Dispersion to simulate inaccuracy

[dnk 13]

First off, people should note that this was originally started in the recoil thread, taken to the dev fatigue thread, and then appropriately moved to its own thread when it overgrew that thread. This was all suggested as an alteranative to the current recoil mechanism of "shooting to the sky" if you didn't constantly adjust, which many players have complained about (I'm less concerned about that aspect of it). One alternate was random direction for recoil, but in the original thread it was complained that this felt like "fighting against the avatar", which I tend to agree with. The purpose here is basically to simulate the soldier and negate the gamey tactics that have come to dominate play, particularly online.

Regarding inaccuracy/weapon sway.

I came up with this idea (well, copied a bit from another game) for changing the current recoil/inaccuracy system. It's related to fatigue, and since you're working on this already, felt I might mention it here as well.

I'd just settle for real inaccuracy [rather than recoil], and have that increase substantially for X milliseconds after a shot is fired, cumulative, up to some hard upper limit. So, each weapon has a set base inaccuracy (much higher than current, since it's not only weapon-specific MOA but also the shooter's non-super-delta-force-ability/stress), which is adjusted for stance, health and fatigue. Then, each weapon also has an amount of inaccuracy increase per shot. Then each weapon also has a set reduction of inaccuracy per second, as well as a maximum inaccuracy (you're never going to accidentally shoot 90-degrees to your intended target due to recoil).

Example:

MX base inaccuracy = 4-deg (modified by health, fatigue, stance, and skill)

MX shot increase = 6-deg (modified by health, fatigue, stance, and skill)

MX decrease/sec = 4-deg 1/(modified by health, fatigue, stance, and skill) [might be adjusted more often than 1 second, but this is the cumulative 1-sec reduction]

MX max = 14-deg (modified by health, fatigue, stance, and skill)

So, it takes about 3 seconds to return from full auto to a "perfectly" aimed shot. Any single shot will take 1.5 seconds to fully recover from back to a "perfect" shot. You can adjust the values according to how much you think recoil affects attaining a "perfectly" aimed shot (given battlefield conditions, shooter error, etc), but I think this is clearly the best way to handle it.

Proposed modifiers:

"hold breath" (total)x(0.60)

health (1.0 - 0.01) >> (x1.0 - x1.5)

fatigue (0.0 - 1.0) >> (x1.0 - x1.5)

stance (stand, crouch, prone) >> (x1.0, x0.67, x0.33)

skill (0.01 - 1.0) >> (x2.0 - x1.0)

So, a crouched man at 0.20 fatigue and 0.92 health with an "aimingskill" of 0.5, who has fired 4 shots in the past 3 seconds on an MX, without holding his breath, would have a Gaussian dispersion with 92% of shots falling within this many degrees of the cursor:

(base: 4) x (x1.1 x1.04 x0.67 x1.5) + 4x(shot: 6) x (x1.1 x1.04 x0.67 x1.5) - 3x(reduce: 4) x (x1.1 x1.04 x0.67 x1.5)

= 4.6 + 27.6 - 13.8

= 18.40 degrees

= 14 degrees (max)

That makes way more sense, I think. You could add a camera-only shake/movement (ppeffect) for each shot (that doesn't move the cursor, and which will automatically return the camera to be centered on the cursor after X amount of time). That would add to immersion and at least be slightly disorienting vis-a-vis the sight picture, without requiring constant micro-adjustments of the mouse.

Edited November 26, 2013 by DNK

[Deadfast 43]

I'd just settle for real inaccuracy [rather than recoil]

No. Please, just no. There is noting I hate more than random dice roll deciding whether I will hit something that is dead middle in my crosshairs. Deviation should be reserved for simulating inaccuracy caused by the weapon itself, nothing else.

[CaptainObvious 95]

No. Please, just no. There is noting I hate more than random dice roll deciding whether I will hit something that is dead middle in my crosshairs. Deviation should be reserved for simulating inaccuracy caused by the weapon itself, nothing else.

Very much this, perfect example of the proposed system not being very fun to play with is BF3 and its suppression.

[John Kozak 14]

Regarding inaccuracy/weapon sway.

I came up with this idea (well, copied a bit from another game) for changing the current recoil/inaccuracy system. It's related to fatigue, and since you're working on this already, felt I might mention it here as well.

<...>

This idea is implemented in many arcade shooters, but is not appropriate for a simulator. Reason is simple: in real life, the bullet is flying (roughly) where the aim is pointing. If you have a laser aim on a weapon, it will fly along that laser and not to some point 10 degrees to the side. This is a basic thing expected from a simulator or simulator-themed game. So, no, unfortunately, this doesn't make sense in the context of ArmA.

