New recoil, please make it go away

[Baron von Beer 0]

I like the first recoil system better because that is how it is. If you have a good firing stance and grip the pistolgrip tightly with your right hand and hold on to the handguard lightly with your left hand when you fire, the weapon will automatically "glide" back in your left hand after recoil to a default position after each shoot, this is realistic. The weapon will not magicly spring 5cm up in the air like now.

Much of my basic military training (the first three months) range firing practice was to learn to take a good firing position and learn to know where this default weapon place and recoil place will be if you quickly bring up your weapon to sighted, a natural feel.

Also how "realistic" is it that when recoil hits your whole arms and hands automatically raise them self 5 cm every shoot like in the beta version? I for one don't jap my arms up after each shoot i fire, do you guys do that?

Trouble was with the old way it went back to the exact same position. You could put your 2nd, 3rd, 10th rounds through the same hole at 100m with out any need to aim.

Edited August 30, 2010 by Baron von Beer

[Curry 10]

Watch at 1:47

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BGjBowi5BU&feature=sub

Even an 5.56 AR has quite some recoil and this is only Semi Auto in the video (muzzle even raises)...

New recoil system is far better than the old one. I hope they leave it and maybe improve it for even more shooting simulation. The old "recoil" was way too arcadish.

[dayglow 2]

This has been the bain of the simulator community, from flight sims, to driving and now ArmA. More difficult does not equal realism. There are things that you cannot properly 'simulate' and having recoil such as this defeats the purpose. I didn't realize how bad it was until I was a SAW gunner and had a group of OPFOR at around 100m and I was crouching. I don't expect to have laser accurate shots, but from a crouch the recoil from the first round pushed the barrel a good 2-3 cm up on screen, which equaled about 30 feet over their heads at that distance.

Now maybe if I was holding the LMG very loosely and relaxed and had no idea if I was firing it may push up that level, but in game I hope I'm a trained soldier and understand the mechanics of a proper shooting stance. I don't expect my rounds to hit the same spot at 100, but I should be able to put a sustained burst right into the group and at least suppress them. I tried pushing down on my mouse, but I ran out of desk after a fraction of a second trying to keep the weapon level. Really I would expect some climb, but much more muted and controlled. I would expect the barrel to jump around a little, so that at that distance rounds would be landing around the group, but right now burst fire from a SAW is useless.

For the people arguing that actively fighting the recoil with the mouse is realistic may I suggest that you also ask for independent front and rear sight alignment, as that is the most important thing, and if difficult=realistic, then auto alignment is much worse than recoil compensation.

...edit

Went back and it seems only the new SAW version for the British troops is porked. I played around on the US range with their SAW and it worked the way I thought it should

My experience with the new recoil coincided with my downloading of the British troops and I played the first SP mission where you are the LMG gunner. That weapon is screwed up compared to the other ones. A single shot causes the barrel to climb like crazy.

Edited August 30, 2010 by DayGlow

[akd42 10]

...edit

Went back and it seems only the new SAW version for the British troops is porked. I played around on the US range with their SAW and it worked the way I thought it should

My experience with the new recoil coincided with my downloading of the British troops and I played the first SP mission where you are the LMG gunner. That weapon is screwed up compared to the other ones. A single shot causes the barrel to climb like crazy.

Yup. Mentioned at least twice in this thread already.

[TinManNFO 10]

I was looking at this a little bit, and I think I may have a compromise solution. Unfortunately, I haven't shot in real life for a few months (a little too busy with other things, and ammo has been a bit expensive), though this topic has made me somewhat inclined to try to go to the range to check this out if I have time in the next few weeks. However, I do think I have enough muscle memory from putting probably a few thousand 5.56/.223 rounds downrange over the last few years to remember the feeling pretty well, and I was holding my rifle (a CA-legal configured AR about as close as you can get to an M16A4 in semiauto) and trying to simulate it indoors.

