Project Reality Forums

AlonTavor wrote:"reeeeeeeeee why did you ruin my obscure exploit only 30 people in the community know about"

I on the other hand thank the DEVs for this machine gun/AR deviation change on the other hand, this is very realistic as i explained in detail(previous page, previous post). It provides a change for me and more guys to not get mowed down by an un-realistic player who holds trigger down to wipe a full squad.

I need to make sure this gets seen by a DEV, in relation to how much worse it could be for Smek realistically so we can give Smek and everyone else the best and closest to reality we can. MOSTLY meant as a joke but would be funny and really cool if you added representations of it.

"Recommend to the DEVS, to incorporate barrel sag, barrel rise, barrel rifling wear for BAD PERMANENT KIT negative deviation and visible effects of bent up barrels to justify to the user visually what he did. People will think and learn the 3 major concepts of barrel wear to use it better the next time. Just because he hates the new deviation so much. Lets innovate with reality incorporation further to play with Smeks feelings and show how cruel reality can be without knowledge to use tools right."


So CAN you visually bend a barrel model if under certain conditions of firing and a certain amount of rounds for certain time? Cyclic fire needs to be exchanged every 800-1000 rounds so lets start sagging it around there. Even if we dont get saggy barrel visuals just have the failure of the deviation bar show that it wont get closer with a red bar in middle. I already have had a glitch especially on Vietnam where my M60 or PKM over heats cause i was on a turret overheated or the previous user was, the chinese newer machine gun kit also overheated on me. I thought it was pretty funny i couldn't fire it.

I understand that this is asking for a lot and could lead to potential glitches on things you worked hard on to create the kits with out all this extra bull mess. This is mostly a joke so hopefully Smek understands its could be worse, i want it to be "worse" so i can survive people who just take AR kit and dont know how to use it.

AlonTavor wrote:"reeeeeeeeee why did you ruin my obscure exploit only 30 people in the community know about"

it was a feature

Grump/Gump.45 wrote:I on the other hand thank the DEVs for this machine gun/AR deviation change on the other hand, this is very realistic as i explained in detail(previous page, previous post). It provides a change for me and more guys to not get mowed down by an un-realistic player who holds trigger down to wipe a full squad.

I need to make sure this gets seen by a DEV, in relation to how much worse it could be for Smek realistically so we can give Smek and everyone else the best and closest to reality we can. MOSTLY meant as a joke but would be funny and really cool if you added representations of it.

"Recommend to the DEVS, to incorporate barrel sag, barrel rise, barrel rifling wear for BAD PERMANENT KIT negative deviation and visible effects of bent up barrels to justify to the user visually what he did. People will think and learn the 3 major concepts of barrel wear to use it better the next time. Just because he hates the new deviation so much. Lets innovate with reality incorporation further to play with Smeks feelings and show how cruel reality can be without knowledge to use tools right."


So CAN you visually bend a barrel model if under certain conditions of firing and a certain amount of rounds for certain time? Cyclic fire needs to be exchanged every 800-1000 rounds so lets start sagging it around there. Even if we dont get saggy barrel visuals just have the failure of the deviation bar show that it wont get closer with a red bar in middle. I already have had a glitch especially on Vietnam where my M60 or PKM over heats cause i was on a turret overheated or the previous user was, the chinese newer machine gun kit also overheated on me. I thought it was pretty funny i couldn't fire it.

I understand that this is asking for a lot and could lead to potential glitches on things you worked hard on to create the kits with out all this extra bull mess. This is mostly a joke so hopefully Smek understands its could be worse, i want it to be "worse" so i can survive people who just take AR kit and dont know how to use it.

You dont know how to play anything in this game anyways

UncleSmek wrote:it was a feature

yeah like dolphins

transpilot wrote:You dont know how to play anything in this game anyways

he is better than you

That's enough now. Next off-topic or flame post gets a nice infraction.

