A serious discussion about weapon deviation in 0.85

[sakils2]

You're joking right?

CQB right now in .85 is spray and pray. It's totally unrealistic and a nightmare.

I would rather play counterstrike source than repeatedly go up against OPFOR in CQB.
xXRich07Xx is online now Reply With Quote

I haven't been into army, I presume you haven't iether, maybe they (Soldiers) don't make accurate shoots when theres a baddie 5 metres away from them. But hey, I'm not a military expert.

To be honest, I like CQB in 0.85

[xXRich07Xx]

I haven't been into army, I presume you haven't iether, maybe they (Soldiers) don't make accurate shoots when theres a baddie 5 metres away from them. But hey, I'm not a military expert.

To be honest, I like CQB in 0.85

So you like spraying and hoping that a bullet will hit? You like running around in circles with the enemy as if you were dancing? You like not being able to hit a guy that is less than a meter from you?

I'm not in the military. However my stepdad is.
oh I know they can make accurate shots at 5 meters without staring down their sights.

How do you think they clear rooms? If they stared down their sight while doing that, they would have almost no peripheral vision, and would thus get killed.

[$kelet0r]

deviation in .85 is just about perfect, .8 was retarded,the people saying point and click is too easy well in the real world thats what you do point, aim and shoot and if a soldier cant hit a target 200 metres away then hes pretty screwed in a warzone. Hardly anyone every plays the game realisticlly no matter how much you try to force the player to play the way you want them to they'll find a way round and you'll be back here with another thread like this complaining.

But to take your point - 0.8 created a situation where if you saw a sniper on Muttrah, you called over you whole squad, pointed out the target, called out over voip "3,2,1, open fire!" and said sniper was consumed in bullets. Now in 0.85, you can simply outsnipe the sniper by kneeling and firing purposefully - the longer you kneel the more accurate you become.

Or in 0.8, if two soldiers were coming down a street and you spotted them at range, knowing that your fire would suppress them or wound them only, you got the light machine gun to light up the target marker and the rest of the squad fired on the now suppressed and prone targets for the kill. In 0.85 trying to do the same yesterday with a PKM resulted in a quick bullet in the forehead just after opening fire.

Sustained suppressive fire is gone after actually being useful in 0.8 - suppressive fire is not blasting a window for a second so that the enemy crouches for a few seconds like some PR players think it is, it is deliberate aimed fire designed to deny access or ability to engage over a sustained period

The problem with 0.8 that everyone complained about was the CQB where it literally was turn based roll the dice combat - crouch, wave to the enemy and wish him luck, wait, fire, wait some more, fire...oooh headshotted him, lucky me! If the maximum deviation was much much tighter, that problem would have been fixed - prone diving was dead when crouching was made just as accurate (a great decision btw).

Average maximum viewdistance
RL = 1000m+
PR = 500m (pixellated)

Average medium/long range rifle combat distance
RL = 200m (increased where machine gun and heavier caliber weapons available)
PR = 100m

Effective lethal range of M16
RL = 400m
PR = 400m

M16 MOA (standard issue, military ammo)
RL = 5
PR = about the same as rl

There is the problem right there - where 0.8 had it right. Unlike a game like Arma, PR is stuck with BF2's limitations and scaling the combat for infantry proved in 0.8 that the gameplay is better (aside from CQB obviously). If the effective range of the M16 in PR was halved by making the real MOA at 400m the ingame MOA at 200m, (doubling the minimum deviation in simplistic terms), the gameplay would be better for it - your avatar is still lethal after a long settle time but where combat is fast and furious, engaging in numbers is a necessity rather than a luxury or a hindrance to your personal score as it is now.

[Tirak]

But to take your point - 0.8 created a situation where if you saw a sniper on Muttrah, you called over you whole squad, pointed out the target, called out over voip "3,2,1, open fire!" and said sniper was consumed in bullets. Now in 0.85, you can simply outsnipe the sniper by kneeling and firing purposefully - the longer you kneel the more accurate you become.

Or in 0.8, if two soldiers were coming down a street and you spotted them at range, knowing that your fire would suppress them or wound them only, you got the light machine gun to light up the target marker and the rest of the squad fired on the now suppressed and prone targets for the kill. In 0.85 trying to do the same yesterday with a PKM resulted in a quick bullet in the forehead just after opening fire.

Sustained suppressive fire is gone after actually being useful in 0.8 - suppressive fire is not blasting a window for a second so that the enemy crouches for a few seconds like some PR players think it is, it is deliberate aimed fire designed to deny access or ability to engage over a sustained period

The problem with 0.8 that everyone complained about was the CQB where it literally was turn based roll the dice combat - crouch, wave to the enemy and wish him luck, wait, fire, wait some more, fire...oooh headshotted him, lucky me! If the maximum deviation was much much tighter, that problem would have been fixed - prone diving was dead when crouching was made just as accurate (a great decision btw).