I would not object against a more random recoil pattern, though. Something in line of "current vertical recoil (reduced) + random element". Current recoil is way too uniform - regardless of shooting position or target movement.

[dnk 13]

Well, personally I think people get a bit too involved in having the virtual projectile following the path of the virtual barrel a bit much while insisting that the virtual soldier's own abilities/skills are not to be considered at all.

Which is more important: the soldier or the barrel?

And it can be tweaked to be less offensive than "BF3 suppression". Setting the max to like 5 or 10 degrees only would keep shots pretty close within 250m at worst. Make the base inaccuracy lower to like 2 degrees, and you get pretty tight shots when you're taking your time and on single-shot, as is realistic - it's only a real penalty when... you have low health, high fatigue, or low shooter skill. I suppose suppression effects could be added also, but you can reduce them to something more minor so they're only really effective when you're at a considerable range (250m+ say).

Point is, you can set the system up so that people who play "realistically" don't really have this affect them much because they're usually taking well-aimed single shots in crouched/prone positions without fatigue.

[John Kozak 14]

Well, personally I think people get a bit too involved in having the virtual projectile following the path of the virtual barrel a bit much while insisting that the virtual soldier's own abilities/skills are not to be considered at all.

Which is more important: the soldier or the barrel?

Realism + immersion. Both are sacrificed in your idea.

Soldier's skills can be taken into account in other ways without that sacrifice. Randomized recoil is one of them.

Edited November 25, 2013 by DarkWanderer

[vegeta897 13]

Recoil and weapon sway is how soldier skills are in effect. The system works because even with weapon sway, you still know where the round is going to fire when you click. If you break that, you completely break the system. Getting a lucky shot while under heavy sway actually takes skill to time it right, not relying on RNG.

[dnk 13]

Fact is with sway, you can still hit highly accurately if you know how to adjust, so in most cases it's basically being a super-soldier. Your point about getting a shot under heavy sway still being possible to do shows it. Ultimately, reality's more like the RNG than just waiting an extra half second to time it right.

If the sway was a lot more erratic and fast I'd find that as acceptable. Currently, it's just too easy to adjust for in all but the most extreme situations.

[Deadfast 43]

I suggest you play Project Reality for BF2, dispersion is used there heavily as it is the only way of preventing people from sniping one half a second after stopping within the BF2 engine. I find it infuriating as there is no way of knowing what your dispersion is until you pull the trigger and accidentally hit a barn 45 degrees to the left of whatever you were aiming for. No thanks.

[John Kozak 14]

Fact is with sway, you can still hit highly accurately if you know how to adjust, so in most cases it's basically being a super-soldier. Your point about getting a shot under heavy sway still being possible to do shows it. Ultimately, reality's more like the RNG than just waiting an extra half second to time it right.

No, it is not :)

[dnk 13]

K, I can line up a shot "perfectly" as I see it, but that bullet's still going to hit within a certain circle of my intended target, even with an ideally perfectly precise rifle with the sights properly calibrated to myself and conditions. If I've been running around a bit and breathing heavy, I'm never going to shoot as accurate as if I'm lying down calmly. I can improve my accuracy with focus and some effort, but ultimately as far as I can be concerned that shot's going to be randomly around its intended target, and more randomly than in the calm scenario. In this game, I can just take a little extra time to wait for the dot pixel to be the same as the target's pixel and click within 50ms (1 frame) and that's exactly where it's going...

but in reality my whole body's moving, muscles perhaps shaking a bit, when under fatigue conditions, and sight pictures are never as static or perfect as they are in this game, the trigger pull never as non-affecting as the mouse click, and the pull never as quick neither, such that the barrel/picture has moved by the time the weapon fires. It's all things that I can improve upon with practice and focus and effort, but things that I can never perfect, and things that my own condition can impact quite negatively in a way I can't fully compensate for, making the end result effectively random from my perspective - why'd that bullet go so far up and to the right? Hell if I know, felt good at the time I shot.

Now, I don't know much about BF's latest and "greatest" techniques and how extreme they are (seems from comments it's quite extreme). I think I've mentioned enough already that it doesn't need to be 45 degrees (indeed, that's ridiculous). Actually, I've specifically stated 10 or 14 degrees twice now. It could be even less that, plus sway (so you can feel better about your skills). Ultimately, the effect should be realistic. Frankly, I get really tired really quick of these arguments that "COD/BF does it terribly, therefore it's a bad mechanic and will necessarily be implemented in an equally terrible way." (this isn't the first issue it's been used for either...) Be fair enough to this to at least consider what I've said specifically about the seriousness of the effect being more minor than "can't hit a barn door at 50m because of the randomness." I don't want that either. I just want to have to stop fighting the mouse all the time and have the simulation, you know, simulate things.

