Project Reality Forums

Menuen wrote:Blayas if something is realistic but it's destroying balance of the game, It shouldn't be implemented. Also remember most of older players and new players are playing PR because it's a game balanced between realism and arcade.

``traverse realistic Speeds are a great addition the depth of the game, and is more a peculiarity which makes it different vehicles each other, causing the players to develop strategies and different forms of use for each of them as it happens with their real counterparts, additions so the realism and immersion are always a good thing, always are in addition to the asymmetrical balance, and always make the most interesting and immersive game.``

There are MANY ways to create balance, and deleting realistic characteristics should not be one of them.

Haven't been following this thread, so excuse me if this has been in here already.

Check out the mobility of this M1 Abrams. Now there is some turret acceleration, I will agree, but not to the level of this new patch.

(Skip to 1:15 for turret demo.)

I wish people would stop putting forward the realism argument, as neither system is more realistic than the other.

Navo wrote:I wish people would stop putting forward the realism argument, as neither system is more realistic than the other.

+1

As long as you can control your turret with a mouse it is impossible to make the turret control realistic.
Only with a Joystick it could be close to be realistic.

The only thing that is really different now from before is that your max rotation speed is limited regardless of mouse sensitivity, which is a good thing.
Everything else is just 'getting used to it'.

MADsqirrel wrote:+1

As long as you can control your turret with a mouse it is impossible to make the turret control realistic.
Only with a Joystick it could be close to be realistic.

The only thing that is really different now from before is that your max rotation speed is limited regardless of mouse sensitivity, which is a good thing.
Everything else is just 'getting used to it'.

The new system has brought two new features, a realistic (limitations in traverse speeds of the towers, which adds more variety and depth to the game) and an unrealistic trait that is the subject of most complaints (the inertia that need and will be fixed)

Acceleration that's the main problem. Oh guy's did you used panther ? Gun on it is doing 360 slowly, when you turning vehicle to left or right Also why turret moves from target, when rest of vehicle is moving. In newer tanks gun is staying in one place all the time. In PR its moving to left and right. It is possible to implement this or no ?

Observe here , the rotation of the tower start at 0:06 and end at 0:12 , what do give 60deg / s, if is wrong ingame , require the devs a fix .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnhJxmZ8idA


An interesting thing that I found , read the description


https://youtu.be/Nioha290818


What you call tower stand on target , it is known as FCS (Fire control system) The FCS system electronically controls the calculations for engagement , including elevation and lead , both vertical and horizontal stabilization , could be implemented fully or partially depending on the needs , and in fact partially implemented the missing correction for engagement can be supplied manually ... even in the case of fcs failure. , the devs have worked on this, but I do not know what the current their opinion on the subject.

https://youtu.be/3NjLbCASfro

blayas wrote:Observe here , the rotation of the tower start at 0:06 and end at 0:12 , what do give 60deg / s, if is wrong ingame , require the devs a fix .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnhJxmZ8idA


An interesting thing that I found , read the description


https://youtu.be/Nioha290818


What you call tower stand on target , it is known as FCS (Fire control system) The FCS system electronically controls the calculations for engagement , including elevation and lead , both vertical and horizontal stabilization , could be implemented fully or partially depending on the needs , and in fact partially implemented the missing correction for engagement can be supplied manually ... even in the case of fcs failure. , the devs have worked on this, but I do not know what the current their opinion on the subject.

https://youtu.be/3NjLbCASfro

I thought PR "simulated" the lack of Fire control system by having easy-control turrets. In real life, a modern MBT commander can search & click on new target and the turret fires at it on queue. Pretty easy if you think about it.

In the last patch Developers killed APC. The rotation of the turret has a very large and not realistic delay and inertia. The video "youtube" APC turret spin faster and better. Maybe it was the answer to balancing development APCs and infantry, but this is too much. APC in reality is constructed as deadly weapons, and now he was rubbish. Remaining kill helicopters and rename the game, because the name is now out of place... Best regards and excuse the language...

Steeps wrote:Haven't been following this thread, so excuse me if this has been in here already.

