Weapon posturing

[Psychomorph 1]

I've seen some ArmA3 footage and weapon posturing seemed similar to how it is often done in games, where the weapon is held that high, that it obstructs the center horizontal line on the right side. No soldier does that in real life. Less of this, more of this. That means that no matter how large the sight is, the gun posturing should be adjusted to have the center horizontal line (height of the crosshair, spanning from the left to the right of the screen) always unobstructed. From a gamer point of view it's just not so good for awareness.

Generally I'd prefer to not even have the rifle pointed forward all the time, but held in low ready, where you have more unobstricted view and realistically need to bring up the sights to aim, or tap the fire key to quickly point the muzzle forward and shoot. Like this, or how

. A crosshair wouldn't even be necessary, but I know that's just a dream and wont see the light of day in ArmA. Maybe a mod will finally make it.

[instagoat 133]

Doubletap ctrl to lower the weapon. The new stance has the rifle where it would be irl in that position, too. Arma 2 has the rifle lower and further to the right, which results in the weapon on the soldier being pretty far away from his face.

The new stance is better. If people want the old one back, they can put that in again, I guess.

[Smurf 12]

The guy has a point. There should be a intermediary stance, bit lower (standard not looking through sights) + animation for bringing up the weapon and moving the head a little low to aim through sights, which is missing since... ever.

[Vespa 1]

Hello. Good point OP, I'll see what can be done (as usual - no promises). The problem with most weapons is the optics, we have them pretty massive and they reach right at the horizon line. However with just ironsights or a collimator, every weapon meets OP's requirement even now.

[Scoggs 1]

Hello. Good point OP, I'll see what can be done (as usual - no promises). The problem with most weapons is the optics, we have them pretty massive and they reach right at the horizon line. However with just ironsights or a collimator, every weapon meets OP's requirement even now.

I love you guys!

[Vespa 1]

And I love YOU, random citizen!

[metalcraze 290]

Yeah lower-ready stance would be interesting to try actually. May as well solve the issue of navigating inside buildings due to long weapons - if there will be no auto-lowering.

[instagoat 133]

Yeah lower-ready stance would be interesting to try actually. May as well solve the issue of navigating inside buildings due to long weapons - if there will be no auto-lowering.

If a low ready could actually be implemented, I´d mostly welcome it because of better muzzle control for the AI. Everybody muzzlesweeps everybody in A2, and more proper weapons handling both for players and the AI would be great, because friendly fire is a massive issue right now in A2, especially in close quarters.

[rye1 21]

For this to work the transitions must be able to be done whilst mobile otherwise it would be stop-start, stop-start.

[Psychomorph 1]

There should be a intermediary stance, bit lower (standard not looking through sights) + animation for bringing up the weapon and moving the head a little low to aim through sights, which is missing since... ever.

This.

Hello. Good point OP, I'll see what can be done (as usual - no promises). The problem with most weapons is the optics, we have them pretty massive and they reach right at the horizon line. However with just ironsights or a collimator, every weapon meets OP's requirement even now.

Thanks for the reply. With my first sentense I indeed made it sound like all weapon postures in ArmA3 footage were too high, while as you say, the reflex sight looks good. My point was that if you should have a scope, which is even larger because of the on-top reflex sight, the first person should adapt and compensate, that means the weapon model should be moved slightly lower and the characters head (view) maybe a slight bit higher, because you're never going to put a scope right infornt of your eyes, unless you want to aim it. At any point you keep your eye level above anything that is mounted on the gun. Things like that aren't just there to add realism, because things that happen in real life happen for a good reason, same as why the low-ready is the basic weapon posture, because it moves the gun even more out of the operators view, while it is still there ready to be aimed in a split second. Open view is awareness and awareness is control. Why should that be any different in a game?

The low-ready, fully implemented in the first person (not just for 3rd person aesthetics) has been a looong time wish of mine. That one game, Ground Branch, made it one of its main features and that sit quite well with me. A great mil-sim like ArmA simply needs to have that stuff, too. Maybe it finally will at some point in the future.

As for the weapon posturing. Personally I'd love to see it being moved a bit more to the center (horizontally), kind of to give the user a feel for holding the rifle with a tight grip. Like this. But as said, I'd love to see the low-ready as the basic posture. If you have a picture viewer that can scale up/down pictures and you can easily switch between two, then do this with these two pictures and see for yourself how nice and smooth the transition beween the low-ready and unaimed shooting is. Quite similar it would be with the transition between low-ready and aim. See how you have a more open view with the rifle at the low-ready.