[maturin 12]

Picking your moment in the sway cycle to shoot at a target is gameplay. It is skill-based. It rewards concentration and practice.

Shooting randomly with the forlorn hope that the game's fire cone will let you hit something is frustrating and down to luck. It is fake and it makes for bad gameplay.

[John Kozak 14]

but in reality my whole body's moving, muscles perhaps shaking a bit, when under fatigue conditions, and sight pictures are never as static or perfect as they are in this game, the trigger pull never as non-affecting as the mouse click, and the pull never as quick neither, such that the barrel/picture has moved by the time the weapon fires.

But whatever it is, the basic condition still holds: when the bullet leaves the barrel, it flies to where the barrel end is pointing (plus weapon's inherent inaccuracy - several MoA), not 10 degrees off. You're proposing to break the basic simulation truths for some artificial gameplay limitations/rewards - okay, it's fine for a game, but for another sort of game. It's fine for CoD or Battefield or Borderlands, but not for ArmA.

but things that I can never perfect, and things that my own condition can impact quite negatively in a way I can't fully compensate for, making the end result effectively random from my perspective - why'd that bullet go so far up and to the right? Hell if I know, felt good at the time I shot.

You can never perfect it, but why do you think noone can? It was made clear enough to you.

Frankly, I get really tired really quick of these arguments that "COD/BF does it terribly, therefore it's a bad mechanic and will necessarily be implemented in an equally terrible way."

Don't propose nonsense and you won't be tired reading responses on it :)

I don't want that either. I just want to have to stop fighting the mouse all the time and have the simulation, you know, simulate things.

Noone says the problem does not exist - it does, indeed. But your way of solving it is invalid - it's like adding auto-aim to "simulate the soldier training".

[dnk 13]

Feel I've stepped a bit far OT now, so it's spoilered.

@maturin

Picking your moment in the sway cycle to shoot at a target is gameplay. It is skill-based. It rewards concentration and practice.

Shooting randomly with the forlorn hope that the game's fire cone will let you hit something is frustrating and down to luck. It is fake and it makes for bad gameplay.

Keep in mind the randomness is meant to be equivalent to that of your typical real-world shooter (depending on skill selected and conditions), and in the real world there are frustrations regarding hitting randomly around the area you want to hit. How is it fake? Keeping some sway isn't out of the question - the two can be used together so some player skill can be added to the equation, but then we have the "hold breath" command to simulate this focus/effort aspect of shooting. I think that works well and would like to keep it specifically because it's simulating the soldier and has limits (you get worse shake if it's used too long).

@DarkWanderer (and Deadfasts's points further)

But whatever it is, the basic condition still holds: when the bullet leaves the barrel, it flies to where the barrel end is pointing (plus weapon's inherent inaccuracy - several MoA), not 10 degrees off. You're proposing to break the basic simulation truths for some artificial gameplay limitations/rewards - okay, it's fine for a game, but for another sort of game. It's fine for CoD or Battefield or Borderlands, but not for ArmA.

You've not yet answered why properly simulating the barrel is more important than the shooter. And there's no reason why a simulation element is inappropriate in a simulation game. Please expand further on this point and how this is a valid counter-argument. This just looks like guilt by association to me.

You can never perfect it, but why do you think noone can? It was made clear enough to you.

By definition perfection is impossible here. I don't doubt there are a few crack shots out there in the population, but why is this relevant to a discussion over typical accuracy of grunts? You can set it so that skill level has a higher determinant, so a skill of 1.0 leads to very tight groupings, while only the lower skill levels have serious impacts.

Don't propose nonsense and you won't be tired reading responses on it :)

Right, but the issue is that the reply is quite literally nonsense in that it does not respond directly to any points made. I am not proposing a 45-degree "can't shoot worth a damn" mechanism, but that seemed to be the issue of the reply, that this would copy some horribly implemented "gamey" approach done in a different series, when I've made clear I want it to mirror reality closely.

Noone says the problem does not exist - it does, indeed. But your way of solving it is invalid - it's like adding auto-aim to "simulate the soldier training".

Yet the game does have this "autoaim" in that the bullet always goes where the sight picture says it will (+/- rifle imprecision) at the time you click fire, and that the level of accuracy of this sight picture is perfect - the crosshairs are all always perfectly aligned save when on the move or turning sharply.

Frankly, I'm tired of every human always being able to hit 95% of their shots and of recoil having been made a wrist-pain-inducing matter of constant microadjustments. I'm tired of being able to constantly get easy kills on full auto running around at full speed and half health because I know how to compensate, even if in real life I couldn't compensate worth a damn in these situations. It's arcadey, moreso than BF or COD. Ultimately it's that lack of realism and the full-on gameyness that I dislike.