Check out the mobility of this M1 Abrams. Now there is some turret acceleration, I will agree, but not to the level of this new patch.

(Skip to 1:15 for turret demo.)

Case closed. Devs revert back to 1.3.1.0, please.

Inertia is an unwanted byproduct of realistic traverse speeds code, if this by-product is resolved, there is no need to return to the old model.

In-game the m1a2 does 360 in 8s to 9s while the tank in the footage takes between 10 to 11s, I guess more tweaking is required.

so-long as the mouse aim doesnt overshoot 90+degrees that's fine ^_^_^_^ its the stopping and turning the other way which is the problem, not the turn speed

It wont overshoot if you don't move the mouse an excess amount.

Let's say the turret's max turn speed is 36 degrees per second and you try to move it faster than that, maybe 50 degrees per second. This means that by the time the turret has done a full 360 in 10 seconds, it'll still keep moving for that excess amount you inputted with your mouse, which is an extra 140 degrees... 50-36=14, 14x10=140

Solution: stop trying to turn it faster than it's allowed to go and it'll stop right there the second you stop moving the mouse. Simple.

thats not a solution, thats poor input processing

[R-COM]Hulabi wrote:It wont overshoot if you don't move the mouse an excess amount.

Solution: stop trying to turn it faster than it's allowed to go and it'll stop right there the second you stop moving the mouse. Simple.

There's absolutely no player feedback on what's "an excess amount" though. Are we supposed to memorize every vehicle's turret rotation rates and how fast that correlates to moving your specific mouse across the desk?

[R-COM]Hulabi wrote:It wont overshoot if you don't move the mouse an excess amount.

Let's say the turret's max turn speed is 36 degrees per second and you try to move it faster than that, maybe 50 degrees per second. This means that by the time the turret has done a full 360 in 10 seconds, it'll still keep moving for that excess amount you inputted with your mouse, which is an extra 140 degrees... 50-36=14, 14x10=140

Solution: stop trying to turn it faster than it's allowed to go and it'll stop right there the second you stop moving the mouse. Simple.

So you add a deviation indicator to eliminate the guesswork and make it easier for new players to get the hang of it, but now you add this to turrets and we have to guess how fast the turret is allowed to go and not move faster than that? How does that add up?

I have to change my DPI settings every time I get in a different vehicle now. I used to never change it at all.

I dont really post often on here but coming from someone who is actually qualified turret operator gunner for a LAV3 and has opperated a LEOC2 and a LEO2A4/6 Turret when the gunner traverses the turret as fast as possible and then releases the stick the turret comes to a violent hault, not simply continuing for several degrees off target. If this game is willing to go to the UK and record sounds of vehicles and is truely PROJECT REALITY lets make it realistic and use joystick controls and inputs WASD. Its a solution that will not "NURF" the armour assets as people have discussed here. Lastly, stop with the "buthurt" comments and dismissing people who are making valid points or who are speaking from experience. it just shows a lack of understanding on your part and defeats the purpose of a discussion.

[R-CON]UTurista wrote:In-game the m1a2 does 360 in 8s to 9s while the tank in the footage takes between 10 to 11s, I guess more tweaking is required.

[R-COM]Hulabi wrote:It wont overshoot if you don't move the mouse an excess amount.

Let's say the turret's max turn speed is 36 degrees per second and you try to move it faster than that, maybe 50 degrees per second. This means that by the time the turret has done a full 360 in 10 seconds, it'll still keep moving for that excess amount you inputted with your mouse, which is an extra 140 degrees... 50-36=14, 14x10=140

Solution: stop trying to turn it faster than it's allowed to go and it'll stop right there the second you stop moving the mouse. Simple.

Just what they need, but 27 pages too late?

I honestly find the recent dev's or con's responses to be very shallow and making no valid points. 8-9s instead of 10-11s? Who cares? This isn't ArmA, just revert it back to how it was. You have 28 PAGES of replies stating that the change is not justified in the least. No one is going to turn the turret 360 degrees in one second and pull the trigger on a target accurately. Who was the dev that came up with this idea?