I agree. It's one thing to prevent AR sniper rifles. But it's another when you readjust your aim slightly and your bullet sprays 90' orthogonally

while most complaints concentrate on the exaggerated sustained fire deviation increase,
both changes take away from the uniqueness and specialised role the AR fills, reducing infantry gunplay variety.

faster deployment deviation settle pushes AR into a more mobile, less base of fire direction.

higher sustained fire deviation punishes good positioning with medium to long range fields of fire (punishes base of fire)
and ability to supress (supression is a function of accuracy, currently peeking a set up AR to shoot back is a viable option [as first shot accuracy is the same, and follow up accuracy comparably decayed]).

both push AR closer to assault rifles in effective use.


to the realism people: the ARs role on the squad level is as the main casualty inflicting weapon. suppression doesnt just happen, its the believable threat of the ablility to kill the enemy through accurate fire.
furthermore a rifles effective range under combat conditions is generally estimated at 300m, while the AR pushes the the envelope of effective fire out to 500m+ (which the recent nerf doesnt reflect at all).

trying (and failing) to implement wonky realism to individual gunplay at the cost of unrealistic behavior on the macro level (dodging/pushing through MG fire; peeking/ countersniping ARs with carbine) has already failed int the past.

macro level realism (rewarding fire and maneuver tactics, base of fire, sutained supression ...) trumps everything else and is one of the core principles that make PR that immersive and successful.

LimitJK wrote:while most complaints concentrate on the exaggerated sustained fire deviation increase,
both changes take away from the uniqueness and specialised role the AR fills, reducing infantry gunplay variety.

faster deployment deviation settle pushes AR into a more mobile, less base of fire direction.

higher sustained fire deviation punishes good positioning with medium to long range fields of fire (punishes base of fire)
and ability to supress (supression is a function of accuracy, currently peeking a set up AR to shoot back is a viable option [as first shot accuracy is the same, and follow up accuracy comparably decayed]).

both push AR closer to assault rifles in effective use.


to the realism people: the ARs role on the squad level is as the main casualty inflicting weapon. suppression doesnt just happen, its the believable threat of the ablility to kill the enemy through accurate fire.
furthermore a rifles effective range under combat conditions is generally estimated at 300m, while the AR pushes the the envelope of effective fire out to 500m+ (which the recent nerf doesnt reflect at all).

trying (and failing) to implement wonky realism to individual gunplay at the cost of unrealistic behavior on the macro level (dodging/pushing through MG fire; peeking/ countersniping ARs with carbine) has already failed int the past.

macro level realism (rewarding fire and maneuver tactics, base of fire, sutained supression ...) trumps everything else and is one of the core principles that make PR that immersive and successful.

very well said limit

transpilot wrote:You dont know how to play anything in this game anyways

You must be joking or not reading what I say, i typed this.

Cyclic fire is just holding the trigger down for one minute. Then Rapid fire and sustained fire. This is literally where i learned the rest of how to shoot once i found grazing fire on YouTube. Click ctrl + F and search for words you want to jump to on page I.E Cyclic, makes learning and finding what you want to know that much faster. https://www.globalsecurity.org/milit...-22-68/c05.htm

LimitJK wrote: to the realism people: the ARs role on the squad level is as the main casualty inflicting weapon. suppression doesnt just happen, its the believable threat of the ablility to kill the enemy through accurate fire.
furthermore a rifles effective range under combat conditions is generally estimated at 300m, while the AR pushes the the envelope of effective fire out to 500m+ (which the recent nerf doesnt reflect at all).

trying (and failing) to implement wonky realism to individual gunplay at the cost of unrealistic behavior on the macro level (dodging/pushing through MG fire; peeking/ countersniping ARs with carbine) has already failed int the past.

macro level realism (rewarding fire and maneuver tactics, base of fire, sutained supression ...) trumps everything else and is one of the core principles that make PR that immersive and successful.

I understand as i already said the full role of the AR. It is in the link to Combat Techniques of Fire here. https://www.globalsecurity.org/milit...-22-68/c05.htm

In contact situation its scan, suppress, back enemy off, killing is last. That is how i role, everything suspicious is scrutinized or shot for looking or sounding suspicious. Everything you said STILL requires realism to use the weapon, that is the whole point i am getting at. Real life bursts for control. Many types of engagements where you prolong it for fun or being the distracting squad while another squad overwhelms using the distracting squads noise or you do the fire team splitting for base of fire to push.

