Weapon Deviation/Accuracy

[random pants]

Originally Posted by [R-DEV]Masaq

Yeah, DM weapons are a little borked at the moment I think. The G3/SG1 has a MOA of 24... no no no!

Thank God some DEV's can step in and say that things need tweaking, instead of brushing off complaints saying "y'all just need to adapt to it" ...and if DM's are borked, Masaq, then sniper's are borked to the third power....

[Wolfe]

Originally Posted by Human_001

If so I don't agree with all factions having same deviation. Because some gun is more accurate then other.

True, but you have to understand what's evolved in the coding. Even the smallest changes have a huge impact. They all require hours upon days of testing.. just for one weapon. I worked on the deviation for 8-10 hours a day for three months... and that was just to get the overall balance of each class (rifleman, saw, iron sights, scopes, etc). Imagine going into depth with the uniqueness of each individual weapon. It's more work than you might think but if you're up to the challenge, I'd be eager to see what you come up with

Also, there's a very weird phenomenon with the way BF2 determines shot groupings. The shot spread pattern isn't even uniform across the cone of fire. It's exponential, meaning the majority of shots will be towards the center with fewer shots to the outer edges. What's the problem with that? Well, if you want to minimize pixel-perfect headshots, you have to increase the cone of fire such that the majority of center shots can't hit the target's head.. but to do that, the cone of fire has to be increased larger than preferred... so when you get those stray shots towards the edges, it feels like the weapon is out of whack. There's nothing we can do about that unless someone figures out a way to change the way BF2 calculates the shot groupings; it's probably hardcoded.

One alternative is to reduce the cone of fire and make the weapons more deadly... but it's tricky without going back to 2-3 shot kills and insta-prone headshots. A delicate balancing act indeed, and that's why it takes so long to code.

Another altnerative is to increase the accuracy while keeping the recovery rate (time to minimum deviation) relatively long. The end effect would be a weapon that is very accurate if you stand still long enough, but only relatively accurate on the move or just after moving.

[Noobofthenight]

Hey, I'd just like to add my opinion in to this pool, and you wont like it, but thats what I think.

I personally believe you need to get a mix of 0.75 more into 0.8, I'm not saying you should be able to headshot all the time, but I've got experiance of shooting in real life (I did it competitively in a commonwealth competition .22bore.)

And I have to say, what are these soldiers on? Are they all wasted? I cannot understand how you can miss a target 10m away, seriously. The deviation is FAR too extreme, now I know I've not been in a battlefield, but honestly, you point a gun in the direction of someone at 10m, you'll probably hit them.

Longer range, its better, but I still think that the soldiers shoot far too poorly. At 25m range, I can quite happily hit a 1cm by 1cm target, so hitting a torso at 10m away with triburst kneeling should bring them down, even with 1s aiming time.

I know you try to account for other things, but maybe you are trying to demand too much from the engine? And I do appreciate the work that has gone into it, and I'm sad to say that I do not enjoy it as much as 0.75.

[Oldirti]

i remember the good ole days of .7, those were the days of the best deviation! Other than the fact that Snipers/marksmen were borked, it was the best deviation system i'd seen, of course i havn't been able to play .8 so i can't tell my opinion on that.

[tanky]

Originally Posted by Noobofthenight

Hey, I'd just like to add my opinion in to this pool, and you wont like it, but thats what I think.

I personally believe you need to get a mix of 0.75 more into 0.8, I'm not saying you should be able to headshot all the time, but I've got experiance of shooting in real life (I did it competitively in a commonwealth competition .22bore.)

And I have to say, what are these soldiers on? Are they all wasted? I cannot understand how you can miss a target 10m away, seriously. The deviation is FAR too extreme, now I know I've not been in a battlefield, but honestly, you point a gun in the direction of someone at 10m, you'll probably hit them.

Longer range, its better, but I still think that the soldiers shoot far too poorly. At 25m range, I can quite happily hit a 1cm by 1cm target, so hitting a torso at 10m away with triburst kneeling should bring them down, even with 1s aiming time.

I know you try to account for other things, but maybe you are trying to demand too much from the engine? And I do appreciate the work that has gone into it, and I'm sad to say that I do not enjoy it as much as 0.75.

