Project Reality Forums

I suppouse that 100% is not too much real, but if you are good shooter you shouldent play with the luck.
Rigth now if you are aiming to a stopped target your firts shot does not go to the objetive(or may I must learn to aim yet).

75% gets my vote.

[R-CON]Wolfe wrote:Allow me to clarify:

I am still attempting to refine the new deviation model. The poll question is specifically trying to determine the ability to track a moving target at 100m. If that target is running, should you hit it every time? Or should you have a chance to miss?

One of the problems with the game is the total lack of weapon sway. Players are able to move their cursor over a target and track it with pixel-perfect precision. At the very least, the cursor should waver a bit to simulate real life, even if that wavering doesn't perfectly match where the bullet will go, but at least it would make a mental impact on the shooter by changing the thought from "my pixel is on his head, I should always hit" to "my pixel is moving, so I might miss".

So don't read anything into the question that isn't there. 100 meters. Prone. Single shot. Target is moving left/right across your field of view. Should you hit every shot?

There you go, perfect. That is exactly how the question should of been asked in the first place (did you edit your first post)? Apparently, I'm 'retarded', so thinking about what the questioner is trying to achieve is wrong. I must always assume best case scenario, which are usually the simplest questions to answer so thereby negating a need for a poll in the first place. But it makes it easier for the 'retarded' people to answer I suppose.

I know the deviation argument has been done to death, joined in May 2005, but I'm still operating under the pretence that my in-game weapon is a tool. A tool you come to rely on. Deviation adds a random effect to this tool, thereby rendering it unreliable at times and therefore not as fun as it could be. Why should you hit one time and not the next under the same conditions?

I like the deviation as it is now, based on the WASD movement. Scope movement, like with the sniper, could use some tweaking. If I'm tracking a sprinting target, them perhaps some deviation could be introduced. Jogging target, I, personally, would like no deviation as the M16 is a very accurate weapon and this is still a game.

My vote would be 85-90% of the time. Just to be pedantic and perhaps retarded.

Perhaps this question is posed at the wrong audience. From my perspective it looks as though people are pulling values out of thin air. Virtually no-one has described which direction the target is moving, the size of the target, the speed of the target, if the burst setting is used or not and whether the firer is supported or not; in their estimates. Instead people are drawing from their video game experiences (which we know aren't a substitue for reality). As I see it, it is hardly fitting for this opinion poll to be an indicator of realism.

Whoops looks like I voted too. Guess that puts me in with the rest (and makes me a damn hypocrite too).

'[R-CON wrote:nedlands1;745979']Instead people are drawing from their video game experiences (which we know aren't a substitue for reality). As I see it, it is hardly fitting for this opinion poll to be an indicator of realism.

'[R-CON wrote:Wolfe;741599']Using a standard issue riflemen (M16, for example) in scope mode, and assuming you are stationary, and also assuming that you have 0 ping, how easily should you be able to hit a moving solder at a range of 100 meters?

I think the poll is about ingame experiences. I never had lag problems in RL (while being sober).

100% aimbot power.

KkarlArsch wrote:I think the poll is about ingame experiences. I never had lag problems in RL (while being sober).

You mean "0 Ping" doesn't mean "No Bullets Pinging off structure around you"?

If deviation is only introduced off WSAD movement, then that needs to be rethought. Someone hiding in window should not be able to go from prone to stand without some serious deviation introduced. Much more so than small WSAD movements... Of course, without some kind of indication, I don't know if this does or does not happen. I do know I got killed over the weekend by someone who did this.

I picked 50%, because that is what I get from experience playing, 50% hits on moving targets. So it takes an average of 4 shots to bring down a moving, non zig zagging target.

All this talk or implying that the rifles are too accurate, and maybe they are on paper, but in use people still can't hit jack, certainly not more than 50% accuracy on first shots on moving targets and even on stationary heads peeking up over things.

The more code that gets put in limiting accuracy only NERFS THIS GAME! The human factor is the biggest and most important, and I haven't been seeing the masses being crackshots.

true you cant factor in the % that you'r shitting yourself that you're going to lose everything you hold dear and also the % of rocks digging uncomfortably into your crotch on this dirty mound the % of how ballsed you are from running across the battlefield...

And so on

Laying down on a target range with "0 Ping" a trained soldier will hit the moving target 99.98% of the time, However in combat with all those variables.... Pah I'd say 75% would be a reasonable estimation

I voted 100%.

If I have practised this game enough, and I reflexive and alert enough, there is no reason why I shouldn't be able to hit a moving target in good conditions. In real life, I wouldn't miss a prepared shot on a roo bouncing at 30km/h at half that range again (nearly always on the first shot too), and that's with an iron sighted bolt action rifle. I admit that's no subsititute for combat experience, but then I've never been formally trained.

Let's face it, while stress might cause mistakes in real life, simulating them with whacked out deviation is pretty harsh when BF2 hitreg already makes half my hits miss for no reason anyway.

Truism wrote:I voted 100%.

If I have practised this game enough, and I reflexive and alert enough, there is no reason why I shouldn't be able to hit a moving target in good conditions. In real life, I wouldn't miss a prepared shot on a roo bouncing at 30km/h at half that range again (nearly always on the first shot too), and that's with an iron sighted bolt action rifle. I admit that's no subsititute for combat experience, but then I've never been formally trained.

Let's face it, while stress might cause mistakes in real life, simulating them with whacked out deviation is pretty harsh when BF2 hitreg already makes half my hits miss for no reason anyway.