Speaking about postures. I think I saw in one ArmA3 footage video an aiming pistol. One thing I totally hate about games is if the aimed pistol is held so close to the face, that you don't even see arms (this made me laugh hard when I saw it), in that ArmA3 fotage the pistol had some distance so that you could see the wrist. That was very good. If I remember correctly the unaimed posture had the pistol to much at the right side. Usually pistols are held (also at the low-ready but) somewhat close to the chest, so basically they are far more in the center (think a bit about the old DOOM pistol posturing, but of course not quite like that), this is about what I think would be cool for pistols (Picture1). And just to compare, the aimed pistol should be held far enough away from the view (Picture2). Also use here your picture viewer to see how nice a transition between the two postures would be.

I mean imagine that in CQB in ArmA3, that would be basically this, done correctly, in a game... for once.

You know, I actually often just go to YouTube and watch old R6: Rogue Spear videos (talk about dwelling in the past). The 3rd person animations, for a game that old, is brilliant and seeing the hyper realistic/authentic weapon posturing (low-ready, muzzle down checking rear, muzzle forward when shooting/aimingzooming) is just a blast to watch and never gets old. I don't remember another game that did this stuff that good and I am impatiently waiting for a game to step up and do it in the 1st person also.

.

This is not just something that belongs into a CQB game, that's the basic way to handle guns (at least it's popular), no matter if you're in a room or out in the desert. Only in a desert you might want to use a carry posture more often, which ArmA had since the beginning already.

I see that's a bit too much for once. I certainly don't expect a reply or agreement from the development team, just want them to think about it. I am 100% sure that a more realistic and authentic weapon handling and posturing can be done in a game, in a simple, very comfortable to handle and fun way. Should other community members agree, it would be good if they'd support it. That way we could make a point. I know many want this stuff in an ArmA game and as said, I'm absolutely certain that it can be done in a way that even the casual gamer wont see a problem with it.

Yeah lower-ready stance would be interesting to try actually. May as well solve the issue of navigating inside buildings due to long weapons - if there will be no auto-lowering.

Definitely agree. Trained soldiers are kind of professional with the gun, that means they can turn around and quickly lower the muzzle and raise it back up when there's an object in the way. An actual first person low-ready posture would contribute to it aesthetically very much, as the lowering process/animation would be shorter and look cleaner if the rifle is held at a slightly lowered (low-ready) state already. Win on both ends :D.

If a low ready could actually be implemented, I´d mostly welcome it because of better muzzle control for the AI. Everybody muzzlesweeps everybody in A2, and more proper weapons handling both for players and the AI would be great, because friendly fire is a massive issue right now in A2, especially in close quarters.

Oh man, I hate that muzzle sweep stuff! Though, I'm not sure if it would actually contribute to the savety of the team members, as the way I envision the low-ready situation, you'd be able to - let's say - double tap the fire key and the gun would be raised and muzzle pointed forward extremely fast and actually fired (pretty much as you fire unaimed in games, only you'd have a slight animation involved). That would be the unaimed point shooting in "extreme cases", like when you run into an enemy and simply react. The basic and main way to fire the weapon, however, would be the aim. A low-ready posture would contribute to using aim preferably, instead to lead the gamer to a point shoot (and miss) behavior caused by an always forward pointed weapon and a crosshair, which is misinterpreted as instant accuracy (BF3 style...). Aim or die, point shooting is for extreme/unusual cases (I think, don't misinterpret me as an expert, correct me should I be wrong about something).

[Panda_pl 0]

I think I would solve it by adding some weapon slow lowering behavior when you are using weapon floating zone.

But then again if you use floating zone you can do that manually.

While playing ArmA2 I would lower the rifle a bit all the time by myself so I don't see the problem. I prefer more awareness to magic CQB aim.

Am I the only one who did not push the slider all the way left for more CoD feel?

[On_Sabbatical 11]

This is partially included in ArmA 2,but what needs to be fixed is that the player needs to stops to change stances which is not logical !

[LeeManatee 4]

what about turn tactical pace in low ready stance. this will solve possible run and gun and will be realistic

[rye1 21]

Am I the only one who did not push the slider all the way left for more CoD feel?

I have mine just over half way, and with my mouse settings and sensitivities it is very reactive and I can target transition quite quickly. Well, as quick as I can make it currently. I used to play with it off but now I just can't, even though some small situations were better with it off, the majority are with it on.