Average maximum viewdistance
RL = 1000m+
PR = 500m (pixellated)

Average medium/long range rifle combat distance
RL = 200m (increased where machine gun and heavier caliber weapons available)
PR = 100m

Effective lethal range of M16
RL = 400m
PR = 400m

M16 MOA (standard issue, military ammo)
RL = 5
PR = about the same as rl

There is the problem right there - where 0.8 had it right. Unlike a game like Arma, PR is stuck with BF2's limitations and scaling the combat for infantry proved in 0.8 that the gameplay is better (aside from CQB obviously). If the effective range of the M16 in PR was halved by making the real MOA at 400m the ingame MOA at 200m, (doubling the minimum deviation in simplistic terms), the gameplay would be better for it - your avatar is still lethal after a long settle time but where combat is fast and furious, engaging in numbers is a necessity rather than a luxury or a hindrance to your personal score as it is now.

I hate to break it to you, but soldiers are trained to shoot and kill things. If a sniper finds himself in position to be shot by an Assault Rifle, the problem lays with the sniper, not deviation. If two guys run across a street without covering each other, the problem is in the player, not the deviation.

[AnRK]

the main problem for me in CQB is that kits with scopes get pwned up pretty bad really

removing the indenciary grenade from scope kits and using teh extra slot for the CQB sight on the scope would be really really awesome...

That's a great idea, if you ask me there's too many of those sodding grenades anyway, even medics get them which pushes it a little too far for my liking. If that were in game the iron sights would still be better in CQB then the alternate sight for scopes and it would also increase the usefulness of the kits that had incendiaries in their loadouts. If you ask me the only spawnables with them should be officer, specialist and no scope rifles.

[sakils2]

So you like spraying and hoping that a bullet will hit?

No, I use my sights. When I have a scoped weapon I can make accurate shoots without using scope.

You like running around in circles with the enemy as if you were dancing?

Ermm... No. I haven't seen that in PR.

You like not being able to hit a guy that is less than a meter from you?

Well, thats why you need to aim...

I'm not in the military. However my stepdad is.
oh I know they can make accurate shots at 5 meters without staring down their sights

This was meant to be sarcasm: I haven't been into army, I presume you haven't iether, maybe they (Soldiers) don't make accurate shoots when theres a baddie 5 metres away from them.

[xXRich07Xx]

No, I use my sights. When I have a scoped weapon I can make accurate shoots without using scope.

You can make accurate shots without using your scope? Well, that's a tall tale if I've ever heard one.


Ermm... No. I haven't seen that in PR.[/QUOTE]

Have you been under a rock?

Well, thats why you need to aim...

You just stated that you can make accurate shots without aiming.

Rrrrright.

Please stop wasting my time. Honesty is the best policy.

This was meant to be sarcasm: I haven't been into army, I presume you haven't iether, maybe they (Soldiers) don't make accurate shoots when theres a baddie 5 metres away from them.

There was nothing sarcastic about that statement. Stay on topic. Because this was irrelevant.

[$kelet0r]

I hate to break it to you, but soldiers are trained to shoot and kill things. If a sniper finds himself in position to be shot by an Assault Rifle, the problem lays with the sniper, not deviation. If two guys run across a street without covering each other, the problem is in the player, not the deviation.

I hate to break to you but snipers cannot set up out of assault rifle range in PR except maybe on Kashan Desert - which has no infantry combat anyway. That is the issue.
Surely the removal of headshots in 0.85 indicates that there was an inherent problem with the new deviation - a problem that did not exist in the previous release as bullets had to be aimed centre-mass to hit at most ranges whereas now you can line up the head, pause and kill. It's not like 0.8 did not reward carefully aimed shots - you just had to prepare them and make sure you had a position that gave you the advantage if your first shot missed.

Ingame my avatar is now too lethal - killing too easy. When players praise the accuracy saying "I created an ambush and killed a whole squad", then something isn't working.


Btw Rich - don't make things personal, challenge the post not the poster

[xXRich07Xx]

Btw Rich - don't make things personal, challenge the post not the poster

Simply stated because he is contradicting himself and cannot make up his mind.

[General_J0k3r]

why not remove snipers then? i would definitely like that

[Alex6714]

Should make everyone either roflmen or medics.

[Jay]

No, I use my sights. When I have a scoped weapon I can make accurate shoots without using scope.

Ermm... No. I haven't seen that in PR.

Well, thats why you need to aim...

I actually agree with this guy; I like the CQB right now. I found that in 0.8 I'd be dancing around people, but in 0.85 it usually doesn't take more than a couple bursts to kill an enemy on the ground in front of me (if I'm moving, he surprised me, etc.).

Although, I'm usually a medic, so I have iron sights if I need them.

[Chubben]

Ingame my avatar is now too lethal - killing too easy. When players praise the accuracy saying "I created an ambush and killed a whole squad", then something isn't working.

Thats why I stopped playing and changed over to IRacing Pr no more atleast until 0.9 and if they improve it.

Also i like that most people saying that 0.85 is the best have a hard time making a sentence without lame, stupid or the likes, just tells me why you should never listen to the masses.

[Katarn]

I hate to break to you but snipers cannot set up out of assault rifle range in PR except maybe on Kashan Desert - which has no infantry combat anyway. That is the issue.