You are right here truism but if you shot with an M16 standard issue then you probably wouldn't. They are a POS compared to your bolt action hunting rifle, you are shooting with a semi precision rifle much more similar to a marksmen rifle. Remember that. A standard issue M16 has an MOA of 4-6. A gun you purchase at the store has about 2 MOA. If it was 4-6 you would certainly take the piece of junk back. 1 MOA=approx 1 inch of deviation at 100yds. 2 inches at 200yds.

VipersGhost wrote:You are right here truism but if you shot with an M16 standard issue then you probably wouldn't. They are a POS compared to your bolt action hunting rifle, you are shooting with a semi precision rifle much more similar to a marksmen rifle. Remember that. A standard issue M16 has an MOA of 4-6. A gun you purchase at the store has about 2 MOA. If it was 4-6 you would certainly take the piece of junk back. 1 MOA=approx 1 inch of deviation at 100yds. 2 inches at 200yds.

See now if you guys would make this clear when you ask the question, it would be much easier to get a consensus.

Even 4-6MOA at 100m, that is still only 4-6 inches on a man, who is more than 4-6 inches thick from the side or from the front or back. Even at 200m that is 8-12 inches, which is about the size of a mans torso. So you should still be hitting men no problem at 100m.

Wonder what an ak would rate as

SiN|ScarFace wrote:See now if you guys would make this clear when you ask the question, it would be much easier to get a consensus.

Even 4-6MOA at 100m, that is still only 4-6 inches on a man, who is more than 4-6 inches thick from the side or from the front or back. Even at 200m that is 8-12 inches, which is about the size of a mans torso. So you should still be hitting men no problem at 100m.

MOA basically gives you the radius of your deviation. Your pattern in real life would be 8-12 inches wide at 100yds and 16-24in at 200yds etc.

VipersGhost wrote:MOA basically gives you the radius of your deviation. Your pattern in real life would be 8-12 inches wide at 100yds and 16-24in at 200yds etc.

Even 8-12 would = hits on a man @ 100m.

Care to explain how you get 8-12inches at 100m instead of 4-6? I don't follow.

SiN|ScarFace wrote:Even 8-12 would = hits on a man @ 100m.

Care to explain how you get 8-12inches at 100m instead of 4-6? I don't follow.

Diameter=2x the radius. MOA(minute of angle) is the radius...so multiply it by two an viola you have the overall diameter of your shot pattern. 8-12 inches is fairly substantial actually. No one is arguing that you wont hit a man @ 100yds...its just the frequency at which it happens.

btw, fantastic scene in "The Dark Knight".

VipersGhost wrote:Diameter=2x the radius. MOA(minute of angle) is the radius...so multiply it by two an viola you have the overall diameter of your shot pattern. 8-12 inches is fairly substantial actually. No one is arguing that you wont hit a man @ 100yds...its just the frequency at which it happens.

btw, fantastic scene in "The Dark Knight".

It's my understanding that when you say a rifle shoots X MOA groups, X measures the total arc size, not the radius.

Sniper rifle Accuracy
The most common way of describing the accuracy of the sniper rifle is to measure average diameter of the circle, that may be drawn arount the group of bullet holes in the target. Usually, the rifle is fired from the rest with groups of the 5 (or 3) rounds, and then every group is measured. Average group diameter is the most common criteria of rifle accuracy.
Today, the thin line between "good" and "poor" accuracy is usually laid in 1MOA group. 1 MOA (Minute Of Angle) is measure of the angle, that formed with the triangle with muzzle as the top and the group as the base. 1 MOA is roughly equivalent to 1 inch group diameter at 100 yards (91 meter), or to 2 inches at 200 yards etc. So, if you read that rifle XXXX shooths 1MOA groups, it means that at 300 yards this rifle could place 5 or so bullets in circle of no more than 3 inches in diameter. Many modern sniper rifles, when loaded with right ammunition, could shoot 0.5MOA, or even 0.3MOA, which mean 1 inch groups at 300 yards, or 2 inch (50 millimeters!) groups at 600 yards (550 meters).

Source: Modern Firearms - Sniper Rifles - Intro

Some AK rifles are considerably more accurate than others. The old AK-47 and the Bulgarian AK types, with their heavy milled receivers, as well as Yugoslav and late AK-74 rifles from Russia, with their heavy 1.6 mm stamped receivers, are usually said to be capable of accuracy of two MOA. Most AK type rifles, with thin 1.0 mm stamped receivers, are less stable as the bullet goes through the barrel and there is consequently greater random vibration and oscillation before the bullet leaves the muzzle, and are typically only capable of approximately six MOA accuracy. Most Western military rifles are capable 2 MOA or better.

The AR15 comes in two different barrel twist rates. This can cause problems since the different twist rates in the barrel can effect accuracy and bullet performance. (See Note A) However an AR15/M16 has the edge in accuracy, generally scoring 1-3MOA (Minute of Angle) or approximately 1"-3" at 100 yards. The average AKM will generally do 4-6 MOA with AK47's doing about 3- 5MOA.

Modern studies done by the United States, the former Soviet Union, former Warsaw Pact countries, NATO ( North Atlantic Treaty Organization) show that modern combat is generally at ranges less than 300 meters. So accuracy of 4-6MOA is sufficient since that would cover 12"=18" at 300 yards or the average size of an adult male torso.

POLYTECH National Match AK made in China. Is made with a forged/milled receiver and an air gauged heavy barrel. The wood on it has a slightly different cut to it and the accuracy of these national match AK's equals that of the AR15. With handloading I have been able to get .8-1.1 MOA. This rifle is chambered only in 7.62x39mm

Avtomat Kalashnikov

Thats what I thought.

100 meters, prone position... 100 % hit