[Psychomorph 1]

One thing I want to say though. All my suggestions are not the expression of displease toward how things are being made for ArmA3. In-fact I like what I have seen sofar (obviously except the large scope, and the reflex sight dot being "painted" on the lense). I like the weapon position, the feel of things and such. Obviously it also looks a bit more generic (probably by design to attract to a wider audience), which isn't such a bad thing. I just believe that a more realistic/authentic weapon posturing and handling would be a very good thing for that game. The reason many gamers had their issues with past BIS games was not because it was not generic enough, but simply because it was not always implemented well enough. A very realistic, but extremely well and userfriendly implemented weapon handling system would be ahead of anything comparable, for a mil-sim for sure. Now that BIS is attempting to "fix" ArmA, it would be nice to see it done right.

I think I would solve it by adding some weapon slow lowering behavior when you are using weapon floating zone.

But then again if you use floating zone you can do that manually.

While playing ArmA2 I would lower the rifle a bit all the time by myself so I don't see the problem. I prefer more awareness to magic CQB aim.

I've been playing Infiltration for 11 years now (an ancient Unreal Tournament mod). It has a floating zone (we call it free-aim), but the unique aspect of it is that the floating zone is wider to the bottom than it is to the sides and the top. Result is the first, to me known, game that has an active, user handled 1st person low-ready stance. You aim the sights, but move the muzzle lower to have an open view, once you have sighted a target, you move the muzzle up with the mouse, place the irons on target and fire, after fireing you lower the muzzle back to the bottom and scan the area. I's one of the most brilliant things I've seen in a game.

While Infiltration's system is truly brilliant, it also has drawbacks:

Drawback Nr1 is that you have the sights always aimed, you move the gun down to lowready, but the gun stays aimed, not very visually realistic.

Drawback Nr2 is the fact that there is awlays a floating zone, if you want to take a glance up, you can no longer keep the gun at low-ready, as to look up you need to move the entire weapon up (to the screen center and a bit further), which then obstructs your view. This is both, uncomfortable and very unrealistic. Quite limitting.

That is the reason why I support a "locked" low-ready posture. That way you can look and turn around without a floating zone being in your way and the weapon always being in the bottom of your view and the view always open and unobstructed. As much as I love moving the gun with my own hand in Infiltration, it is just too limiting and at the far end too unrealistic.

what about turn tactical pace in low ready stance. this will solve possible run and gun and will be realistic

That would apply naturally I think. The run and sprint should lower the rifle completely, while the walk and tactical pace (and standing still) would have the low-ready. Aim should be the main shooting method, being it in CQB or range. Point shooting would be a possibility for all kinds of situations.

One thing I did not mention. I am not really against a crosshair, while I think a real expanding crosshair would not be necessary, a small dot would be a good simulation of a focus point. What I mean with "focus point" is that in real life you can focus on a target and either shoot at it unaimed relatively accuratley on close distances, or point the sight relatively accurately on it. Hand/eye coordination and a skilled shooter is really fast and accurate. The dot would simulate that ability to focus, so you could use that dot as a reference point of where the gun goes, but it would never be accurate enough for point shooting and the sight would never be perfectly aligned with it. Think about it as a help to simulate the focus point and the characters hand/eye coordination abilities, but you'd still need to aim the sights properly to be really accurate. If you know what I mean. :386:

[Panda_pl 0]

@Psychomorph

That's some interesting point, however I do think ArmA3 level design (*ekhm*) will involve far less "verticality"...

Besides what I was talking about is how you keep the weapon when you are not aiming, since I believe floating zone decreases when you aim and zoom in.

Perhaps the upper boundary of float zone should be middle of screen, since rising weapon higher to have it occlude the view too much is useless anyway, you would never do that intentionally. Or have it separately adjusted.

[blu3sman 11]

I agree with above points. Low ready should be default position. I have idea that weapon should be raised only while holding specific key(except when prone obviously), spacebar would do. So WASD is normal jog, hold Space+WASD = tactical pace, Shift+Space+WASD = usual arma walk. That can prevent stupid raising-lowering weapon every few seconds, when switching run-walk. Also it would require at least some effort for "cod run-n-gun tactical pace". Any thoughts?

[chortles 263]

So you propose that the new stance be hampered? I'm fine with just adjusting tactical pace to support the low ready and the original proposal that the fire key alone is enough for point shooting, no need to drag the Space key into this... especially when tactical pace is not "cod run-n-gun".

[blu3sman 11]

How is new stance going to be hampered?

I think its just realistic to require some action to bring weapon up and keep holding it in firing position. It can be tied with weapon resting system, so there will be no need to hold key while gun is rested. Because constantly pointing your gun everywhere you look in all situations is not normal and is a bit tiring.

