6.5 mm and recoil management in game

[jgbtl292 0]

simulation or not - i have a avatar i feel it not . in real live my body to trainet for this make it automatic. ;) and my weapons come down by the gravity after the shot.

i have my gun not pressing with my forwardhand hand 5,56mm recoil ?? pffff its a joke

weapon on-hook of my hand , shot , weapons come back by gravity to my hand , adjust next fire .........

in the arma world - weapon in my hand , shot , weapon go hight come not down - adjuist the hight - breath - only a second ... adjust - adjust............... next fire ......... nono sry i shot live in real world with bum ond smoke and fire :D with my little g36

Edited March 20, 2013 by JgBtl292

[-Coulum- 35]

From a simulationist stand point, squishall is right; even in firefights, muscle memory will (hopefully) keep you more on target than the current system allows. That's one of the reasons we all train so much, in live fire drills. Granted, adrenalin will hinder that somewhat, but not nearly to that extent.

From a gamist viewpoint, I'd be more inclined to agree with Coulum; I like controlling recoil, since it keeps me engaged.

Yeah pretty much. I would say it depends on what you want to simulate. If you want to simulate weapon handling then squishall is the go to. Thanks by the way for sharing your knoweledge on the topic which is obviously very extenshive. If you want to simulate - no... emulate, the dynamics of a firefight than some abstractions needs to be made - not everything you see on screen can be taken literally (ie. recoil and sway).

And the results speak for themselves. With the current recoil, and sway, firefights are longer, harder and require more maneuvering with covering fire to protect your advance which contrasts against arma 2 where a fire fight is just a collection of individual, second long shootouts at hundreds of metres away, each ending in one player on one side being killed. I don't think I need to point out which of those two has more realistic firefights.

From there, it just depends on which you prefer. Modding, I think, gives the best of both worlds.

Amen. for those interestied in quickly fooling aorund with recoil in the editor try using this command.

[squishall 10]

Coulum..you are forgetting one thing. In A2 it is very easy to see soldiers at just about any range. In A3 camo works much better and it is very difficult to see them at any range. By the time you have picked out a target you are probably dead and that has to do with the unrealistic difficulty of bringing your sights to bear. The complaints of the AI being too accurate I believe extends from this issue of sway and muzzle rise. They don't have to deal with it and therefore are better at engaging quicker and repeatedly. I am finding it very frustrating to have any success. Note that I play with those red enemy octagon thingys off. Finding the enemy is very hard (and realistic I might add).

So by bringing the current sway and muzzle rise in line with reality it should lesson the frustration of have the AI always get you before you get them.

If I might add..we need to decide what we want in this title. Do we want a high fidelity simulation of modern combat with all that that entails or do we want a Call of Duty. Battlefield 3 type of game with some reality being part of it but not so much that it is inconvenient?

[-Coulum- 35]

Coulum..you are forgetting one thing. In A2 it is very easy to see soldiers at just about any range. In A3 camo works much better and it is very difficult to see them at any range.

Compared to chernarus you are right, but on maps like aliabad region, with tonnes of objects, cover, concealment and micro-terrain, I don't see how arma 3 is anymore difficult to spot in. And in Aliabad, the same poor firefight dynamics I described above are still present, so I disagree that it is only the camo and concealment in arma 3 resulting in better fights.

The complaints of the AI being too accurate I believe extends from this issue of sway and muzzle rise. They don't have to deal with it and therefore are better at engaging quicker and repeatedly. I am finding it very frustrating to have any success. Note that I play with those red enemy octagon thingys off. Finding the enemy is very hard (and realistic I might add).

So by bringing the current sway and muzzle rise in line with reality it should lesson the frustration of have the AI always get you before you get them.

Okay the ai are very poor in terms of combat ability, reaction to fire and spotting ability. In arma 3 their aiming ability is extremely good and effected very little by recoil. But is this a reason to decrease recoil and sway? I would say not. The ai should be brought to human standards not the other way around. Justifying something because "the ai can do it" is silly in my opinion. If the ai can spot us at 1 km within seconds of us firing, we shouldn't reveal enemies to the player at 1km after a couple seconds should we? (obviously you agree because you say you don't have the "red thingys" on). Same goes for recoil and sway. We shouldn't be basing those features on the ai abilities but rather basing the ai abilities on these features. For recoil, we shouldn't change recoil simply so we can compete with the ai, but rather change ai so they have a human like ability to handle the recoil.

For this discussion, since the ai is not even close to being complete/human I think it is best we assume that we are playing PVP rather than coop or SP.

If I might add..we need to decide what we want in this title. Do we want a high fidelity simulation of modern combat with all that that entails or do we want a Call of Duty. Battlefield 3 type of game with some reality being part of it but not so much that it is inconvenient?

For me, what I want for the game is to have gameplay as close as possible to realism. I want the dynamics of the fight to match those of reality. ie. I want to be able to apply the same tactics and procedures used in reality in game with the same results. I have never played COD, and from what little I have played of BF2 (never played 3) I don't want a " Battlefield 3 type of game with some reality being part of it but not so much that it is inconvenient?". And I think simulation is a bit of a heavy word to be throwing around in a game like arma.

