Project Reality Forums

One change in .8 that I loved was that ironsights had a quicker sight-in time than their scoped counterpart. While ironsights are still heavily gimped against scoped weapons, it gave them an edge in <50meter engagements, since you could get the first shot in the fight.

This is a recent quote from Chuc, in this thread regarding officers using pistols for CQB instead of their scoped weapons.

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f255-v ... usage.html

[R-DEV]Chuc wrote:Wont be necessary come revisions to the animations, but thanks for your concern

Chuc has confirmed that scope-sight in times are being reduced. Now, being a total whore for scoped weapons, I'm excited to hear that.

But now it seems the only advantage ironsights have will be gone in .85, and frankly, I think that's a step in the wrong direction for overall balance.


We all know that IRL ironsights are a quick, clean, and reliable way of target acquisition, and while they are now inferior to red-dot style aimpooints, they still can be used with great efficiency.

Since real life "resolution" and view distances are much greater, ironsights can be used effectively at much higher ranges (200-300meters) than their effectiveness in-game. As it stands right now, ironsights are really only effective up to about 100 meters, and that's with an easy-on-the-eye background. Any further than that, and you can expect to lose a firefight 95 out of 100 times.


I am proposing two things to add a little more balance, and possibly realism (depending on how you look at it) to ironsighted weapons.

1. Give all iron sighted weapons a modest 1.5x to 1.8x zoom. This will greatly help with your ability to engage targets slightly past 100 meters, and also help with targets in your "sweet-spot range" (40-60 meters)

Just think of it as your eye really focusing in as you sight your weapon. 1.5- 1.8x zoom really isn't that much, but it will help a lot with the ability to engage targets accurately and efficiently.


2. Greatly decrease the deviation from WASD movement. I think this change would be terrific for ironsight/scope balance.

Think about it this way. If you're sighted in, and side-stepping/strafing with a 4x or greater magnification scope, your reticule will be bouncing all over the place. You will need to stop..settle your scope, then take your precision shots (which is currently what the deviation system represents)


An ironsighted weapon, on the other hand, has a very clean sight picture, and it should be much easier to strafe and shoot while being accurate since you are just using the front post over your rear aperture to aim.


You know how you can strafe and shoot accurately with the pistol now? That's basically what I'm proposing with the ironsighted rifles, though not AS deadly accurate, but close.


This would really give the edge back to ironsighted weapons in engagements less than 100 meters, which is their bread and butter range.


It would be great for more people to be grabbing ironsighted weapons in PR, because they are very formidable IRL, and as they are now, I just can't ever justify grabbing an ironsighted weapon over a scope.


I hope the DEV's consider these changes I proposed seriously. I know that they are doable, we have had zoomed ironsight weapons before, (remember the 4x M16 in .6).

Like I said, I'm a total whore for scoped weapons, and I don't want my ironsighted buddies left in the dust!

Great ideas random pants, particularly the 2nd one as that would really give the iron sights a set advantage in CQB-medium range that was really noticeable and effective.

+1

1 NO, 2 yes.

Some good points. The sight-in time has only been reduced by 1/4 of a second I believe, so iron sights still sight-in three times faster.

We'd have to test the zoom in-game, but I just don't like how it sounds in the original post.

There was a suggestion somewhere about Forgotten Hope 2's depth perception. If we could somehow add that to PR as well as a slight (1.1 to 1.3x) zoom, if any at all, we could achieve the same effect as a 1.8 zoom without the FH2 effect.

i couldnt disagree with this any more.

"But now it seems the only advantage ironsights have will be gone in .85," -so your saying the only advantage the ironsight has is the quicker draw time? have you tried sighting in a target in CQB situation with a scope? by the time you line up youd be dead. i think most people think the real advantage of iron sights is in a CQB fight where you get a better view of your target.

"If you're sighted in, and side-stepping/strafing with a 4x or greater magnification scope" -what is this quake? what are you doing strafing? you shouldnt expect to be able to hit the broad side of a barn if your moving sideways while shooting.

"we have had zoomed ironsight weapons before, (remember the 4x M16 in .6)." -that was only because the other factions had scoped weapons and the devs had not finished up the m16 with the acog. it was the only way to even things up at the time.

im not trying to be overly contrary, but these suggestions kinda sound like adding vanilla to PR. i personally choose ironsights alot over scopes depending on the map. especially since the M68 came out. i often like to trade off some uber long range shooting abilites for better close in ability. ramiel is a perfect example of this, most engagements are pretty close on that map, i almost always choose the m68 over the acog. even on kashan, i choose it quite often when clearing out the bunkers, theres other guys on the squad who will use acogs to keep us protected from long range threats.

Would be nice with a tiny bit of zoom on iron sights.

charliegrs wrote:i couldnt disagree with this any more.

"But now it seems the only advantage ironsights have will be gone in .85," -so your saying the only advantage the ironsight has is the quicker draw time? have you tried sighting in a target in CQB situation with a scope? by the time you line up youd be dead. i think most people think the real advantage of iron sights is in a CQB fight where you get a better view of your target.

First of all, it is very easy to sight in a target with a 4x scope in CQB. I do it all the time and still devastate people. The key is just having them close to the center of the screen before you sight, that's all. PLUS, in very close engagements, I'm firing from the hip anyways, which negates the scope disadvantage completely.

"If you're sighted in, and side-stepping/strafing with a 4x or greater magnification scope" -what is this quake? what are you doing strafing? you shouldnt expect to be able to hit the broad side of a barn if your moving sideways while shooting.