[chortles 263]

That's no better than the old ARMA 2 system where it was Shift to force you into walk speed and thus raise the weapon, when the point of tactical pace seems to have been partially negate that; I know that when I used SMK Animations (oh hey the inspiration for tactical pace) I definitely used tactical pace as my default.

[metalcraze 290]

If a low ready could actually be implemented, I´d mostly welcome it because of better muzzle control for the AI. Everybody muzzlesweeps everybody in A2, and more proper weapons handling both for players and the AI would be great, because friendly fire is a massive issue right now in A2, especially in close quarters.

Yeah it's a great idea

The problem here of course is that raised weapon looks cool (like in other shooters) and lower-ready not so much. But it's more usable and can solve those aforementioned issues both for player and the AI.

Hope BIS considers this. It will be great to try out this in alpha and compare to the default stance.

No need for any additional clicks on player's side. The weapon can be lower-ready by default but whenever you press LMB - the soldier will immediately bring it up and fire (without aiming)

And if you press RMB - then you will look through ironsights. It should be same as now except the stance animation will be different.

Edited August 19, 2012 by metalcraze

[Psychomorph 1]

@PsychomorphThat's some interesting point, however I do think ArmA3 level design (*ekhm*) will involve far less "verticality"...

Could be true. In Infiltration there are also maps that have less verticality (open arid environments), the thing however is, that when moving the gun down to lowready, you can not always know when to stop and at some point can reach the lowest floating zone "border" and pull the entire view a little bit down. To correct this and raise the view you still need to move the gun all the way up and then down again to move it back to lowready. This is one of the few things I really never liked...

Besides what I was talking about is how you keep the weapon when you are not aiming, since I believe floating zone decreases when you aim and zoom in.

Perhaps the upper boundary of float zone should be middle of screen, since rising weapon higher to have it occlude the view too much is useless anyway, you would never do that intentionally. Or have it separately adjusted.

...while on the other hand I'm aware that in case of ArmA we talk about an unaimed weapon position where you can bring down the gun to lowready, so even if you have to raise your view, you move the gun up and it will never obstruct your view and should not be the same problem as the aimed guns in Infiltration. However, in Infiltration you can have the guns unaimed, too (it's hipped, but I awlays liked to see it as a carry posture) and even then I awlays hated to sway the entire gun around (ironically especially when unaimed) to change my looking direction.

Guess it's all personal preference, so I do not disagree with your point of view, but my actual, main point regarding the subject however is the following: A floating zone is a user manupulated feature. In Infiltration I always like to keep the guns lowered, just because it feels right and realistic to me, while I don't always have to. When shouldering the guns in Infiltration (which makes them aimed also) it is on the other hand natural to move them lower, simply because the sights are in the way. So even if you're a gamer who has zero knowledge of how weapons are handled in real life, in Infiltration you're going to instinctively lower the sights to have more view. In ArmA, with the floating zone + unaimed guns, most people will see the floating zone merely as away to sway the guns around (even if they know how using real guns work), only few will have the awareness to actually see and use it as a low-ready. Thus, for me it is not a really good implementation of low-ready.

A locked low-ready stance does not require the player to understand it. The soldier character will use this stance by default and you will always see the correct posturing in the 3rd person and 1st person.

The problem here of course is that raised weapon looks cool (like in other shooters) and lower-ready not so much. But it's more usable and can solve those aforementioned issues both for player and the AI.

Hope BIS considers this. It will be great to try out this in alpha and compare to the default stance.

I see it actually quite the other way around. Nothing is cooler than a soldier with his gun at low-ready, while all the games where the guys run around with their rifles pointed straight forward all the time annoy me quite a bit.

There needs to be something clarified on my end. If you browse "low-ready" on google, you find a variety of postures actually, some are quite low, others less. The one I thought about would be the latter, so the muzzle is lowered just a bit (about 15° - 20°). So basically the gun is still kind of pointed forward, only not ridiculously straight, but slightly lowered (more like this).

This has an aesthetical inpact, but also functional, because it looks realistic and cool, players have an open view and people will be, hopefully, not stimulated to shoot unaimed (because of an always forward pointed, ready gun and a crosshair), but to aim at the first place.

No need for any additional clicks on player's side. The weapon can be lower-ready by default but whenever you press LMB - the soldier will immediately bring it up and fire (without aiming)

And if you press RMB - then you will look through ironsights. It should be same as now except the stance animation will be different.

Yeah, that's the basic idea.