Now, I am going to veer away from recoil and focus soley on why unrealistic abstractions are necessary in order to make a game actually become more realistic. Lets look at weapon sway. In reality a trained soldier's aim is not swaying, or swaying very very little correct? So if we are to simulate this in game we would make it so there is no sway and rather that the player shoots where he points the mouse just as in real life a soldier shoots where he point his weapon.

Also in reality, a soldier's aim is not effected by any negative acceleration - it goes where he wants it when he wants it to go. So to simulate this in game we make it so that the mouse is not effected by any funny business and goes where the soldier points it, when the player points it. Now we have our basic simulation of weapon handling. Taking it out for a test we see that a player who has a bit of experience with a computer is able to hit targets hundreds of metres away in under a second with relative ease. You can imagine how our firefights are effected by this - basically if you're seen your dead. But wait? this is not how things are in reality is it. Firefights are more than spotting and near instantly killing an enemy aren't they? If we are simulating weapon handling properly why is it our gameplay isn't realistic?

Well, even though we are technically simulating weapon handling quite accurately the problem is when it comes down to it, we are just at a computer clicking and moving a mouse from one pixel to another, which is many times easier than handling a rifle, let alone handling a rifel in a combat situation. The result is top notch 'simulation' of weapon handling, but firefights that don't play out anything like reality.

Now if we add weaponsway, even though it is unrealistic and breaks our simulation of weapon handling, the gameplay results will be more realistic. players will need to take an extra moment to control their sway by which time the enemy may be out of sight again, resulting in the need for tactics maneuvering and suppression. Thus it was necessary to have an unrealistic abstraction in game to make the game itself play more realistically.

Still don't believe me. Just try out VBS. weaponsway is there too... and it is meant to be a simulator to train actual militaries. Did they get it wrong as well?

Its not about whether a feature itself is totally realistic or not, its about whether all the features add up to a realistic experience.

Anyhow that long winded explanation/example goes for recoil as well. Sometimes it needs to be abstracted, misrepresented or exaggerated in order to make the game as a whole become more realistic. Because "simulating" it 1:1 with reality doesn't produce realistic gameplay on the broader level of the game.

There I am done, hope it wasn't TL;DR and I am interested as to what you think of the point of view I am coming from.

[squishall 10]

I'd love to debate this forever but we will have to agree to disagree. In the end all that I personally want is for them to fix the way in which the muzzle stays up in the air. It should come down without me forcing it down with my mouse. The sight sway should be less for a rested soldier than for one who just sprinted 20m and when playing as a sniper/marksman the sway should be even less to simulate a better trained/more skilled shooter.

I don't know if I am seeing things but I just went into A3 to do some more testing and the muzzle rise does not seem to be as drastic as it was at first. Could they have adjusted it?

Edited March 20, 2013 by squishall

[4 IN 1 0]

I already bring that up earlier, or though he doesn't seems to understand the mindset behind.shooting and keep arguing an artificial means is the correct way to simulate actual shooting, no matter how unrealistic it is. Allow me to repeat myself: the problem is not the gun throw off target, it never is, the problem is that the gun won't come down even when you are in a stable stance taking pot shots.

[-Coulum- 35]

I'd love to debate this forever but we will have to agree to disagree.

fair enough I guess. I guess this thread has circled enough. But do you at least acknowledge that we can't take everything we see happen on the screen for a 1:1 simulation of reality and get realistic gameplay? Or am I still out to lunch?

Allow me to repeat myself: the problem is not the gun throw off target, it never is, the problem is that the gun won't come down even when you are in a stable stance taking pot shots.

Well what I don't want to happen is the player being able to release long bursts of accurate fire without having to even think about it (just clicking and holding the mouse). Now let's discuss you'r suggestion more. What would happen when rapidly firing? would the gun continue to rise, and fall back down slightly lower than where it was originally aimed no matter how long you've been releasing a burst? After emptying a clip would you be looking down at your toes? Or would there be some kind of system that disallows the rifle from drifiting too far from the orignal point of aim.

[mr_centipede 31]

My take on this matter, since we have VBS2 style breathing (aiming sway when stationary instead of static like in ARMA 2) then I think it's probably better to return the aim at more or less (up/down/left/right) from original point of aim. Never exactly at the original point of aim. This way we still need to realign our sights instead of just "aim and fire, fire, fire," kind of play but not have to play the "mini-game" so much

Honestly I like both styles, so I kinda have mixed feelings about this. But one thing for sure is, the AI should suffer the same penalty as players do

[Reuben5150 2]

Seen this ?

http://http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?133245-Aiming-Accuracy-in-Arma-3

[Nikoteen 24]

My guess is that we'll be heard, some fixes and some tweaks and we're done :) also think to affect the AI, not only PvP.

[aoshi 1]

wanna no recoil go play a more 4fun game =D

[jgbtl292 0]

not the recoil aoshi - the point is the weapons comes not down after the shot.

