Aiming Accuracy in Arma 3

[-Coulum- 35]

For longer range you should NEED more CONCERNTRATION and SKILL to use it. The opposite effect is seen in Arma for CQB: You need to concerntrate heavily to get line-of-shot, POA/POI. It should be negated in CQB, especially room clearance. Orientate, engage.

Exactly. Close range shooting should feel natural and require no real thinking. long range shooting should require more time and concentration. In arma its the opposite way around, at least for me. It makes CQB slow and not nearly as enjoyable as it could be, and makes ranged firefights far to quick and unforgiving.

I agree with the rest of your post as well, just to lazy to quote it.

[rye1 22]

This is true. As you have stated before, "Arma has it backwards - aiming in close quarters is too hard, aiming at far range is too easy". This is exactly right, even with "Close Quarter" weaponry and sights or attachments it is still flawed. The only thing I agree with in that sense within Arma is fighting with a sniper or marksman rifle in Close Quarters is way too hard and awkward. As Tango says, it's about "shooting on the edge".

I must note as well in the top videos the amount of demonstrations we see: Full or partial pistol transition, one or two hands. Combat or tactical (retainment) reloading. Hand and shoulder transitions. The stabilization during shooting in cadence(*). All mentioned before earlier in this thread and others such as the animation topic and wishlist.

*This type of stabilization with LMG's I don't think we shall see, but it is a good reference video.

What do you think accuracy and accuracy factors should be like in Arma 3 with LMG's or HMG's? Because we are going to see them... and use them. No doubt about that.

Some previous posts have mentioned America's Army 3; though good I do not like the accuracy within:

http://www.americasarmy.com/images/forums/tt3_9.jpg

This cone of fire, dispersion level to me seems a bit overkill. It's just wrong, it narrows within too close a distance.

It would make a game like RVS or SWAT 4 where you can be 1-4 meters away and still miss, whilst aiming DIRECTLY at target.

http://www.americasarmy.com/images/forums/tt3_8.jpg

The instinctive shooting accuracy is totally incorrect. They should research point shooting and its benefits. This makes it seem like 'running and gunning' in reality is not possible with accuracy - when that is entirely wrong.

Compare it to SWAT 4, The Regiment's or RVS's movement and orientation speeds is fine but definately not accuracy!

All these games lack it in controlled accuracy because they are purely CQC games and 'total' accuracy may spoil them.

SWAT 4.

The accuracy is just a disgrace in how over-exaggerated it is. What I can agree with is bigger movements making bigger dispersion patters, but the stabilization time is too long, it should take the maximum of a second or two to stabilize yourself (even while in flight) to engage the suspect.

The first videos point really evulates it around the 3 minute mark. Second video notice the reticule adjusting to movement and so forth, but how wide it gets for simple movements. You have to virtually be stood still when engaging, which some individuals teach in real-life, but is virtually stupid for gameplay.

RVS.

In RVS it is the same, stopping and crouching or proning. The CQC side even with the reticule perfectly around the target can leave spaces for misses, 1-3 inches even at 1-3 meters. It can be a joke. Anyone who has ever played these games will get it... and it is very hard to find videos which demonstrate it. Around the 0:40 mark demonstrates accurate hits that miss! Slightly adjustments somehow change a hit on target from a 1 inch miss to a centre mass hit, virtually impossible in reality and stupid.

In both games the movement, reactivity and responsiveness is great for CQB but the accuracy and terminal ballistics are terrible.

Watch any helmet camera footage, you'll get the point.

The Regiment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bo9RaLn3Yo

Another great game of its time, this time the opposite in what we're talking about. Great accuracy, response, control, etc, most of the time except for the training sessions where it's nighe impossible to complete. But useless animations, it's virtually burst in, shoot, move on. Nothing really special in those terms. COD or BF3 like... You can get quick firefights going and really good conventional game shooting, which is needed for Arma CQB in some sense. An accuracy/response system like this would be great.

Bugs and features to work on:

- Clipping especially when your sight aim is 'pushed' because of an object, instead your character should move with collisions i.e. bringing the pistol back into retention so you can move around the object and still shoot.

- Possible features talked about like breathing control, heart rate control, longer time to line up the shot for harder long-range accuracy.