One thing I remember pretty clearly in my more formal rifle training in the Navy Individual Augmentee Combat Training course that I did with the Army in Fort Jackson, SC, before going to Iraq was about how once you get a good prone supported position (which is probably the same as what you’d be able to get with a bipod), you should be able to fire, and the weapon should kick but settle back onto essentially the same position and sight picture you had when first aiming. This is pretty evident when you are doing a 25m zero on the weapon for the first time, and it does work about as advertised!

So, I was testing the new recoil on the known distance range I have set up (in the Zargabad map), and I think what would be something that can make most people happy is the following; note that this is for a 5.56 rifle firing semi-auto from prone as a baseline starting point:

1) When you fire, first the recoil as it is now occurs in v 1.54.

2) At the end of the current recoil, the aim point settles back down over about 1 to 1.5 seconds back to approximately the same point that you were originally aiming. In my indoor simulation holding my weapon, this was what I seemed to remember to be the approximate time it normally takes for my weapon and body to settle back to the original position. This way, you still get the realistic return to aim point but are forced to shoot more slowly if you want that to happen.

3) If you want to try to shoot faster, you can override the settling of the weapon by pulling the mouse down and reaiming yourself. (This would cancel the settling movement so that you don’t reaim the weapon and then after that it settles lower down than where you were trying to aim.) This may appease those people who like the current v1.54 recoil representation.

4) The position to which the weapon settles is randomly placed within ~1 milliradian (mil) or ~3.5 minutes of arc/minutes of angle (MOA) of the prior aim point. This is equivalent to ~10cm at 100m or ~3.5in at 100yds, and seems close to the error bar size I probably get when the weapon settles when I’m shooting in real life; 3.5 MOA also appears to be an approximate desired accuracy for trainees according to the US Army Field Manual 3-22.9 Rifle Marksmanship for M16/-M4-Series Weapons (see paragraphs 5-15 to 5-18 and 5-125 of the 2008 version). Also, this would be equivalent to ~0.5m at 500m, enough of a miss if you don’t correct to turn a potential lethal shot to the head or CG into a harmless dust cloud next to the target.

The effect would probably need to have modified values for settling time and ending position error related to (ideally) the weapon caliber, weapon weight, barrel length, ammunition type, stance, etc. (e.g. the settling time would be longer and the ending position error greater if you were standing).

Any thoughts?

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Yes :p

One thing I remember pretty clearly in my more formal rifle training in the Navy Individual Augmentee Combat Training course that I did with the Army in Fort Jackson, SC, before going to Iraq was about how once you get a good prone supported position (which is probably the same as what you’d be able to get with a bipod), you should be able to fire, and the weapon should kick but settle back onto essentially the same position and sight picture you had when first aiming. This is pretty evident when you are doing a 25m zero on the weapon for the first time, and it does work about as advertised!

Two thoughts.

1) Are the prone climb also a problem now? I find I need very little "gun work" in prone.

2) I expect there to be quite a significant difference to "calm shooting at the range" compared to in a hot zone.

3) If you want to try to shoot faster, you can override the settling of the weapon by pulling the mouse down and reaiming yourself. (This would cancel the settling movement so that you don’t reaim the weapon and then after that it settles lower down than where you were trying to aim.) This may appease those people who like the current v1.54 recoil representation.

Agreed, but I don't think the engine supports something like that.

4) The position to which the weapon settles is randomly placed within ~1 milliradian (mil) or ~3.5 minutes of arc/minutes of angle (MOA) of the prior aim point. This is equivalent to ~10cm at 100m or ~3.5in at 100yds, and seems close to the error bar size I probably get when the weapon settles when I’m shooting in real life;

That is quite far from what I experienced with my 7.62 rifle. I spent quite a few seconds re-aiming between each shot when shooting for score, pluss getting off the shot in a controlled squeeze (something we don't need to worry about at all), although this was iron sights only. I've never shot a 5.56 rifle though.

3.5 MOA also appears to be an approximate desired accuracy for trainees according to the US Army Field Manual 3-22.9 Rifle Marksmanship for M16/-M4-Series Weapons (see paragraphs 5-15 to 5-18 and 5-125 of the 2008 version).

Yes, with re-aim, not shooting blind after the first shot was aimed.