[Gnalvl 1]

What we really need is someone to do a test where various shooters fire, using rifles of various calibers, with laser sights affixed to each. With a camera recording the path of the laser during each shot, we could find the appropriate range of muzzle deviation during recoil in minutes of angle, how fast the muzzle should realign on target, and how accurately it should do so.

Assuming such a test could be done, I think the best test subjects would be people who'd been through basic training and qualified with rifles, but not with years and years of experience. After all, shooting in a videogame will always be easier, and players will always compensate by pulling down and correcting with the mouse. Therefore, if you base the recoil on a SEAL with 20 years of experience, expert control of recoil, and then the player corrects with the mouse on top of that, you're back to excessively low recoil and easy long range shooting.

Also, I meant to add, it's kind of clear what happened with the 6.5mm rifles... BIS attempted to "balance" or compensate for the high capacity magazines by artificially beefing up the recoil. Since it's a fictional weapon and a fictional caliber, one can't really say it's incorrect. Though, if the goal is to emulate 6.5mm Grendel, it's not really in-between the 5.56,, and 7.62 rifles...it's over both.

Edited March 27, 2013 by Gnalvl

[Nikoteen 24]

I already imagine firing the .50 sniper rifle in the game, with no bipod account, first shot : sight in the sky.

That's the recoil model at work that some are praising here...

[4 IN 1 0]

What we really need is someone to do a test where various shooters fire, using rifles of various calibers, with laser sights affixed to each. With a camera recording the path of the laser during each shot, we could find the appropriate range of muzzle deviation during recoil in minutes of angle, how fast the muzzle should realign on target, and how accurately it should do so.

Assuming such a test could be done, I think the best test subjects would be people who'd been through basic training and qualified with rifles, but not with years and years of experience. After all, shooting in a videogame will always be easier, and players will always compensate by pulling down and correcting with the mouse. Therefore, if you base the recoil on a SEAL with 20 years of experience, expert control of recoil, and then the player corrects with the mouse on top of that, you're back to excessively low recoil and easy long range shooting.

Also, I meant to add, it's kind of clear what happened with the 6.5mm rifles... BIS attempted to "balance" or compensate for the high capacity magazines by artificially beefing up the recoil. Since it's a fictional weapon and a fictional caliber, one can't really say it's incorrect. Though, if the goal is to emulate 6.5mm Grendel, it's not really in-between the 5.56,, and 7.62 rifles...it's over both.

Replacing upward only recoil with more sideway sway will not make long range shooting easier, it just make the recoil more natural.

[Wolfstriked 11]

A question.......since the mouse sensitivity decreases when you zoom in as evidenced by how far you can turn while not zoomed as compared to zoomed,doesn't this mean that recoil will be harder to control since the mouse is less effective?

[LJF 0]

What we really need is someone to do a test where various shooters fire, using rifles of various calibers, with laser sights affixed to each. With a camera recording the path of the laser during each shot, we could find the appropriate range of muzzle deviation during recoil in minutes of angle, how fast the muzzle should realign on target, and how accurately it should do so.

Assuming such a test could be done, I think the best test subjects would be people who'd been through basic training and qualified with rifles, but not with years and years of experience. After all, shooting in a videogame will always be easier, and players will always compensate by pulling down and correcting with the mouse. Therefore, if you base the recoil on a SEAL with 20 years of experience, expert control of recoil, and then the player corrects with the mouse on top of that, you're back to excessively low recoil and easy long range shooting.

That would be ideal. It would also be interesting to see that same test repeated under stress with minimal sleep and a lot of noise against a moving target in poor light.

[Nikoteen 24]

Hey,

I made a little mod that fix the recoil to something close to what it was in ArmA 2.

Obviously, it's made for SP testing, as in MP it would be considered as a cheat.

If you guys are interested, I could publish it... Tell me.

[Wolfstriked 11]

Hey,

I made a little mod that fix the recoil to something close to what it was in ArmA 2.

Obviously, it's made for SP testing, as in MP it would be considered as a cheat.

If you guys are interested, I could publish it... Tell me.

Yes please:rolleyes:

[kernriver 4]

I'm interested. :)

[Nikoteen 24]

Ok, I will upload it later today :)

Please note that doesn't affect the hardcoded "boucing aim" ArmA 3 has introduced but that reduces significantly the upward movement and allows group shot in single fire mode (what I missed the most). I think that that mod could even please the fans of the new recoil for that reason :)

The LMG is at last controllable in standing stance and almost steady when prone, as it should be due to its caliber and firing rate.

I'm eager to hear your feedback !

[Nikoteen 24]

Mod is online to this address : http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?154338-The-Recoil-Fix-Mod-Alpha&p=2386981#post2386981

:)

[Wiki 1558]

Not tested it yet but yeah, recoil in arma 3 is a joke IMO - it's overdone

[Smurf 12]

The problem is not (just) the recoil, is that the weapon don't "fall" back in place after firing.

[Insanatrix 0]

The problem is not (just) the recoil, is that the weapon don't "fall" back in place after firing.

Yeah that's probably the biggest thing.