- Better reactiveness with smaller weapons, talked about above. CQC Combat breakthroughs for better and quicker fights, especially for moving onto and acquiring targets (shooting in cadence, close combat accuracy).

Edited May 27, 2012 by Rye

[4 IN 1 0]

Again, we we already assuming that we have good trigger control and good stance and a good grip because there is no proper way to realistically simulate those things, period. That only left 4 things out, sight alinement, sight picture, breath control and follow through, now follow through itself is a personal thing to judge if your shoot is effective or not and reset is again assumed to be taken care of by gaming itself, breath control, we already know that it is not the most realistic part of the game, but with hope that BI might taken that care of, so that left us only 2 things, sight alinement and sight picture, but again, how to realistically simulate them? Moving while looking down the sight is utterly broken for sure, in no way your gun could swing like that given if you have basic knowledge on how to do it properly and have your fundamental trained up, so that left the problem for shooting target down range, but no one in this thread ever given a proper solution on how to fix it, instead just keep saying it is broken and should be fix.

Edited May 27, 2012 by 4 IN 1

[rye1 22]

Breathing control has been done in other games such as AA2/3. You get in a stable platform; you can hear your heart rate, your breathing rate, you take aim and slow it by using the right mouse button, the sights move up and down with your lung expansion; inspiration and expiration (tidal volume, etc) and a small holding space allows you to engage in the most stabilised position.

The bar at the bottom simulates stamina allowance, once you get over it you start shaking and lose aim, you have to breathe in.

Sight picture? No idea. Make it slightly blurry when fully focused?

Sight alignment? No idea. I have a vague idea that is hard to put into words, especially with mobility i.e. transitions and angular shooting.

Don't some other games simulate these or one of them? Pretty sure I've played a game that does and you have to make micro-adjustments. Sometimes in Arma when you're on certain heights, platforms or moving your alignment is off, especially during parts of the movement animation whilst looking down sights and you have to aim further down (by inches) than usual. This happens a lot for me in quick deathmatch PvP's.

Follow through? I don't see how it can be done. You keep your finger on and it may probably keep firing.

Just like trigger control - it's up to the individual. I mean you can't model trigger pressure either... a mouse clicks straight down, no lee-way.

Sometimes Arma 1 did a better job (

) for reactiveness, animations such as the walking one seen in the video. How fast the guy can spin and stay on target in a microsecond. The only bad thing is really that hunched over, quasimodo type jogging animation.

And yes deffo about moving and orientating while having your weapon up. I like the way AA3 does it (and even Skyrim's new mounted combat) because your upper body has a big range of movement and it makes it easier turning into corners to engage, adjusting to enemy position quickly, etc, in CQB. Deadzone tweaked properly in-game may around this range of movement but even that seems stubborn at times.

Really, it's not about just fixing things but tweaking them. It's on how BIS model the shooting aspect for instance recoil management and recoil recovery. Maybe there could be a point where a good ROF could be more accurate. For instance GEARS OF WAR have the correct reload point, when you reload you have to click it in the tiny gap available to do the perfect reload. If Arma had something similar for a good rate of fire, that we could not see, maybe a shooters 'skill' would become more apparent. Bit of a dodgey idea now I look on it... Anyways putting the ideas out there. I'll keep thinking about your statement.

What ideas do you have?

Aassuming that we have good trigger control and good stance and a good grip because there is no proper way to realistically simulate those things, period.

Thinking about this. Assume not.

We could try throw this idea out there...

When you create your character you can model individual points which can be changed through the edit profile -> edit character options in the main menu, just like your facial hair and face. Stance, grip, strong hand, leaning. Does he do weaver? Isosceles? Does he shoot left or right handed? Does he do an SUL grip? CAR system grip? CSM grip? How does he lean? What do you think? (Remember it's only a random idea).

It is just like the weapon preferences they are adding, customising weapons but for your character. And on that topic, customisations will affect accuracy such as bipods, tripods, attachments with muzzle-end weight.

Edited May 27, 2012 by Rye

[metalcraze 290]

It says a lot when even a more arcadey America's Army has breathing simulation and somehow it isn't a problem but a solution against overpowered snipers present in ArmA.

[-Coulum- 35]

*This type of stabilization with LMG's I don't think we shall see, but it is a good reference video.