^ I second that ^

[random pants]

Originally Posted by [R-CON]Wolfe

True, but you have to understand what's evolved in the coding. Even the smallest changes have a huge impact. They all require hours upon days of testing.. just for one weapon. I worked on the deviation for 8-10 hours a day for three months... and that was just to get the overall balance of each class (rifleman, saw, iron sights, scopes, etc). Imagine going into depth with the uniqueness of each individual weapon. It's more work than you might think but if you're up to the challenge, I'd be eager to see what you come up with

Also, there's a very weird phenomenon with the way BF2 determines shot groupings. The shot spread pattern isn't even uniform across the cone of fire. It's exponential, meaning the majority of shots will be towards the center with fewer shots to the outer edges. What's the problem with that? Well, if you want to minimize pixel-perfect headshots, you have to increase the cone of fire such that the majority of center shots can't hit the target's head.. but to do that, the cone of fire has to be increased larger than preferred... so when you get those stray shots towards the edges, it feels like the weapon is out of whack. There's nothing we can do about that unless someone figures out a way to change the way BF2 calculates the shot groupings; it's probably hardcoded.

One alternative is to reduce the cone of fire and make the weapons more deadly... but it's tricky without going back to 2-3 shot kills and insta-prone headshots. A delicate balancing act indeed, and that's why it takes so long to code.

Another altnerative is to increase the accuracy while keeping the recovery rate (time to minimum deviation) relatively long. The end effect would be a weapon that is very accurate if you stand still long enough, but only relatively accurate on the move or just after moving.

Wolfe, I completely understand everything you said. That exponential spread within the cone is indeed a bitch.

We all know you can't have the best of both worlds, but what the guns are right now is worse than even .6 laser-beam guns. Seriously.

I really think all that needs to be done is to take what the weapon deviation values were from .75 (minus the sniper, cuz that kit has been broken since .6) and add 5-20% more or less to what they were...

Minimum deviation immediately after moving? 10-20% more.

Maximum accuracy at ranges after rest? 5% less.

Deviation from fine/harsh scope movement? 5-15% more.


etc....


I know I'm making something complex sound simple, but I know more than you think I know about coding.

The values have been taken to the extreme, and skill is less of a factor, it's more "who can camp better and roll the dice-better in quick-up close firefights."

Wolfe, can you just acknowledge that the deviation needs some real tweaking?

If you do, I promise I'll shut up and wait happily for .85

[Simmage]

I'll just try not to respond to anyone directly and give my feedback on the deviations.

It took some getting used to, but I'd say it's better. In all honesty, in .75 any half retarded monkey could headshot somebody at 300m with a G3. It was EASY. Now; firing your rifle is a little bit more challenging. It's been said before; The bullet doesn't always go where you want it to, albeit it 5m left of your adversary or it hits him on the shoulder rather than the head. It's a change that can be adapted to, and thus is a good change.

I like the deviation. Period.

[Bringerof_D]

Originally Posted by Spec_Operator

Actually, i am quite good with the marksman rifles. At least with the G3SG1, a hit at 300m wasnt a problem. Wouldnt know why 30 meters would be a problem... But well, i think the trick is to lay down.

yeah...with the british rifleman kit i was able to pull of a 100+ metre shot against an enemy sniper, 2 hit KO

[random pants]

Originally Posted by Bringerof_D

yeah...with the british rifleman kit i was able to pull of a 100+ metre shot against an enemy sniper, 2 hit KO

100 METERS??? POSSIBLY MORE??? ONLY 2 HITS??? Pretty impressive!!!!

/sarcasm



I can throw a frisbee further than that....



Standard barrel length 5.56x45mm rifles are effective up to around 350meters, even more if you've got high power scopes and good marksmanship/trigger action.

Seriously doesn't this just prove our point that deviation and scope settle time is fugged?

[cat]

The accuracy for firing enfield scoped from staind or crouched is waaaay off.

As seen on this screenshot weapon was fired standing from a house at the ground 30m away, The mouse was completely still for 2 seconds.

If that is a feature to enforce prone shooting I think its not a cool idea. This makes the weapon totally useles in urban combat (any insurgent map) because It cant hit something more than 30m away. Means the user has either to stay on the street or on a roof and lie down, making any proper sniper hiding spot useless

And I have seen videos of soldiers in ww2 firing it standing without any support. I mean this weapon would not be the standard ww2 rifle for the british if you have to setup like an MG.

So I would suggest that it would be changed so that firing it crouched is useful.


In case the screenshot does not show, the accuracy on this shot was at least 15 degrees off