Change the handling of MG

[Rudd]

I like the two modes, and it doesnt seem stupid in my mind since when deployed, you hold the weapon differently and modify your weight distribution, in a way that just wouldn't work if standing, as you'd have to actually put strength in to holding the weapon's weight.

[flickflackingfligger]

true the MGs need more tweaking, the accuracy is horrible while being crouched. I doubt that Real life forces crawl into rooms with SAWs to sweep them in Deployed Mode

[Solid Knight]

Originally Posted by Caboosehatesbabies

This is exactly what the Devs don't want you to do.

Then why did they develop a system that encourages that very act?

Think about it. The players are going to use things to their full extent. So if you can dive quickly and deployed mode offers the best accuracy they will naturally combine the two. Even if you extended dive times people would still lay down and fire every single time simply because it's the only way they're going to kill somebody.

The funny thing is the M249 is 5.56 so it doesn't have much recoil anyway. It can easily be fired on the move. Its inaccuracy comes from the fact that is an MG that is designed to put out a lot of lead not to hit a person in the face at 300 yards with one shot. This brings us to another problem with PR (and many, many, other shooters) in which recoiling weapons will cause you to point at the sky. This makes absolutely no sense as in order for that to happen you'd have to make it happen. If you held any rifle out and fired it without even trying to control the muzzle it would just bounce around a lot with the max muzzle climb being a few inches at worst. The reason why shooting, say 7.62+ sized round on full auto leads to horrible accuracy is simply because you can't hold it still. It doesn't climb to the sky it pushes on your limbs and rotates your torso a bit. The shooter tries to compensate by pushing back only it's a consistent force in the opposite direction versus an abrupt and inconsistent force. It leads to a bit more sway which in turn leads to less accuracy.

All recoil should lead to slight muzzle rise and a slight arc to the right and should just bounce around in a small cone from there if it's still being continuously fired. None of this looking at the birds in the sky BS. On single shot it should return somewhere around the starting position.

The other problem with fighting against the muzzle climb in PR is that it requires you to constantly drag your mouse down which is a horrible metaphor for trying to vice a weapon with your arms. You see, in real life you don't have to pick up your arms and move them back up so you can keep vicing your weapon every few seconds. I mean, I can contract my muscles to constantly resist upwards movement for a very, very long time. I don't have to reset my muscles every few seconds.

[Celestial1]

Originally Posted by Solid Knight

Then why did they develop a system that encourages that very act?

Because it's not 'Reality Mod 1.0' yet, is it?

[pclipse_teh_owner]

Originally Posted by AnRK

All the deploy timers are gonna be played with for the nest patch, it shouldn't be such a pain from what I heard. The two modes make alot of sense to me at least, added alot to the role.

Only thing that makes me angry, is instead of just putting down the bipod which takes 2 seconds. Now you have to take out the gun, which was already out..and then put down the bipod. That's like 7 seconds.

[Rudd]

remember, they are working around engine limitations,

the best way to prevent prone spam would be to have a timer like hen you get up from prone...but again...engine limitations

[Solid Knight]

Originally Posted by Celestial1

Because it's not 'Reality Mod 1.0' yet, is it?

Is the version number really being used to indicate an implementation of features status? The nature of this mod doesn't seem like they preplanned the final product and worked their way to it methodically but rather that of working towards an ambiguous goal--as in no detailed final product but just a concept of what it should be like.

Basically:

Preplanned system:
0.1 Revamped weapons.
0.2 Revamped vehicles.
0.3 Revamped spawning.
0.4 Revamped commander's assets.
0.5 Revamped squads.
0.7 Revamped soldiers.
0.8 Revamped effects.
0.9 Revamped maps.
1.0 Tweaks, final product reached.

vs

Ambiguous goal:

0.1 Changed guns, spawning, some vehicles.
0.2 Changed guns again, changed spawning to a new system, changed vehicles back.
0.3 Changed vehicles again, commander changed, some new maps.
0.4 Some maps removed, effects added, squads changed.
0.5 Changed guns again, soldier geometry changed, spawning system overhauled again
0.6 Changed guns again, some effects changed, commander changed.
0.7 New maps, new spawning system.
0.9 New weapons, new vehicles.
1.0 Changed effects again, new vehicles, changed guns again.
1.1 Changed vehicles, changed spawning.
1.2 Changed commander again, changed squads, changed guns.

Both systems have pros and cons.
Cons for preplanned is that you might depend upon a flawed concept which can ruin your final product or force you to overhaul in the middle of the project. Cons for the other method is that you might have sound principals that are only flawed due to the system and not the mechanic by itself thus you might ax a good system simply because another system didn't work well with it.

[Scot]

Originally Posted by Solid Knight

Is the version number really being used to indicate an implementation of features status? The nature of this mod doesn't seem like they preplanned the final product and worked their way to it methodically but rather that of working towards an ambiguous goal--as in no detailed final product but just a concept of what it should be like.

Basically:

Preplanned system:
0.1 Revamped weapons.
0.2 Revamped vehicles.
0.3 Revamped spawning.
0.4 Revamped commander's assets.
0.5 Revamped squads.
0.7 Revamped soldiers.
0.8 Revamped effects.
0.9 Revamped maps.
1.0 Tweaks, final product reached.

vs

Ambiguous goal:

0.1 Changed guns, spawning, some vehicles.
0.2 Changed guns again, changed spawning to a new system, changed vehicles back.
0.3 Changed vehicles again, commander changed, some new maps.
0.4 Some maps removed, effects added, squads changed.
0.5 Changed guns again, soldier geometry changed, spawning system overhauled again
0.6 Changed guns again, some effects changed, commander changed.
0.7 New maps, new spawning system.
0.9 New weapons, new vehicles.
1.0 Changed effects again, new vehicles, changed guns again.
1.1 Changed vehicles, changed spawning.
1.2 Changed commander again, changed squads, changed guns.

Both systems have pros and cons.
Cons for preplanned is that you might depend upon a flawed concept which can ruin your final product or force you to overhaul in the middle of the project. Cons for the other method is that you might have sound principals that are only flawed due to the system and not the mechanic by itself thus you might ax a good system simply because another system didn't work well with it.

You missed 0.8 in the second one...

But this is getting Off Topic, lets talk about Machine guns and their handling, eh?

I think that I can see what the DEVs are trying to do, however, I think the un-deployed mode is vicious and kind of impossible to control. Although it should be hard, you can't hit a barn door with that at anything more than 50m, especially with the Minimi and it's tiny iron sight But i feel it is definately a step in the right direction

[AREM117]

I hate how you have to prep the gun every time you go from deployed to undeployed. But why would you anyway it is too inaccurate.

[Solid Knight]

Originally Posted by [R-COM]TheScot666

You missed 0.8 in the second one...

But this is getting Off Topic, lets talk about Machine guns and their handling, eh?

I think that I can see what the DEVs are trying to do, however, I think the un-deployed mode is vicious and kind of impossible to control. Although it should be hard, you can't hit a barn door with that at anything more than 50m, especially with the Minimi and it's tiny iron sight But i feel it is definately a step in the right direction

Well they need to pick a single method of creating inaccuracy. Currently they have two. They have the weapon physically move around and on top of that they have a deviation cone that is supposed to mimic the affects of the weapon moving around.