I think that looks can sometimes be deceiving. In arma I think it is possible to fire with that stability. Get a saw and rip off an entire clip without looking down sights and slowly compensate for muzzle rise. The end result looks something like that vid. Now of course if you looked down the sights and tried that the recoil is too much to be accurate, but I am willing to bet that is how it would look down the sights of the gunner in that vid as well. Could be wrong, I don't actually know how hard is to stabilize a saw in reality as I have never tried it.

What do you think accuracy and accuracy factors should be like in Arma 3 with LMG's or HMG's? Because we are going to see them... and use them. No doubt about that.

I would say they retain the clunky feeling all weapons have in arma. They would experience more sway than your average assault rifle and would require breath control at range... but they would be possible to deploy eliminating a lot of sway and recoil.

Bugs and features to work on:

- Clipping especially when your sight aim is 'pushed' because of an object, instead your character should move with collisions i.e. bringing the pistol back into retention so you can move around the object and still shoot.

- Possible features talked about like breathing control, heart rate control, longer time to line up the shot for harder long-range accuracy.

- Better reactiveness with smaller weapons, talked about above. CQC Combat breakthroughs for better and quicker fights, especially for moving onto and acquiring targets (shooting in cadence, close combat accuracy).

just to add

Jerky weapon sway when moving

misalignment of sights while strafing

Again, we we already assuming that we have good trigger control and good stance and a good grip because there is no proper way to realistically simulate those things, period. That only left 4 things out, sight alinement, sight picture, breath control and follow through, now follow through itself is a personal thing to judge if your shoot is effective or not and reset is again assumed to be taken care of by gaming itself, breath control, we already know that it is not the most realistic part of the game, but with hope that BI might taken that care of, so that left us only 2 things, sight alinement and sight picture, but again, how to realistically simulate them?

What about a single key to make your character do all of this. When your character isn't in a shooting position he will have significant sway, not enough to ruin CQB but enough to make shooting at more than 150 metres impractical. Then when you decide you want to make an aimed shot you press the "magic" key. The character will take 3 seconds (give or a take one perhaps) to get adjust to a good stance, line of his sights control his breath, steady his weapon etc. etc. in this time sway decreases, but any sudden movements result in concentration being lost. at the end of the 3 seconds sway will be totally eliminated and recoil would be significantly decreased. this lasts 2 seconds or so after which the shooter needs to breathe and has fatigued his fine muscle control. after a few breaths he can retry. This would make it so that long range shots can't be lined up in mere seconds like in a2, but can still be accurate.

Moving while looking down the sight is utterly broken for sure, in no way your gun could swing like that given if you have basic knowledge on how to do it properly and have your fundamental trained up, so that left the problem for shooting target down range, but no one in this thread ever given a proper solution on how to fix it, instead just keep saying it is broken and should be fix.

To fix it...

When strafing, the sights shouldn't misalign like they do currently and the scopes shouldn't come and hit you in the face. sway should be similar to forward moving sway, but slower and more predictable.

When moving forward sway should be slower and more predictable. Not so jerky like it is now.

I would say that would do it.

When you create your character you can model individual points which can be changed through the edit profile -> edit character options in the main menu, just like your facial hair and face. Stance, grip. Does he do weaver? Isosceles? Does he do an SUL grip? CAR system grip? How does he lean? What do you think? (Remember it's only a random idea).

It is just like the weapon preferences they are adding, customising weapons but for your character. And on that topic, customisations will affect accuracy such as bipods, tripods, attachments with muzzle-end weight.

Would be awesome but how would the different types of grip be represented in game and effect gameplay?

[rye1 22]

I think that looks can sometimes be deceiving. In arma I think it is possible to fire with that stability. Get a saw and rip off an entire clip without looking down sights and slowly compensate for muzzle rise.

Yes it is actually now I think of it. LMG's in CQB do pretty well. If you've ever seen the FN Instructor video talking about FN Minimi use in CQB, I'd suggest checking it out. It seems to me in Arma that 10m actually looks around 5, it could be depth perception, etc, but I've said this all along. For instance we can see 500m and identify key features, or zoom in with just the human eye. I think that makes what we perceive to be easier for longer range.

I would say they retain the clunky feeling all weapons have in arma. They would experience more sway than your average assault rifle and would require breath control at range... but they would be possible to deploy eliminating a lot of sway and recoil.