Also, this would be equivalent to ~0.5m at 500m, enough of a miss if you don’t correct to turn a potential lethal shot to the head or CG into a harmless dust cloud next to the target.

That dust cloud still have suppression value. Effective rounds doesn't have to be rounds that hit, but cause the enemy to not shoot back - at least accurately. Now is the time to get some other teams up front for the kill, they will be much safer while the enemy is pinned down and kept unable to return accurate fire. Fire and maneuver. What we have (had) in Arma was just the fire part. Far too much killings compared to the rounds fired (remember that 10000:1 ratio).

The extreme firing accuracy/effectiveness we have is a problem for those making missions (me). What we try to make into a 10 minute engagement is over in 20-30 seconds, and to make up for it we have to pour on insane amounts of enemies to make it interesting. This the servers can't cope with and results in even dumber AI and restrictions on maximum players.

We read about it every day: "Gun fight lasting several hours, at least two dead". Arma version: "Gun fight lasting 20 minutes, at least three hundred dead". I'm sorry but it's just not my idea of "realism". I know mission design (me) will have to take some of the blame, as I have played better missions where some of this is reduced.

So for me any means designed to prolong firefights is a good one. Reducing our ability to shoot quickly, accurately, and fast, would be one such mean.

[dayglow 2]

We read about it every day: "Gun fight lasting several hours, at least two dead". Arma version: "Gun fight lasting 20 minutes, at least three hundred dead". I'm sorry but it's just not my idea of "realism". I know mission design (me) will have to take some of the blame, as I have played better missions where some of this is reduced.

So for me any means designed to prolong firefights is a good one. Reducing our ability to shoot quickly, accurately, and fast, would be one such mean.

That has a lot more to do with fear for life and rushing shots vs actual weapon dynamics. People fire a lot of rounds down range to keep the enemies head down and keep their own head down because simply, they don't want to die. I don't like the idea of porking weapons with cone/fire and or recoil exaggeration to mimic another aspect of the battlefield. I remember Brother In Arms was the worst for this. Nothing sucks more than to get to a good firing position, line up a great shot and have it fly off somewhere because the designers wanted to force a style of gameplay.

How do you put a fear for life into a player? No idea, it's one of those things that you can't translate into a game. It's up to the players to play within a certain style vs forcing it through game mechanics.

Edited August 31, 2010 by DayGlow
expanding thoughts.

[akd42 10]

That has a lot more to do with fear for life and rushing shots vs actual weapon dynamics. People fire a lot of rounds down range to keep the enemies head down and keep their own head down because simply, they don't want to die. I don't like the idea of porking weapons with cone/fire and or recoil exaggeration to mimic another aspect of the battlefield. I remember Brother In Arms was the worst for this. Nothing sucks more than to get to a good firing position, line up a great shot and have it fly off somewhere because the designers wanted to force a style of gameplay.

How do you put a fear for life into a player? No idea, it's one of those things that you can't translate into a game. It's up to the players to play within a certain style vs forcing it through game mechanics.

Dispersion is a separate issue. In fact, more realistic recoil should allow for more realistic (reduced) imposed dispersion. The recoil system will not make you miss an aimed shot.

And regarding not needing to reaim after firing a shot in a good prone position, that is not true. The target may remain in the sight picture, but you are still going to have to aim that second shot, even in the best slinged-up tight prone position. This is what happens in the game. It is very easy to keep a target in the sight picture during rapid prone fire. You just have too decide if you want very rapid area fire on the target or slower deliberate aimed fire.

Edited August 31, 2010 by akd42

[Ragingbear505 10]

Huh haven't people been asking for recoil for a while and now that we get it people are complaining?

[Sirex1 10]

That dust cloud still have suppression value. Effective rounds doesn't have to be rounds that hit, but cause the enemy to not shoot back - at least accurately. Now is the time to get some other teams up front for the kill, they will be much safer while the enemy is pinned down and kept unable to return accurate fire. Fire and maneuver. What we have (had) in Arma was just the fire part. Far too much killings compared to the rounds fired (remember that 10000:1 ratio).

