Page 5 of 5
Re: Is 'scope in' in the state you want?
Posted: 2009-10-13 22:22
by Rudd
CAS_117 wrote:The problems I have with undeployed mode for rifles are these:
- Assault Rifles (usually) don't come with a bipod, which is what LMGs deployed mode are supposed to represent.
- Deployed mode for an assault rifle logically means no benefits to accuracy or recoil the way the LMGs do.
You seem to have a different idea of how the deployed mode would work.
Deployed = Like now
Undeployed = Like the LMG undeployed looking down the weapon. I.e. higher max deviation and lower time to reach min deviation.
The idea isn't about bipods or resting comfortably, its just about how the shooter intends to use the weapon, with the deviation etc reflecting that.
In reality you have two eyes. In most games, you have one. So I decided to merge the two into one, giving you the FOV of 2 eyes with the same aiming capability you would have with your single aiming eye. Could I make it so that the 1x zoom is before 4x? No, and I probably wouldn't even if I could. When I am in CQB I'd prefer to lower my scope completely rather than zoom in. At long range it really doesn't matter.
I'm sorry but imo it really doesn't work. If you had a COD4 type scope, yes you are (reasonably) realistically reflecting how the eyes regard a scope, but what you did was give a scope with 2 levels of zoom, which I just can't learn to love.
Re: Is 'scope in' in the state you want?
Posted: 2009-10-14 00:19
by CAS_117
Dr2B Rudd wrote:You seem to have a different idea of how the deployed mode would work.
Deployed = Like now
Undeployed = Like the LMG undeployed looking down the weapon. I.e. higher max deviation and lower time to reach min deviation.
The idea isn't about bipods or resting comfortably, its just about how the shooter intends to use the weapon, with the deviation etc reflecting that.
There's no physical reason for the deviation to be different is my point. This feels very arbitrary to me. (Press button to have more deviation).
Dr2B Rudd wrote:I'm sorry but imo it really doesn't work. If you had a COD4 type scope, yes you are (reasonably) realistically reflecting how the eyes regard a scope, but what you did was give a scope with 2 levels of zoom, which I just can't learn to love.
Having the area around the scope looks better aesthetically but again that only represents one eye, and even then not all that well because the outside of the screen is zoomed as well. I care more about its functionality being closer to real life.
Let me explain. In reality you have your left eye open, and your right eye open. In PR you have your left eye closed, and your right eye open. The acog only shows you what is inside the diameter of the lens but bigger by 4x. I prefer to compensate by a wide field of view.
So does it look right? No not really. Does it give the soldier the same capability he should have? Yes it does. And I can avoid the problems of switching weapons (which takes several seconds).
Re: Is 'scope in' in the state you want?
Posted: 2009-10-14 07:13
by Rudd
There's no physical reason for the deviation to be different is my point. This feels very arbitrary to me. (Press button to have more deviation).
maybe ur right, but thats a case for the undeployed and deployed modes to have the same deviation and only different views.
So does it look right? No not really. Does it give the soldier the same capability he should have? Yes it does. And I can avoid the problems of switching weapons (which takes several seconds).
Its too clunky to be the same capability, I know thats not your fault, but it is. in its current form it doens't represent what you are saying imo, and it ruins the immersion because of it.
Re: Is 'scope in' in the state you want?
Posted: 2009-10-14 21:22
by TomG101
i think the scopes a perfectly fine its the people behind them if u can hit shit is probaly cause u just laid down and u have to count for the distance its the same with the m203 if u on a hill and u want to hit a target 150m away in a valley u have to change the hight so scopes are perfect
thanks
Re: Is 'scope in' in the state you want?
Posted: 2009-12-08 15:30
by crazyivan
Viper.Sw wrote:Scope now is FAIL imo! Accuracy is shit ====> You should hit what the crosshair is pointing at when scoped. At least for like 300 meters or more. As for now you need to shoot like 3 shots after each other and hope one of em hits the target!
For CQB the scope rifle is like walking around with a zoomed in sniper rifle. Imagine a sniper using his scope while clearing a small room LOL!
To solve this issue: Add a mode to see just above the scope without zoom in like the LMG BUT to be more centered in the middle of the screen so that it is easier to aim.
And DO NOT make two weapon modes for rifle since then when switching between scope and non scope it will take an extremely long time.
I definitely agree with you about having an intermediate mode of aiming where you see above the scope. At the moment clearing the interior of buildings is very difficult because if you want accuracy (looking down scope)- speed, agility and filed of view are all sacrificed substantially. Whereas if you want speed agility and a large field of view when clearing a building (rifle in hip pos.) - accuracy is catastrophically reduced. There seems to be nothing in between and I find myself resorting to a knife or bayonet- Now this doesn't seem so realistic!
More importantly it gives a huge tactical advantage to guns that can be held in the 'intermediate mode' at the moment, namely LMG's.
Re: Is 'scope in' in the state you want?
Posted: 2009-12-08 15:39
by boilerrat
I think they are fine.
Re: Is 'scope in' in the state you want?
Posted: 2009-12-08 15:55
by -.-Maverick-.-
Make it 3D like in CODs if possible.
Re: Is 'scope in' in the state you want?
Posted: 2009-12-08 16:27
by Oddsodz
Need more deviation to stop the "Prone Spam" that still goes on. It Just wrecks my head that I use ion sights and am walking and I see a target in 30m and I kneel down and scope/aim and fire and miss. But my target has gone straight to laying down and one shots me in the same amount of time with a scope. G3 is to biggest culprit for this. I Wish to see that "Proning/diving" give even longer deviation.
Re: Is 'scope in' in the state you want?
Posted: 2010-03-27 16:24
by Jigsaw
'Smith[EEF wrote:;1306087']How about reddot & ACOG, take a look at this guys rifle at 0.44. Although it would be inbalanced it would be awsome
YouTube - Korengal Valley Fight
Lol, that is an interesting modification. Hardly standard issue though

Re: Is 'scope in' in the state you want?
Posted: 2010-03-27 16:51
by gazzthompson
its not a 'modification', its called an 'Trijicon RMR' (from Trijicon™ site) . All brits ACOGs seem to have em tho i havnt seen em much on US rifles.
Re: Is 'scope in' in the state you want?
Posted: 2010-03-27 16:52
by Rudd
3D Scopes Update - Project Reality Forums
old thread is old, I think the direction scoping in will take has already been decided
Re: Is 'scope in' in the state you want?
Posted: 2010-03-30 16:13
by hotfranc
I think they are fine, but need a quick adjustment
Re: Is 'scope in' in the state you want?
Posted: 2010-03-30 19:47
by Hotrod525
this mod need 3d scopes... its a must =)
Re: Is 'scope in' in the state you want?
Posted: 2010-04-04 03:42
by Iceberg
The new 3d scopes look awesome, but i think iron sights should zoom in a bit to symbolize the soldier focusing on the target
Re: Is 'scope in' in the state you want?
Posted: 2010-04-04 07:26
by Pfc.Cuthbert