Yes, exactly. I'd want it to be well deployed in short-bursts also and virtually below average in long ones unless fully stabilised and breathing properly. There must be some amount of recoil management so you can differentiate skilled shooters. The proper use of bipods will be great.

Jerky weapon sway when moving

I'd prefer more controlled for CQB, harder to get on target and potentially 'jerky' or at least more difficult for long-range. The hard part is differentiating and working out a way to do this. Arma 2 as it is now 'fits' both categories in the same box and shooting function but the CQB element isn't as good as it potentially could be (which would attract more players) and the long-range seems too easy. If longer-range was harder it would mean longer and better firefights based on maneuver, and really putting the shits on you when a HMG opens up!!!

Sway should be stabilised when moving perfectly forward, backwards or side to side, and an oblique angle should be a little harder to add to that. That and the upper body range of movement just right may improve CQB dramatically.

Another question is: How should stance and angle of movement affect it? I.e. crouched and moving laterally or diagonally.

Maybe to add onto your idea (and the idea next paragraph you posted) where your characters aim dynamically changes how you act, where you aim via a distance calculator. For instance go in vanilla and click space, it tells you distances. Maybe this distance calculator should change aiming and accuracy? So when you do aim 500m away you have to take your time! It should then be negated if you're just looking in that direction, i.e. with binoculars or without aiming down sights, because you're not engaging or getting ready to accurately engage - but down sights it kicks in.

The problem I could see with that may be, you are aiming 200m away then suddenly an enemy pops up, it would have to instinctively adjust so you could engage well in CQB... and that may be off-putting because you may have to actually aim at him or near before the calculation would kick in. Just a random thought... again, from a none-scripter or developer POV!

Would be awesome but how would the different types of grip be represented in game and effect gameplay?

How about this?

The CAR system is a great CQB grip**, especially for pistols. The CSM is a great CQB grip for rifles, swapping shoulders while staying on the trigger. The list goes on... these styles really differentiate players. It actually reminds me of the game Fight Night which promoted all the different animations for boxer style such as Mike Tyson and his leverage technique.

** "its comfortable & has less muscle fatigue; can be used in confined spaces too. Also has reduction in recoil, target acquisition, reloads, etc."

Maybe a button that could swap or change your default in real-time, for instance I'm in game, holding the pistol as we do in A2. I come to a door, I click my "Y" key (or whatever) and swap to another grip in logical order. I swap until I find the C.A.R. method and run with it.

SHIT! I'm engaging my weak-side corner, I press "U" and swap hand side. I now move in the room and have a better muzzle-line shot without over exposure. It could even go so far as basing it around doctrine, for example if Israeli's were in game; they have a very large, flat stance for pistol shooting, the Israeli method, could be added or used by the Israeli characters (if in game).

I'm in a stance which is too front-on heavy, so I click "H" and go to weaver. I'm leaning on too much of an angle, I use an RVS-type system to lean where I want. I think this system would be better with a better GUI/selection menu, pops up and you can quickly select (better than the "F" key for firemodes we have now).

I also have a vague idea that may be cool... "Warm-up", "Fatigue" or "Stress" dynamic animations. For example if you haven't reloaded in 1 hour of gameplay there may be a random chance you get it wrong and the reload will take longer - or the more stress you are in, the bigger the firefight and closer rounds hitting the worse you are (micromistakes, slightly longer time, making offensive actions by the enemy more of a threat) so you have to work on a recovery to re-gain advantage instead of "RELOAD, SHOOT AGAIN! YAY!".

Maybe even the MORE you do something i.e. a reload in a SHORT period of time with a randomness factor means some slip ups. Or for instance the quicker you are to reload for instance when you run out of ammunition in your magazine, the quicker you are from that point to reload or transition the better it will be.

Fatigue idea by Corvinus here: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?122794-ARMA-3-development-blog-amp-reveals&p=2157954&viewfull=1#post2157954. Great idea for fatigue in place, but the recovery period would be... HOW? Especially to recover and stay ready to engage; this would need a fast draw speed. Low-ready or high-ready, again maybe a separate key for these animations.