I agree with above points. Low ready should be default position. I have idea that weapon should be raised only while holding specific key(except when prone obviously), spacebar would do. So WASD is normal jog, hold Space+WASD = tactical pace, Shift+Space+WASD = usual arma walk. That can prevent stupid raising-lowering weapon every few seconds, when switching run-walk. Also it would require at least some effort for "cod run-n-gun tactical pace". Any thoughts?

Thanks for supporting this idea, but as the other guys said, there is no need for additional buttons. The feature will be pretty much as it is now, only will look and hopefully work a bit more realistic/authentic.

Edited August 19, 2012 by Psychomorph

[metalcraze 290]

This one is cool too:

http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/media/images/modified-low-ready-position.jpg

The ideal solution however if BIS is to implement auto-lowering when close to walls (please BIS - it will really solve a lot of CQB issues) that will lower weapon more like this http://www.magnesiumproductions.com/tacstrap/DanLowReady.jpg

And normally (when no walls are colliding with a weapon) it will be like the stance above.

Either way it will solve that annoyance with large optics (like IR) obscuring half the view.

[Psychomorph 1]

This one is cool too:

http://www.personaldefensenetwork.com/media/images/modified-low-ready-position.jpg

That's good, but looks more like 30°. Not a problem, but keep in mind, that the way I meant it is that the 3rd person low-ready and 1st person should match exactly. Having a lower low-ready posture in the 3rd person would make the gun in the 1st person too low and this would give the player the feeling that the gun is not fast enough, especially in CQB. Because ArmA3 already has a carry posture, there is no need for a too low low-ready. The low-ready in the firt person should still look "pointed forward" enough, to comfort the player and give him the right understanding of the posture. This would also require a shorter "raising the muzzle" animation, making point shooting in CQB accessible enough.

I try to approach this concept from vatious view angles. It is not only about realistic aesthetics, but a matter of comfort, too and not to forget the player psychology and how the player interprets things that he/she sees. It should be balanced between these things.

The ideal solution however if BIS is to implement auto-lowering when close to walls (please BIS - it will really solve a lot of CQB issues) that will lower weapon more like this http://www.magnesiumproductions.com/tacstrap/DanLowReady.jpg

And normally (when no walls are colliding with a weapon) it will be like the stance above.

Either way it will solve that annoyance with large optics (like IR) obscuring half the view.

Yes please! Immediate muzzle lowering when lasering close corners and objects or moving up to walls and team members.

IR LASER

Another subject I forgot to mention!

In ArmA3 it seems that you activate that IR laser separately. I awlays thought it would be a much better and easier way to activate the IR laser with the aim key. Think about it, you do not aim sights with the NV goggles, but the IR laser is meant to be a method of aiming when using NV goggles at night missions. So logically, when not using NVG's, you aim the sights with the aim key, if using NVG's you aim the gun with the IR laser (automatically) also with the aim key. So you'd keep the gun at low-ready when using NVG's, but raise the muzzle and activate the laser only when actually "aiming".

That would be revolutionary, wouldn't it?

[Tonci87 163]

That's good, but looks more like 30°. Not a problem, but keep in mind, that the way I meant it is that the 3rd person low-ready and 1st person should match exactly. Having a lower low-ready posture in the 3rd person would make the gun in the 1st person too low and this would give the player the feeling that the gun is not fast enough, especially in CQB. Because ArmA3 already has a carry posture, there is no need for a too low low-ready. The low-ready in the firt person should still look "pointed forward" enough, to comfort the player and give him the right understanding of the posture. This would also require a shorter "raising the muzzle" animation, making point shooting in CQB accessible enough.

I try to approach this concept from vatious view angles. It is not only about realistic aesthetics, but a matter of comfort, too and not to forget the player psychology and how the player interprets things that he/she sees. It should be balanced between these things.

Yes please! Immediate muzzle lowering when lasering close corners and objects or moving up to walls and team members.

IR LASER

Another subject I forgot to mention!

In ArmA3 it seems that you activate that IR laser separately. I awlays thought it would be a much better and easier way to activate the IR laser with the aim key. Think about it, you do not aim sights with the NV goggles, but the IR laser is meant to be a method of aiming when using NV goggles at night missions. So logically, when not using NVG's, you aim the sights with the aim key, if using NVG's you aim the gun with the IR laser (automatically) also with the aim key. So you'd keep the gun at low-ready when using NVG's, but raise the muzzle and activate the laser only when actually "aiming".

That would be revolutionary, wouldn't it?

No. An IR Laser gives away your position to all enemys with NV Gear. Automatically turning the IR Laser on would be desastrous.