The extreme firing accuracy/effectiveness we have is a problem for those making missions (me). What we try to make into a 10 minute engagement is over in 20-30 seconds, and to make up for it we have to pour on insane amounts of enemies to make it interesting. This the servers can't cope with and results in even dumber AI and restrictions on maximum players.

We read about it every day: "Gun fight lasting several hours, at least two dead". Arma version: "Gun fight lasting 20 minutes, at least three hundred dead". I'm sorry but it's just not my idea of "realism". I know mission design (me) will have to take some of the blame, as I have played better missions where some of this is reduced.

So for me any means designed to prolong firefights is a good one. Reducing our ability to shoot quickly, accurately, and fast, would be one such mean.

You don't know anything about modern combat.

Gun fights lasting several hours is because of low intensity warfare and commanders decision to wait and bomb them out to save media war.

Weapon will hit where you aim, if the enemy is in cover you use machine-guns and or grenade-rifles. People will die fast in real combat. You properly can't grip the amount of soldiers in a real war, you assault with companies not with squads like they do in Hollywood movies.

Short version is that you can't have realistic prolonged firefights because in a war like in Arma2 there is no such thing. You should make more time to maneuver before combat instead.

[stoichiometric 10]

I love the new recoil. It makes the game feel much more realistic considering it IS a simulator. Thank you BIS for implementing it. Thank you thank you! :D

This game rocks!

[sick1 13]

So is this just going to be a back and fourth argument until BIS puts its foot down on the matter, because BIS is great for doing what the community want's and it looks like a lot of user would like to see an option for the recoil. Or maybe some cool guy will make a addon that disables it;)

[maddogx 13]

So is this just going to be a back and fourth argument until BIS puts its foot down on the matter, because BIS is great for doing what the community want's and it looks like a lot of user would like to see an option for the recoil. Or maybe some cool guy will make a addon that disables it;)

I believe BIS has already made it clear that the new recoil stays:

Few notes to the new recoil:

* it is tweaked and tested through long public beta patch process, we believe what is in the game now is overall very good game model for recoil

* making an option for the "old" recoil or to lower recoil is not something we would be keen to do: such option would be problem in mp (where this settings clearly would be server side only) and we prefer to keep this part of the game always the same in all modes

* it certainly requires training and is more demanding than the pre-1.54 recoil

A good decision I think, although it could certainly still use some tweaking. ;)

[sick1 13]

Well it's known that if enough people complain about they will change it:cool: Never say never. We could start some sort of Tea party movement;)

[Michael Withstand 10]

Meh Nah realistic recoil is the way...all the way.

If not we might as well have laser blaster instead. Those don't come with recoil just look at Star Wars.

If you're having difficulty aiming then you're not operating the gun properly. In auto don't hold the trigger but let out short well aimed burst unless to surpress the enemy.

Or go single it's effective too you know if not the most efficient as well? and it's the recommended standard firing mode in most Army.

Edited August 31, 2010 by Michael Withstand

[stgn 39]

I don't get this whole argument that its a simulator and thats why you have to manage recoil manually, its not like I have to manually move the legs by tapping w and e to make the soldier go forward, something as simple as making the recovery time longer(and more realistic for that kind of accuracy) than what BIS had standard is a good way of decreasing accuracy of fast shooting and is easier on the wrist.

@sirex1

I am not a soldier, but all I read about when I read about gunfighting is the importance of teaching shooting because humans are really bad at hitting targets when they are pumped with adrenalin and fearing for their life. That not to say that combat is slow but hitting is difficult and humans are relatively difficult to kill fast with small bullets actually you have to shoot them a lot if you don't hit exactly in the brain, heart or spine - thats at least what i get from what I read heres an example: http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2010armament/WednesdayLandmarkBPerArvidsson.pdf

STGN

[maddogx 13]

Well it's known that if enough people complain about they will change it:cool: Never say never. We could start some sort of Tea party movement;)

I think that would take a few more people. After looking over this thread I found a whopping five people who are absolutely against the new recoil, and perhaps another five who want it toned down a bit. I believe this is a classical case of a vocal minority.