Gun weight idea explained better here by Batto: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?125819-ArmA-3-Community-wishes-amp-ideas-NO-DISCUSSION&p=2158028&viewfull=1#post2158028. Note: Don't agree with the full statement, what I'd add is "cannot stay in the ready-to-fire position for long periods of time, with lull times for stamina collection and recovery. This means you can engage well in crouched or while stood up, but only for short periods; also encompassing short-bursts by MG's and not prolonged long bursts." I agree with his other points such as raise speed.

Example below. He gets better the more he does it, slightly faster. No two reloads are the same in terms of precision, accuracy and quality.

The randomness is create: malfunctions, quality, slight mistakes to perfection.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bfb7Ks9Yhs

Mixture of grips shown.

Some others:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZprHSWBDP4A&feature=related

Well, that's a lot of ideas put into the last few pages. Some are OK.

The best I can hope for is CQB weaponry (sub-machine gun, pistols) can be this good and moveable with your animations in A3!

Edited May 28, 2012 by Rye

[4 IN 1 0]

Sorry, I think we better off stick with what Travis and Chris told people to do in the first place, also, do not make things over complicated for the already complicate enough game.

Edited May 28, 2012 by 4 IN 1

[pd3 25]

I don't know how much we should expect from ARMA 3, however I believe that the future of realistic tactical/milsim gaming should inevitably result in a full IK simulation of weapon handling.

Physics, tension, weights to objects, the whole nine yards.

Say what you will about Trespasser as a game, for those of you who know what I was talking about, when I played that game I saw a lot of potential, despite a rather slap-dash implementation.

I agree with not overburdening the player with a lot of knobs and buttons they have to press and account for whilst aiming/shooting, however behind the scenes, things should become much more complex and detailed so that when we as players are involved, it feels much more like the real thing.

That's just my 0.02 anyhow.

[rye1 22]

Sorry, I think we better off stick with what Travis and Chris told people to do in the first place, also, do not make things over complicated for the already complicate enough game.

Ask for ideas then dismiss them as overcomplication. :rolleyes: As we said before, we solely want tweaks and small features if they fit in with the game, we are open to features that will make gameplay better - CQB easier, long-range harder perception... There are a lot of good ones in the past 3-4 pages for those interested. As you stated, "solutions". Well we're not scripters or developers, we can only offer ideas, perceptions or possibilities.

I don't know about you but I see very little evidence of characters in game using Travis/Chris concepts and techniques. And if so, that's no argument to diversity... otherwise I'll end all my arguments with "I think we better stick with what Paul Castle said". It sounds to me like you didn't really read the past few pages, more skimmed over it. And the complication argument could be countered using imagination - it's a game, anything you perceive as complicated then think of an idea to make it less so, such as a better selection system or a favourites bar which isolates all the none needed things to the stuff you regularly use.

@Pd3 Trespasser? What did it offer in comparison to Arma and the subjects of this topic?

And overburden is something BIS wouldn't do. They'd change the GUI and key system to NOT overburden you.

Edited May 28, 2012 by Rye

[pd3 25]

Ask for ideas then dismiss them as overcomplication. :rolleyes: As we said before, we solely want tweaks and small features if they fit in with the game, we are open to features that will make gameplay better - CQB easier, long-range harder perception... There are a lot of good ones in the past 3-4 pages for those interested. As you stated, "solutions". Well we're not scripters or developers, we can only offer ideas, perceptions or possibilities.

@Pd3 Trespasser? What did it offer in comparison to Arma and the subjects of this topic?

And overburden is something BIS wouldn't do. They'd change the GUI and key system to NOT overburden you.

I recall playing Trespasser way back in '98 and seeing a lot of potential in how I wanted the future of weapon handling in FPS games to develop.

In Trespasser all objects had a weight assigned to them, and admittedly in the game the manipulation control scheme for moving the player's "arm", was really unintuitive.

I caught on immediately because I'm all about that sort of thing, however I really liked the fact that everything from how weapons were held, to how the weight of the gun interacted with the recoil, to how the player's arm interacted with both of those variables was completely dynamic.

Granted you "one-handed" everything in the game, but that was something I was willing to overlook as the concept was very far ahead of its time, too far in fact, and the means they had to implement it were primitive at best.

Even so, I'll cut to the chase, I recall finally being able to shoot a velociraptor at 50m with the croatian AK clone you could pick up in the game, that compared to the feats of marksmanship in ARMA or other games was something to behold.