I just went 35-0 on Operation Archer as a sniper. My spotter went 9-2. With increased view distances, which happens every release incrementally, this entire argument is null about scale.

The reason why players get killed is once again down to player behavior. In 0.8 the "long firefights" people were appeased because of long firefights. In 0.85 the "realistic behavior of weapons" people are appeased because they can hit people they shoot at, within reason. There's no reason there cannot be both, and the Project Reality team does not have to change a single thing. If people took cover in 0.85, firefights would last longer. If people actually maneuvered and didn't do stupid shit, they wouldn't die so damn quickly. It's the "I can poke out around my cover and shoot the guy because I'm a better marksman than him" mentality that gets people killed. How do you not die once during a long round? Increase deviation on weapons? No. Get behind something when people are shooting at you. The reason why I didn't die during my sniper round is because when accurate fire came at me, I ran about 200m (behind cover) before trying to find where it was coming from. I only did not take cover from incoming fire when it was inaccurate AK fire coming from 600+m out.

[X3DChris]

If an entire squad gets taken out by one player I'd say the problem is not with the engine but the squad . I have been out numbered many times on the field and had my *** handed to me but there are those magic moments when I defied the odds and have quite succusfully
taken out a whole squad alone just by adapting and over coming . Leave the deviation alone go play an mmorpg if you like the luck of the draw, this is still and an action first person perspective game at it's heart.

P.S. guns in the real world are very dangerous and lethal in the hands of a trained soldier.

I like having the fear back on the battlefield, .08 removed most of it for me .

[Pariel]

This deviation is the best I've seen so far, and I've been playing since .6.

I think most of the people who are complaining about CQB need to realize that just holding down the trigger and pointing it at the enemy is not enough. When I'm within a couple feet of my target, I fire 2-3 round bursts and realign. I don't just sit there trying to hold the gun on target. If you can't use finger control, switch to single shot and shoot as fast as you can. This forces you to keep aiming at your target.

More often than not, the problem is not the deviation -- everyone in the game suffers the exact same from it. The problem is you if you can't win in CQB, or anywhere else. Instead of asking for game changes to suit your play style, you should be attempting to become better players, which means learning some semblance of tactics and using them. The failure of players to actually work together and be cohesive is a far bigger problem than deviation has ever been.

*EDIT* Essentially similar to what Katarn said, for those of you who prefer not to read repeats.

[$kelet0r]

The reason why players get killed is once again down to player behavior. In 0.8 the "long firefights" people were appeased because of long firefights. In 0.85 the "realistic behavior of weapons" people are appeased because they can hit people they shoot at, within reason. There's no reason there cannot be both, and the Project Reality team does not have to change a single thing. If people took cover in 0.85, firefights would last longer. If people actually maneuvered and didn't do stupid shit, they wouldn't die so damn quickly. It's the "I can poke out around my cover and shoot the guy because I'm a better marksman than him" mentality that gets people killed. How do you not die once during a long round? Increase deviation on weapons? No. Get behind something when people are shooting at you. The reason why I didn't die during my sniper round is because when accurate fire came at me, I ran about 200m (behind cover) before trying to find where it was coming from. I only did not take cover from incoming fire when it was inaccurate AK fire coming from 600+m out.

That argument is just as void though because you just have to shoot at their exposed head. It is very rare that you will ever engage a target who is not near or behind some form of cover and long firefights don't have a chance to even begin - they end by aiming at the enemy soldier, pausing, and firing, and hitting. And I hate, even from a Dev, the snide superiority of lecturing me on how to play the game. Get behind cover you say? What do I do to get the long metal fire stick in my hand to shoot? Knock it off please.

Your avatar was extremely lethal in 0.8 if you were patient and especially if you worked as a proper squad, not the "moving in the same 100m radius as your squad leader" idea of teamwork. What happens now is that assault rifles (because bringing into the argument a rare kit such as sniper rifles is absurd) achieve MOA accuracy simply by not pressing WASD - which means about half a foot or less between bullets at 100m. People wonder why they removed headshots? It's because using those numbers, at out to 200m you have a 50-50 chance of scoring a one shot one kill ... that's in a combat situation. Range data should not even apply - studies conclude that marksmanship deteriorates by factors of full normal numbers for professional trained soldiers. That's 2*MOA, 3*MOA etc. as opposed to 1.x*MOA in PR 0.85 after 5 or so seconds

[Alex6714]

How about you make it so that you can´t hit anything unless the enemy soldier is laser painted by someone else. That is good for maybe your idea of teamwork, makes it so you won´t be frustrated by being killed by someone on his own, and most of all is realistic.

[Katarn]

$kelet0r, you're not looking for an answer, you're looking to *****. If you actually looked at - I don't know - the numbers, you'd see that your argument is so far off from the truth that it's ludicrous.

[sentinel]

What ever the deviation is now or will be, people should just adapt to them or get pwned. If you can fire m4 with a scope accurately up to 200m while standing up, so what. It doesn't mean that you should do it in open terrain, you are still a big target. Just leave them where they are now and let the evolution for better tactics to begin.

And CQB is just fine, but more fixed bajonets would be nice.