much. Over longer distances, the sway would become more prominent.

If the ring in which the reticle would 'sway' matched the ring of max deviation (I guess at 300m, since they are 'zeroed' for it), then the reticle could sway independently and would match the amount of deviation a bullet could have at that range (of course, the bullet will still not come out where the reticle is pointed, but it would be much harder to aim when the reticle is off the 'center' of the screen, since you could try to fire where the reticle is but 'deviation' would cause you to miss since you haven't bothered to settle.


Preferably, the reticle overlay would actually stay in the middle of the screen, and the landscape viewed through it (and where the gun would actually be aimed) would sway, so that players can't just put a mark on their screen to tell where the bullets should land even when swaying.

IMO, a sway-pattern would act most basically as a 'visual' form of deviation, where it still causes the player to shoot off target, only it becomes more 'obvious' as to why, and will make players feel a bit more comfortable knowing when to shoot.



Just shooting the breeze, not sure if any of the above is possible, or whether it'd be good for gameplay.

You mean the sway will be a visual cue for deviation?

Spec_Operator wrote:But it'd make aiming more difficult in general, as it would still move at the same speed even when you're completely still and prone afaik

Wrong, Fh2 has larger sqy when standing, smaller sway when crouching and no sway when prone iirc

They should implement this, its realistic and would be valuable to gameplay, having the sights still only heightens the fact that your looking at a black screen zoomed in with an overlay of the sights in the middle. Just a little bit of movement gradually getting closer to being stationary.

Double Doppler wrote:You mean the sway will be a visual cue for deviation?

Yes and No. It will act as a visual cue as well, but it's primary function would be a second, more visually represented, form of deviation.

Let's say that you are aiming at an enemy soldier, and you have minimum deviation, and therefore no sway. You are aiming at his head; your scope's reticle (crosshair) is pointing at it, and if you fire your shots should land there (ignoring deviation).

Now, you tap W to walk a step forward. Now, you are at maximum deviation, and your scope starts to sway; but if you shot, your bullet would still land on his head (again, ignoring deviation). You wouldn't be able to tell very well that you were aiming at his head from a distance because the scope would sway around.

If you were walking around, then scoped in, your reticle would sway all around and you could still aim your shots decently in close quarters, but it would be hard to pinpoint where your bullet would hit, especially at long range.

This in combination with normal deviation already in-game creates a semi-realistic 'sway' where the sway acts as both a visual cue for deviation levels, and as a visual deviation that makes it hard to aim after moving significantly. This visual deviation as well as normal deviation will make it so that you should know pretty well that you are accurate or not, as well as making it hard to aim on a target beforehand, making it so that your enemy can't just sprint 10 feet, turn, aim at your head, and then just wait 3 seconds. They would sprint, turn, and attempt to aim at your head but the reticle would sway all around until their deviation settled, so then they would have to aim again and then fire.

foxxravin wrote:Still it would be better than having your sight at a target and having bullets hit everywhere but on him....

The animation is not a perfect solution but imo it would be better to not have your sight at a target and miss... than having it on a target and miss....

Stop running and gunning. Want to know why automatic riflemen get so many kills? They wait. Like good automatic riflemen do. You also stay alive much much longer then just running in.

If they could do this they would have so long ago. As it is, noes.