Basically, because the player had a tension or "strength" value associated with their arm and how they could handle the weight and recoil of the gun, everything interacted in a way that felt natural.

I would love to inevitably see something similarly done in the future for some military sim, only streamlined and adapted for real playability.

Imagine how such variables could be applied to different units in the game, conscripts being inexperienced would naturally have very poor weapon control, and of course that would progress upward in a linear fashion to the special forces who would be significantly better at it.

Such technology is a generation or two away at least, simply because having hundreds of units all with their own IK simulation of weapon handling physics would be really hard on most modern systems I would imagine.

However ever since I played that game I always wondered what it would be like to see such an idea fully realized.

[PuFu 4600]

Ask for ideas then dismiss them as overcomplication. :rolleyes: As we said before, we solely want tweaks and small features if they fit in with the game, we are open to features that will make gameplay better - CQB easier, long-range harder perception... There are a lot of good ones in the past 3-4 pages for those interested. As you stated, "solutions". Well we're not scripters or developers, we can only offer ideas, perceptions or possibilities.

Who is "we" that you're talking about?

There is a certain amount of small details i would also like (such as random config reload value for weapons - say reloadTime=3.0; reloadRandom=0.2, which would mean the reload time could be vary 20% for that 3 seconds). That said, changing weapon grips on the fly is really insignificant on the long run (minus say changing shoulders, which could be part of the lean system). Plus, even with the IK animation available, i doubt it is possible if BIs would be using the same config systems as in A2 (where points the grip is defined per weapon).

[rye1 22]

Found some videos, that is actually pretty cool. Could be workable. Floppy hand. :cool:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LIELrGRpdE

The we as in the main people who talk about this topic and agree on certain points or talk to dismiss others, think from a non-developer stand-point on ideas, references: Me, Coulum, maturin, metalcraze. Insignificant, probably right depending on gameplay point of view. I for one constantly play close quarters and room clearing, and is in a clan which constantly does too, so priorities to ideas change on individual level. For the general purpose, correct. If they could pull such a system off... from the advertising and playability purpose, absolute jackpot. Thanks for the input.

Edited May 28, 2012 by Rye

[pd3 25]

Yeah, exactly.

You see what I mean about the very basic implementation of the concept, but ultimately I think this is what needs to be done in some form in order to achieve that inherent difficulty in long range shooting in a combat simulation.

Unless of course you just want to go the COD route and put a big expanding crosshair on the screen and call it a day.

[4 IN 1 0]

Rye@

You are talking about adding X and Y and Z features that needed to add another bunch of key press on an already nearly ovecrowded keyboard, that alone is enough to make things even worse.

Oh and CAR only works in very close range.

One system that I can think of is something like the old R6 did: time that takes to align the sight automaticly, only in ARMA it should be done more realistically by actually showen the alignment in porgess and let the player to make the decisions to pick the time they break that shot.

Edited May 28, 2012 by 4 IN 1

[Corvinus 35]

Fatigue idea by Corvinus here: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?122794-ARMA-3-development-blog-amp-reveals&p=2157954&viewfull=1#post2157954. Great idea for fatigue in place, but the recovery period would be... HOW? Especially to recover and stay ready to engage; this would need a fast draw speed.

My basic idea was that holding your weapon this way for a prolonged period of time should result in the same fatigue of our avatar's arms and greater muzzle sway as in looking through ironsights/optic, since the stance is almost the same. Because in Arma 2 we had increased muzzle sway after running, but if I recall properly, we were able to stand with a rifle or even a machine gun on extended arms for an unlimited period of time without any drop in accuracy (so if you are using cross-hairs, they eventually have an advantage over optics), which should exhaust your arms, especially your reaction hand IRL.

Controls could be pretty simple - just double-tapping the left CTRL key for rest as in previous games, for example, but that's for developers to decide.

As for recovery period I think some 5 - 10 seconds is enough, and you should be able to engage targets even after few seconds of rest, just not with such accuracy as after a full rest.

[batto 17]

Something like this? ;-)

[Corvinus 35]

Yes, exactly.

[-Coulum- 35]

Maybe to add onto your idea (and the idea next paragraph you posted) where your characters aim dynamically changes how you act, where you aim via a distance calculator. For instance go in vanilla and click space, it tells you distances. Maybe this distance calculator should change aiming and accuracy? So when you do aim 500m away you have to take your time! It should then be negated if you're just looking in that direction, i.e. with binoculars or without aiming down sights, because you're not engaging or getting ready to accurately engage - but down sights it kicks in.