The rest of us are okay with it. Like I said, it could be toned down a bit but otherwise I'm not that bothered. After playing through the BAF campaign and several SP scenarios on Veteran, I can safely say that it's fine once you are used to it.

[Richey79 10]

If you're having to lift the mouse up and physically replace it on the desk quite often, I would suggest getting a better quality mouse and mouse mat: there's no need to encounter this kind of difficulty.

I'm not terribly interested in whether the latest version of the recoil is realistic, personally. It means that full auto and semi-auto are used for the right purposes, which is a good thing, imo.

Only takes a few minutes with the new recoil for muscle memory to kick in and your hand is automatically tracking where it guesses the recoil is going to move, no? It's not like Bis actually randomised where the barrel position ends up - that would be a challenging shooting model (and an interesting mod, if you ask me).

[Greez 10]

wanna this rifle in arma ! :D

1VVOH7Ep_8w

[sick1 13]

If you're having to lift the mouse up and physically replace it on the desk quite often, I would suggest getting a better quality mouse and mouse mat: there's no need to encounter this kind of difficulty.

I'm not terribly interested in whether the latest version of the recoil is realistic, personally. It means that full auto and semi-auto are used for the right purposes, which is a good thing, imo.

Only takes a few minutes with the new recoil for muscle memory to kick in and your hand is automatically tracking where it guesses the recoil is going to move, no? It's not like Bis actually randomised where the barrel position ends up - that would be a challenging shooting model (and an interesting mod, if you ask me).

Okay you obviously have some kinda of super mouse. Go into the editor and use any rifle. Fire off a few rounds (enough to have muzzle rise) then move forward 10 to 20 feet. Repeat this process until you have spent all mags or you run out of mouse pad. You have to lift the mouse to regain the downward movement you applied if the game is not returning it for you. How else would it recenter?? Maybe it something I'm doing wrong, but I have a pretty good mouse. I find myself lifting it often. Anyone else do this?

Edited August 31, 2010 by Sick1

[Beagle 684]

Thats video is a fake, recoil and muzzloe climd only exists in OA, fake videos and hollywood as I was told from all the professionals here.

---------- Post added at 08:59 ---------- Previous post was at 08:54 ----------

Okay you obviously have some kinda of super mouse. Go into the editor and use any rifle. Fire off a few rounds (enough to have muzzle rise) then move forward 10 to 20 feet. Repeat this process until you have spent all mags or you run out of mouse pad. You have to lift the mouse to regain the downward movement you applied if the game is not returning it for you. How else would it recenter??

Logitech G500 gaming mouse with three custom ArmA II presets from 1600-1300dpi, and a polycarbonate "Slidepad" double the size of a mouse pad...total cost 58€. You also dont play Flightsims without a Joystick. Get the tools. A office mouse and a office mousepad is not the way of gaming. Edited August 31, 2010 by Beagle

[sick1 13]

I'm just saying give it a try. Note the position of the mouse before and after. Why would my mouse pad be inefficient for gaming?

Edited August 31, 2010 by Sick1

[Beagle 684]

I'm just saying give it a try. Note the position of the mouse before and after. Why would my mouse pad me inefficient for gaming?

Im playing the game with the new recoil for month now since it came with a beta. I have adjusted my Controls accordingly...my statistics in MP just dropped 10%. You will rty to go closer now befrore first shots..loike 100meters without, and 200m with Scope. Thats all...no more full auto ironsight sniping. Use your feet to get closer.

[sick1 13]

When I'm paying single player and I kill about 10 to 15 guys, I would have lifted my mouse a few time to recenter. I don't think you quite understand what I'm talking about. I never play multilayer so I do a lot of shooting in game. It's not realistic, but its fun.

[Beagle 684]

When I'm paying single player and I kill about 10 to 15 guys, I would have lifted my mouse a few time to recenter. I don't think you quite understand what I'm talking about. I never play multilayer so I do a lot of shooting in game. It's not realistic, but its fun.

And you dont see why dpi setting and slide resistance matters??