Project Reality Forums

Im pretty sure the ACOG used in PR is a x4 version of the ACOG.

The L85A2 is a for me a great CQ weapon. It have a slower rate of fire than its other 5.56, 5.8, 5.45 cousins. It makes it very controllable and the recoil is extremly predictible compared to the M4 and M16. You can put much more accurate fire down range in a higher rate of fire than the M16. When I go full auto/burst at medium range the bullets fly everywhere while the L85 is more precise.

Because of the slower rate of fire ypu also conserve ammo. The ammo for a AR-15 series rifle just disappears from the clip and most of the rounds dosen't hit any way.

M16 full auto: 1kill/clip.
M16burst: 2kills/clip.
L85: 3kills/clip

This is what I experience atleast.

Yea. I believe you are right DavviZ. IRL, the L129A1 has a 6x ACOG, and due to my lack of modding knowledge, I don't know how easy it would be to make a 4x ACOG a 6x ACOG?

I agree with you, the L85 is by far an accurate weapon to engage with at close to medium range on full auto not being bias or anything because I'm British :L

Salvo wrote:It's an AR-10 variant, yes. But it is not an AR-10, if you know what I mean

and yes. On top of the 6x ACOG is a close combat sight, which is exactly what I was saying :L but, even if it's something like a 6x ACOG variant and a scope of some sort, it doesn't really matter

Being that it is based off an AR-10, forgive my modding knowledge as I know nothing :L but couldn't it be easy to just modify the existing AR-10 from the Canadians and give it the British Army "touch"?

Well, you called it a "hybrid" sight... Hybrid sight =/= close combat sight, but whatever.

Hybrid sight/close combat sight on top of an ACOG = Same type of thing. But yeah. BF2 engine won't allow it anyway, lol.

I won't even bother to explain it to you any further.

Okay then?

Salvo wrote: But yeah. BF2 engine won't allow it anyway, lol.

don't be too sure

AnimalMother. wrote:don't be too sure

I see what you did there.

1.0 right?

I believe so, from what was decoded of the 1.0 alpha changelog that was released BUIS are in for 1.0

They have been banging on about it for a while guys!

So much misinformation about deviation mechanics in this thread t.t

The reason the G36, C6 and iron sights behave so well has to do with the firing animation, not so much the deviation code. This holds for the particularly disobedient weapons as well that have particularly violent 1p animations that mess around with your camerabone and the like.

Mind expanding on that a bit Truism? I just read it as 'recoil difference' but I'm sure you meant something more.

PPSH rape gun comes to mind, it doesn't have a firing animation so it's brill to kill with!

What you register as recoil has a number of different components. The two main categories are visual recoil and deviation. Firing increases deviation which increases your cone of fire. Each shot adds a certain amount to the cone and time between actions reduces the cone of fire. All weapons in a given class have the same deviation values, though other factors like rate of fire and potentially visual recoil may influence deviation without significant changes to user behaviour.

The second component is the visual recoil. BF2 animations work using a series of points on models called bones which you move to create animations. The two most relevant to discussion on recoil are the camera bone and the sight bone(s). Other animations on the weapon have no effect on a firer's ability to put follow up rounds on target, they are purely aesthetic, but sights an camera have a very pronounced effect on a firer's accuracy. Camera bone defines where the centre of your screen is, violent camera animations disorientate firers, and though I've never confirmed it, I strongly believe they influence deviation firstly by moving the point of aim, and secondly by triggering mouse input to correct the point of aim. Sight animations do not affect the point of aim (it is always the centre of the screen) but they make it much harder for a firer to put multiple shots on target because they can't accurately assess their real point of aim (since the sights don't align).

The L85/86 has particularly pronounced sight and camera animations, that's why people struggle with it in my opinion, while others don't. These animation variations between weapons are really good because try help to differentiate between otherwise extremely similar weapons and reduce the need for super punitive and unintuitive deviation to control unrealistic firer behaviour. Some weapons have too little animation in my opinion though.

Brilliant post, thankyou. I've always wanted to learn more about how the deviation/aiming works.