That wouln’t work for reasons you said. Transitioning from far to close combat would be even clunkier than it is now. But still, brainstorming is good.

The Problem is shooting at close range is too easy and at far range is too hard.

The causes of the easy long range is lack of weapon sway, and lack of time required in reality to line up a shot

The cause of the hard close range is the Clunkyness of weapons – whenever you move the mouse to quickly to snap shoot you lose control, I believe there is some sort of mouse acceleration that causes this – and the horrible weapon sway/sight misalignment when moving.

The results are, when you try to snap shoot like in real life you over shoot and miss and when you go to take long shots it is possible to line up shots far faster than in reality, because you can pretty much just point and click. It results in both unrealistic CQB and far range combat.

I know all that’s been said several times before but I am organizing my thoughts.

So obviously there is more than one way to solve these problems. I think off that bat everyone can agree that

Necessary fixes/tweaks are

-Decrease and smooth out the sway of the weapon while moving.

-Make it so your sights don’t misalign nearly as much when moving.

-make weapons more responsive, like a typical shooter, depending on their weight/size

So assuming BI implemented all these, what more needs to be done to “fix†aiming and shooting. The above improvements would help but we would still have long range shooting that is far to easy, probably even more so because of more weapon “responsiveness†depending on the firearm. So how can this be fixed…

Possible Solutions

1 As Rye suggested way back, make it so that lighter weapons experience less sway, and so that heavier weapon experience more sway. Problem is, this might make CQB with am m16 still pretty hard, do to sway, and make “snipingâ€(at like 100m) with an mp5 too easy. But still, this would be a relatively good solution. Ontop of the sway, there would be some kind of “breath/and weapon control†representation: see

What about a single key to make your character do all of this. When your character isn't in a shooting position he will have significant sway, not enough to ruin CQB but enough to make shooting at more than 150 metres impractical. Then when you decide you want to make an aimed shot you press the "magic" key. The character will take 3 seconds (give or a take one perhaps) to adjust to a good stance, line up his sights control his breath, steady his weapon, adjust his grip etc. etc. In this time sway decreases, but any sudden movements result in concentration being lost and sway returning to normal. at the end of the 3 seconds sway will be totally eliminated and recoil would be significantly decreased. this lasts 2 seconds or so after which the shooter needs to breathe and has fatigued his fine muscle control. after a few breaths he can retry. This would make it so that long range shots can't be lined up in mere seconds like in a2, but can still be accurate.

2 Another idea could be to make it so weapons experience no or very little sway when you are not “zoomed inâ€, and experience noticable sway when “zoomedâ€. Since most close combat is done with zero zoom CQB would be smooth and precise like it should be and since you (well really just me, I assume everyone else is similar) usually zoom in when making long range shots more weapon sway would be applied and those shots would be harder. Of course the “magic†button (see above spoiler) would be used to temporarily stabilize your weapon as well. This method might work but would be sloppy and I am sure people would find loop holes like changing FOV. But it might be worth consideration.

3 The last Idea (for now, I will probably think of some more) would be to simple make sway only occur when looking down the sights only(but they have the "magic" steady/breath control/etc. button) This would force people to not use the sights when in close combat. The plus side would be that when not looking down the sights you would have no sway while stationary and maybe even while moving. From my personal experience this would actually be realistic, because when fighting CQB in airsoft, I rarely use sights, and instead use the “feel†for the gun, and natural instincts. The problem is, in in a computer game it is impossible to convey that “feel†for the gun and spatial awareness… thus it would be necessary to implement a helper, to represent this… yes crosshairs. But these crosshairs wouldn’t be precise like they are now. They would be like COD cross hairs -:- (minus random dispersion) with the distance from one tick to the next being about 10 cm. These would let you know the general location the rifle is pointed but would make it impossible to use it to shoot anything over 30 metres or so reliable.

Of these I think that the last one is actually the best but I can see people disliking it because of the "gamey crosshairs". Ontop of that, Maybe using the sights in CQB is common in reality, in which case this method would not be very unrealistic.

What do you guys think. Anybody else have any other ideas?

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

How about this?...