The complaints about the AR (user) causing missing or dying is tied into another aspect, people fail to do with lack of team cohesion of all squads.. While somebody can understand the fire team aspect within a single squad, they dont understand this teamwork among the squads, the problem is people using a single squad to attack objectives. The AR is outnumbered and if he isnt he lacks knowledge. Not enough people shooting, its just the deployed AR, the new accuracy makes it harder for them to use the weapon taking long to kill giving enemy more chance to return fire.

Wrap the COMBINED ARMS BREACH concept in this video around all objectives in the game, teamwork between assets and infantry with the way its meant to be played. Save "bleeding" burning tanks with logi set in view at the distance it takes to save a burning tank. Look what we have, use it to every capability to save your team or hurt enemy. Tank COAX included, BIG aspect from video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ-sCT_ ... =23&t=188s

nice graph lol

You need to just go practice with the AR. There is absolutely nothing that changes its "roll" for fuck sake.

Quit being so dramatic.

Its different, not useless.

You can track targets all you want at range with no deviation penalty, even from standing. Its easy to use.

dcm wrote:I agree. It's one thing to prevent AR sniper rifles.

Its the whole thing... to prevent AR-Snipers. Thats why these people are so annoyed at it.

Being killed with one bullet from an iron sight PKM at 200m through a window while prone is not how it should work. (yes that happened)

dcm wrote:But it's another when you readjust your aim slightly and your bullet sprays 90' orthogonally

That doesn't happen.

I could track targets and shoot them as they were walking at 300meters, killing them with 1 burst.

There is no change in deviation from fallowing moving targets.

Even from standing I was taking out walking targets at 250meters with 1 trigger pull.

sweedensniiperr wrote:nice graph lol

mans a genius

LimitJK wrote:while most complaints concentrate on the exaggerated sustained fire deviation increase, both changes take away from the uniqueness and specialised role the AR fills, reducing infantry gunplay variety.

Exaggerated how? By how much? How are you able to tell?

LimitJK wrote:faster deployment deviation settle pushes AR into a more mobile, less base of fire direction.

Didn't know everybody liked waiting 10 seconds until your weapon was settled in when in a CQB situation.

LimitJK wrote:higher sustained fire deviation punishes good positioning with medium to long range fields of fire (punishes base of fire)

If anything it could be argued that it's less effective, not punishing. On the other hand, it offers a substantial increase to mobility changes, especially for GPMGs which didn't have that cheeky "let's switch to undeployed mode to not increase deviation for the deployed mode" exploit Smek was claiming to be peak game design.
Base of fire also does not mean "stationary", it's a term for the supporting element of an assault, and, if necessary, the element will readjust their positioning if necessary.

LimitJK wrote:and ability to supress (supression is a function of accuracy, currently peeking a set up AR to shoot back is a viable option [as first shot accuracy is the same, and follow up accuracy comparably decayed]).

Given that deployed LMGs and GPMGs have much better accuracy values, almost no recoil as well as movement-induced deviation not being a factor when holding a position, I don't see that claim holding up at all. How reliable you're able to engage said machine gunner will always depend on your own accuracy too. If you hit, great, now hit him 2 more times while "struggling" with the recoil, meanwhile the MG can just fire away. Peaking an MG less lethal than before, ok, but it's not like you're going to win that kind of engagement repeatedly.

LimitJK wrote:to the realism people: the ARs role on the squad level is as the main casualty inflicting weapon. suppression doesnt just happen, its the believable threat of the ablility to kill the enemy through accurate fire.
furthermore a rifles effective range under combat conditions is generally estimated at 300m, while the AR pushes the the envelope of effective fire out to 500m+ (which the recent nerf doesnt reflect at all).

