The hip fire reticle should go

[lozz08 10]

In OA I can hip fire with an M60 and hit a target 200m away with more accuracy than aiming down the sights. I know that the hip fire reticule can be disabled, but the weapons' fire is still hitting perfectly at the point on the screen where the reticule would be.

Will there be something which reduces the accuracy of hip fire in AA3. Because you should need to aim down sight to hit targets at range.

[Angle 10]

What you should say is force a minimum aiming deadzone greater then zero.

'Cause i hope you are not talking about magic cone of fire.

Edited July 17, 2011 by Angle

[dmarkwick 261]

In OA I can hip fire with an M60 and hit a target 200m away with more accuracy than aiming down the sights.

In ArmA you never fire from the hip, that reticule is there because your weapon is shouldered. As such, the reticule simulates the over-the-top (not quite CQB) view. And lets not forget that ArmA is a game. As you said it can be disabled for people who insist that its not realistic.

I know that the hip fire reticule can be disabled, but the weapons' fire is still hitting perfectly at the point on the screen where the reticule would be.

Umm... as it should be IMO. Why would the weapon fire at any other place other than where it's pointing? If you dislike it set the floating weapon slider up from 0 to get an unknown weapon aimpoint in the game options.

Will there be something which reduces the accuracy of hip fire in AA3. Because you should need to aim down sight to hit targets at range.

I think we established there is no hip fire in ArmA, so I guess any artificial nerfing is not needed?

[maturin 12]

They should keep the crosshair, but having that laser-accurate center pip was a monstrously stupid idea. At mid ranges it is more accurate and convenient than the sights could ever be. The crosshair should be a rough estimate, and should be disabled by default.

[dmarkwick 261]

They should keep the crosshair, but having that laser-accurate center pip was a monstrously stupid idea. At mid ranges it is more accurate and convenient than the sights could ever be. The crosshair should be a rough estimate, and should be disabled by default.

Hmmm... it's an old argument but it shouldn't be disabled by default :) by default ArmA is a game. In any case simply turning up the difficulty level should be enough.

[Daniel 0]

I can't imagine it's all that easy firing an M60 or any GPMG from the shoulder, maybe we should have an option to fire from the hip. At least you get the fire down without your arm dropping off.

[Archosaurusrev 12]

I can't imagine it's all that easy firing an M60 or any GPMG from the shoulder, maybe we should have an option to fire from the hip. At least you get the fire down without your arm dropping off.

it's fairly easy to fire a GPMG from the shoulder with pretty much zero recoil, it would just be tiring as hell.

[metalcraze 290]

They should keep the crosshair, but having that laser-accurate center pip was a monstrously stupid idea. At mid ranges it is more accurate and convenient than the sights could ever be. The crosshair should be a rough estimate, and should be disabled by default.

Not only that but the most wrong thing with a crosshair is when you use BI First Aid and lie in an agony. The crosshair still lets you make perfectly precise hits even at 100m even though you should be completely unfit to do so.

And yes I certainly prefer playing without the crosshair and with wide aiming deadzone (because it's in fact superior as you don't have to turn your body while aiming) - the problem is of course that servers may run it the other way - providing that cheat to wounded people because as we all know AI in OA does not react to wounded with BI First Aid module unless they fire making AI an easy prey.

Oh the reticle may stay as an option for all the newbs - just make it much less cheat'y

Edited July 17, 2011 by metalcraze

[Zipper5 74]

Crosshairs should be left exactly how they are. Those who don't want the accuracy they give can quite easily disable them and add a floating zone. No need to force others to do the same when you can already enforce if the crosshair is present or not in server settings.

[Windexglow 10]

I think it needs to be a bit thicker to give iron sites some sort of advantage in precision.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

More weapon sway when not using optics might help, but other than that I see no problems or nor room for improvement.

[Zipper5 74]

The only addition I think would be nice is a server-side setting for aiming deadzone.

[metalcraze 290]

I agree. Being able to force minimum deadzone on a server will be nice.

[twisted 127]

In OA I can hip fire with an M60 and hit a target 200m away with more accuracy than aiming down the sights. I know that the hip fire reticule can be disabled, but the weapons' fire is still hitting perfectly at the point on the screen where the reticule would be.