That would be pretty awesome. Of course it will never happen, And I don't expect it to, but I would definitely appreciate these type of additions.

My basic idea was that holding your weapon this way for a prolonged period of time should result in the same fatigue of our avatar's arms and greater muzzle sway as in looking through ironsights/optic, since the stance is almost the same. Because in Arma 2 we had increased muzzle sway after running, but if I recall properly, we were able to stand with a rifle or even a machine gun on extended arms for an unlimited period of time without any drop in accuracy (so if you are using cross-hairs, they eventually have an advantage over optics), which should exhaust your arms, especially your reaction hand IRL.

Controls could be pretty simple - just double-tapping the left CTRL key for rest as in previous games, for example, but that's for developers to decide.

As for recovery period I think some 5 - 10 seconds is enough, and you should be able to engage targets even after few seconds of rest, just not with such accuracy as after a full rest.

Great idea, and will be much needed to ensure people don't abuse tactical pace especially when using machine guns. I can already see people running around spraying lead everywhere with machine guns. this will discourage that type of play for realistic reasons.

Edited May 28, 2012 by -Coulum-

[rye1 22]

One system that I can think of is something like the old R6 did: time that takes to align the sight automaticly, only in ARMA it should be done more realistically by actually showen the alignment in porgess and let the player to make the decisions to pick the time they break that shot.

That's not a bad thought process.

[pd3 25]

Rye@

You are talking about adding X and Y and Z features that needed to add another bunch of key press on an already nearly ovecrowded keyboard, that alone is enough to make things even worse.

Oh and CAR only works in very close range.

One system that I can think of is something like the old R6 did: time that takes to align the sight automaticly, only in ARMA it should be done more realistically by actually showen the alignment in porgess and let the player to make the decisions to pick the time they break that shot.

You're not talking about the expanding ring system are you?

That was horrible, there's no way to do such a system without truncating a lot of very complex variables in a way that results in weapon handling and ballistics not being realistic at all.

[-Coulum- 35]

no I don't think so. I think he is suggesting that instead of the exapanding ring, there will be more weapon sway. When the ring closes there will be less weapon sway and the sights will line up. so in Rainbow six, instead of an expanding ring that shrinks over time it would be weapon sway that decreases over time. At least that's how I interpreted it.

I think that is a good Idea. But I also like the idea of breath control and having to choose when you want steady aiming and timing accordingly. As far as I know it is very hard to keep steady aim for long periods of time and in a R6 style sway thingy, it would be possible to do exactly that. being able to choose when to steady your weapon would make sniping much more engaging. But at this point anything is a step up from what we have currently.

Edited May 29, 2012 by -Coulum-

[pd3 25]

Well, from my experience shooting semi automatics if you're engaging in sustained fire your body does "adjust" to the recoil while you're firing. So that makes sense I suppose.

In fact I generally found shooting carbines without optics to be more accurate in a general sense when my body was anticipating the rhythm of the recoil.

However I genuinely believe that in time you will see actual physics play a more significant role in this sort of thing.

[rye1 22]

No he literally meant sight alignment: http://www.christiangunowner.com/handgun_sight_alignment.html. Good illustrations here. For example, raise the weapon, if the angle if off then your sight alignment is off. An extra second to align as you do this or even re-align if wrong. In-game he was suggesting it happen as you go into your sight mode, as to not instantly be on level. One second, on-line, shoot. Sights, shoot, miss, too high - sights wern't aligned when I took the shot.

[Vandrel 10]

No there are no fatigue effects from VBS2. They just slapped a "cinematic" vignette as post processing.

They didn't seem to change a thing when it comes to shooting mechanics. That's really disappointing considering there's not much time left before Alpha for people to test any changes.

Out of the box it's the same fatigue system as vanilla ArmA/ArmA2, however a past requirement sparked development of a improved system that factors in physical condition of individual players based on official military fitness test scores (PFT). So, Pvt. Schmuckatellie runs a 185 3rd class PFT and tipped 223lbs on the last weigh-in. His overall performance and marksmanship will thus be effected in comparison to Cpl. Hardcharger who's a 285 1st class PFT 175lbs stud. Running side by side on a course, speeds will vary and at the end taking a knee to fire on paper targets...the shot groups will vary as well. Marksmanship qualifications can also be factored in.

This however is presently limited to VBS2