Pfft....that's quite an exaggeration. Why are you making such a big assumption anyways? Do you strafe and shoot weapons IRL? I do, especially when doing target runs with my .22lr bolt action, and it's not some sort of impossible task like you make it out to be...Plus these are engagements that are less than 50 meters...

"we have had zoomed ironsight weapons before, (remember the 4x M16 in .6)." -that was only because the other factions had scoped weapons and the devs had not finished up the m16 with the acog. it was the only way to even things up at the time.

You think I don't know that? If you read what I was saying in context i was saying that we could do it since it was done before, I know that the M16 was not in its finished stages...why would they have added the ACOG and done away with the iron zoom if it was already complete

im not trying to be overly contrary, but these suggestions kinda sound like adding vanilla to PR. i personally choose ironsights alot over scopes depending on the map. especially since the M68 came out. i often like to trade off some uber long range shooting abilites for better close in ability. ramiel is a perfect example of this, most engagements are pretty close on that map, i almost always choose the m68 over the acog. even on kashan, i choose it quite often when clearing out the bunkers, theres other guys on the squad who will use acogs to keep us protected from long range threats.

Sure, you stick to your M68, I'll take my ACOG and go 25 and 1 like I do every time I play as US on insurgency...no exaggeration there.

All this teamwork stuff you're spitting out doesn't remedy the fact that skilled players will smoke you with their 4x scopes in most engagements... you roll around in Kashan with your M68 and I'll drop you with my 4x G3A3 anytime, anyplace.

And, that's not some macho I'm better-than-you deal. It's just a fact. The only place you have a chance is inside the bunker on the second floor. Anywhere else and you will get killed by anyone with equal or better skill.

Btw Random, the x4 zoom on the M16 looked horrible.

But something like 1.2-1.5x would be fine i guess.

As it should be, random_pants.

Why are you and Charlie dragging this into a contest between aimpoints/irons and scopes at long distance? That's like comparing Usain Bolt to a Paralympics gold medalist - you know which is better in his field, so why bother arguing about it?

Still, your bickering does bring a good point: according to previous DEV statements, firing 'from the hip' will be a lot more accurate, which could put irons at a further disadvantage in CQB, not to mention how they'd be raped at range by scopes.

a tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny zoom might work, and you can pass it off as eye focusing and the head craning to the ironsights.

Waaah_Wah wrote:Btw Random, the x4 zoom on the M16 looked horrible.

But something like 1.2-1.5x would be fine i guess.

Yea, it did look horrible..

I'm down with a 1.2-1.5x zoom...ANYTHING to give us a reason to actually take ironsight weapons...

Wah are u not digging the less WASD deviation for ironsights? Keep in mind that it can be tweaked so its not ridiculous, but so it also gives irons an advantage.

Hey, Jaymz and Rudd are on the bandwagon, you should come too

Dr2B Rudd wrote:a tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny zoom might work, and you can pass it off as eye focusing and the head craning to the ironsights.

Agreed. Seriously 1.5x zoom would be perfect, I think the spec-ops red-dot in VBF2 had 1.5x zoom, so compare it to that before you disagree, it's really not that much to be unrealistic, but it sure as hell would help ironsights alot.


EDIT---woops double post

random pants wrote:Sure, you stick to your M68, I'll take my ACOG and go 25 and 1 like I do every time I play as US on insurgency...no exaggeration there.

i have pretty much the same policy, i dont play insurgents, scopes are basically immune to the suppression effect in comparison to iron sights.

I don't think ZOOM is POSSIBLE because all iron sights are now 3d. Srry to ruin your party, if i'm right lol...

It is possible. however it was a concious decision on our part to remove the zoom factor (or in reality find a zoom factor that would replicate neutral) on ironsight weapons. We'll deliberate about this, however it would be unlikely that we'll revert the zoom to pre-.8 levels.

Actually in real life irons sights take longer to line up than a scope or red-dot.

Besides, the real reason for iron sights being used is so that classes like medic and engineer do their jobs instead of trying to seek out and destroy infantry.

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]Chuc;827420']It is possible. however it was a conscious decision on our part to remove the zoom factor (or in reality find a zoom factor that would replicate neutral) on ironsight weapons. We'll deliberate about this, however it would be unlikely that we'll revert the zoom to pre-.8 levels.[/quote]

What about the WASD deviation? I know that's not your job. but could you mention it to the other DEV's? Remember I'm not suggesting strafing laser-beam guns just something that would give irons an advantage in a firefight in the 40-70 meter range.





[quote="Solid Knight""]Actually in real life irons sights take longer to line up than a scope or red-dot.

Besides, the real reason for iron sights being used is so that classes like medic and engineer do their jobs instead of trying to seek out and destroy infantry.[/quote]

random pants wrote:

We all know that IRL ironsights are a quick, clean, and reliable way of target acquisition, and while they are now inferior to red-dot style aimpooints, they still can be used with great efficiency.

I never said that irons were better...and I'm talking about irons in the context of settle-time and WASD deviation...plus I am proposing this for the sake of balance...medics and engineer should still be deadly but they are totally punished at most ranges, plus when you factor in the terrain and background it can be very hard in this game to get a clean bead on your target before he splits your face.

if only they could make them act the same way, its the same guns after all

i like the ideas, but i'd prefer realistic implementation of recoil above this.