Will there be something which reduces the accuracy of hip fire in AA3. Because you should need to aim down sight to hit targets at range.

bet it's shouldn't be very accurate though.

will never fire one myself, so i can only refer to video reference,

strong guys can do it. well yes, sorta. but it's going to jump around a fair bit.

some of those guys are damn good but even so..

the problem is not the reticle but the accuracy, recoil or too low aimprecision (that's the amount the weapon drifts when holding it in arma2).

seen this argument a few times, doesn't mean it shouldn't be had, there's is an issue here. as there is with the lack of recoil while walking and shootinhg.

getting to any kind of conclusion is going to be the difficult part. and then if there is a conclusion, does it match where BIS wants the game to go?

Edited July 18, 2011 by twisted

[Nicholas 5]

In OA I can hip fire with an M60 and hit a target 200m away with more accuracy than aiming down the sights. I know that the hip fire reticule can be disabled, but the weapons' fire is still hitting perfectly at the point on the screen where the reticule would be.

Will there be something which reduces the accuracy of hip fire in AA3. Because you should need to aim down sight to hit targets at range.

Change your aiming deadzone so the weapon isn't always centered in the screen and turn off your crosshair. Problem fixed.

[Windexglow 10]

Change your aiming deadzone so the weapon isn't always centered in the screen and turn off your crosshair. Problem fixed.

The problem is the crosshairs tend to be much better than iron sites.

[Phantom Six 25]

I remember back in America's Army 2, if you try to shoot someone far with your crosshair right in the middle, you will NEVER hit them really. You got to use the iron sight to actually score a shot on someone. If you use the hip firing crosshair, the recoil on it would be really high and hipfire is really only effective if you're close range when I played that. How would that system be if you want to compromise? I'm okay with having crosshair in the game, but its really accurate, even more than an ironsight.

[maddogx 13]

Baaaah! Nooo!

Don't force a deadzone on people! As a TrackIR user, having a deadzone makes the game totally uncontrollable.

There has to be a better way.

[twisted 127]

one thing that could help is the value of aimprecision being increased when weapon is not held up to eye. that's the kind of natural sway every weapon has due to humans not being robots, but having to breathe and having muscles that get fatigued.

be smart of bis to find a way to tie in the weight of a weapon to aimprecision, but simply increasing it would help a lot as hitting far away object would be as tricky as in real life conditions but in close would be still possible to a degree but not super accurate.

[M.Andersson(SWE) 4]

A new animation for carry MG´s.

A simulation were you acctually fire from the hip..

On SOME MG´s..

Not all..

IR some of the MG´s can be fired from shoulder with

accuracy.

But face it, a M60 no way, swedish KSP 2-3 shots maybe,

the lighter versions sure.

But for the heavy MG´s ther should be a new animation

and a new reticule. Maybe a dotted ring or something.

And when prone you fire either through scope

or ironsight..

[JojoTheSlayer 35]

I agree. Being able to force minimum deadzone on a server will be nice.

Because that would work so great for people using TrackIR or configured the gaming for zero deadzone. /sarcasm.

If you watch most Arma 2 PvP videos at decent range you will notice that most still use iron sights. I dont really see the issue tbh. Just people whining about others not playing the game like they do.

[dmarkwick 261]

Because that would work so great for people using TrackIR or configured the gaming for zero deadzone. /sarcasm.

If you watch most Arma 2 PvP videos at decent range you will notice that most still use iron sights. I dont really see the issue tbh. Just people whining about others not playing the game like they do.

I think this is exactly it. I like playing with the reticule, so what? It can be switched off for people who don't like it. I use TrackIR and the reticule helps me to know which way I'm pointing. Plus, sometimes I just like to creep around a danger area using the reticule (shouldered) view. I also use 3rd person to give me back the situational awareness that playing through a monitor removes. Call me evil.

And, once again people, there is no hip-fire in ArmA, only shouldered fire.

Edited July 18, 2011 by DMarkwick

[kremator 1065]

it's fairly easy to fire a GPMG from the shoulder with pretty much zero recoil, it would just be tiring as hell.

LOL you are joking, right?

I've fired this beast and it is hard enough holding it standing, never mind the kick this beast has.

I don't know where you have gotten your information from - Arnie types don't exist!

Back on topic ..... system is fine as it is .... move along, nothing to see here.

[Maddmatt 1]

I think the centre dot that points out exactly where the gun is pointing should be removed. The outer part that shows approximately where you'e aiming should stay.

That way you still have a useful crosshair that gives you a sense of where your weapon is pointing, while you need your sights for better accuracy.

[Daniel 0]

I think the centre dot that points out exactly where the gun is pointing should be removed. The outer part that shows approximately where you'e aiming should stay.

That way you still have a useful crosshair that gives you a sense of where your weapon is pointing, while you need your sights for better accuracy.

This exactly. There has to be some bonus to using your iron sights.