Ok, so, I have no idea where those ranges are coming from and I imagine it's just the usual number toss to "prove a point", yeah? Much like others here were really quick to claim something without any kind of source to back up their claims. Wanna see how if I'm putting your numbers up against something a little more substantial?

The Bundeswehr claims the following "effektive Kampfentfernungen" for their main infantry arms relevant to this discussion:
G36: 500m
MG3: 600m
MG4: 600m
MG5: 600m

And though I personally believe that if the MG3 is considered effective at 600m, the MG5 might very well reach up until 800m, the sharp disconnect between the effective ranges of these weapon systems you're tossing out simply isn't there. Partially because LMGs/GPMGs are fired from an open bolt which makes them less accurate than a closed bolt system. Partially because the hit reliability is also contingent on the type of fire. If you're firing aimed single shots, well, then that's one thing, but the game promotes this type of behaviour by having noticeably higher accuracy than assault rifles in this regard. If you're firing bursts, well, the game promotes that too because the increased deviation per shot, the cap and the time it takes to decay the FireDeviation subset is less than what you'd see on the assault rifles.

The only thing you can't do anymore is hold mouse 1 and the game will do the rest. I understand that removing this easy mode changes ARs drastically for the worse, but anybody with some experience behind one of these things(eg. CptFuture, Zwilling) knows that a machine gun is only accurate when firing short bursts of about 3-5 rounds. And depending on range every shot past the first or second is not going to land on a human size target. Which is very much accounted for now.

Really, the only reason why it's such an issue is because 1) it's a change from the past, and we can't have that, and 2) because you and others here have expectations with regards to the ease in killing a target that these weapons physically are having issues to meet even when eliminating the human element.

Is this a frontliner doesnt accept critic thread?

1. Deployed lmg could be a bit more accurate on full auto
2. Gpmg has be point accurate with the first 5 bullets, now only the first bullet hits

3. Its still a game and not a rl simulation so pls dont come with Bundeswehr doktrines

When Limit makes up numbers to prove a point that's ok, but when I set the record straight that's a no-no?

Yeah, no, forget about that.

I have zero interest in further explaining myself when you're so quick to dismiss my reasoning without ever considering the validity of it. Or tell me X is not applicable or "I dIdN't KnOw Pr WaNtEd To BeCoMe MiLsIm." And you're wondering why I "cannot appect criticism"? You want to call this a discussion? Pah! - This is anything but that, it's a set of people ranting that they hate change and will claim whatever is necessary to get me to revert to the previous values. Within not even two weeks you yourself have changed your opinion three times from

"The AR got nerfed a bit too much. 5% less accuracy would have been enough"
to
"I think that the ar is still too op.
Make it less accurate and give more surpression effect."
to
"1. Deployed lmg could be a bit more accurate on full auto
2. Gpmg has be point accurate with the first 5 bullets, now only the first bullet hits "

Alright then, who's opinion should I implement? The Niko from the 18th of March who told me I was way off, the Niko from the 25th of March who told me that it still wasn't nearly enough of a nerf, or the one from around twelve hours ago who wants maybe just a bit less deviation when firing full auto?

Frontliner wrote:The Niko from the 18th of March who told me I was way off, the Niko from the 25th of March who told me that it still wasn't nearly enough of a nerf, or the one from around twelve hours ago who wants maybe just a bit less deviation when firing full auto?

In a case like this always go for the middle

Exactly.
It takes a bit of time to notice all issues.
But as long as u listen to any Niko ur doing something right

transpilot wrote:Is this a frontliner doesnt accept critic thread?

1. Deployed lmg could be a bit more accurate on full auto
2. Gpmg has be point accurate with the first 5 bullets, now only the first bullet hits

3. Its still a game and not a rl simulation so pls dont come with Bundeswehr doktrines

With what they are saying, it seems to me the complainers above have only used the AR kit a few limited times...

... then immediately came on these forums to complain about it in the most extreme and emotional way possible.

Frontliner is actually explaining everything in detail and giving the factual numbers and info about what is really happening. Which I appreciate.

A few cry babies occupying a thread on these forums going on and on about the world ending should not indicate that there is any problem with the changesr.