As I said, making the barrel shake far faster and more often (like 5x more) such that easy compensation wasn't possible is another way to do it if you must have barrel=trajectory 100% thing.

Edited November 25, 2013 by DNK

[John Kozak 14]

Yet the game does have this "autoaim" in that the bullet always goes where the sight picture says it will (+/- rifle imprecision) at the time you click fire, and that the level of accuracy of this sight picture is perfect - the crosshairs are all always perfectly aligned save when on the move or turning sharply.

Because this is how it is in real life. Reflex/holo scopes work exactly this way.

I am not proposing a 45-degree "can't shoot worth a damn" mechanism

Sorry, but you're arguing quantity yet fail to understand you've got quality mistake.

I'm tired of being able to constantly get easy kills on full auto running around at full speed and half health because I know how to compensate

ORLY? :D

, even if in real life I couldn't compensate worth a damn in these situations.

ORLY? :D

It's arcadey, moreso than BF or COD. Ultimately it's that lack of realism and the full-on gameyness that I dislike.

:D

Is your nick on the feedback tracker Fri13? I recognize some of the moves here.

Edited November 25, 2013 by DarkWanderer

[Deadfast 43]

I've moved this discussion to a separate thread. Please PM me if you'd like the title to be changed.

It could be even less that, plus sway (so you can feel better about your skills).

That's even worse because then you give the player the false impression that they can somehow influence the random number generator.

[maturin 12]

Keep in mind the randomness is meant to be equivalent to that of your typical real-world shooter (depending on skill selected and conditions), and in the real world there are frustrations regarding hitting randomly around the area you want to hit. How is it fake? Keeping some sway isn't out of the question - the two can be used together so some player skill can be added to the equation, but then we have the "hold breath" command to simulate this focus/effort aspect of shooting. I think that works well and would like to keep it specifically because it's simulating the soldier and has limits (you get worse shake if it's used too long).

Doesn't matter how it is (or arguable isn't) in real life. If 95% of people think it isn't fun, it doesn't go in the game. Not even VBS 2 or ACE. And if you made this a poll, that's what you'd find.

[metalcraze 290]

Dispersion is a big no. Guns do not magically spray.

The real issue is that the game doesn't simulate wind at all making shots always on target.

So keep telling BIS to add wind. It's doable by mods but BIS just keeps ignoring this important aspect of any gunfight in every game.

[spanishsurfer 58]

I hate this thread and idea. I played Project Reality and I hated that I never quite knew where my shots would go when I pulled the trigger, no thanks DNK!

[Smurf 12]

BF2 PR had this dispersion thing and I hate it too. But on the lastes version they kind of fix it; It is still there but at least it's a "fair" dispersion, one that makes sense.

Once you aim you take a little while to stabilize the weapon and get an acurate shot; if you are moving and do a "quick scope" your shots are off. That was done that way because of BF2's engine limitation.

At least it gave firefights some tension and duration.

I'm against artificial dispersion but it is to easy to aim and shoot in Arma.

[St. Jimmy 272]

Wind is the thing that should cause dispersion. Either that or no dispersion.

[dmarkwick 261]

There's always some dispersion. It's a property of the weapon. That said, I wouldn't wish for artificial dispersion more than the weapon's "natural" amount for any reason.

[maturin 12]

Dispersion is a big no. Guns do not magically spray.

The real issue is that the game doesn't simulate wind at all making shots always on target.

So keep telling BIS to add wind. It's doable by mods but BIS just keeps ignoring this important aspect of any gunfight in every game.

Wind isn't going to make at 200m (about where people expect to make hits without being perfectly prone, stable and calm) unless it's really blowing hard, though.

[metalcraze 290]

Wind isn't going to make at 200m (about where people expect to make hits without being perfectly prone, stable and calm) unless it's really blowing hard, though.

Wind can blow hard, wind can blow soft. There goes more of your randomness.

The point is that even at 200m there will be enough difference for a bullet not to hit right on aimpoint. It will matter.

[surfer 42]

DNK, I think it's great you are offering your time and effort to code this dispersion system. That's what you do, right? You're not asking BIS to change their year old system and finally give up their "simulation" goal, are you? So if you plan to implement this I'm all positive and will be happy to try it.

I like the idea of adding camera shake and therefor reducing the amount of recoil. Imo after shooting your burst the aim should return to near your initial aim and camshake should stop. The combination of medium recoil + camshake might give a feel of how irritating firing a weapon is. Any hardcore simulation fanatics that don't think there's any clunkiness in the game might just ignore this as it is only a suggestion to try out.

However there's also other aspects which in my personal taste would be of higher priority to fix. These are:

- "stuttering" of auto fire, based on frame rates

- too low rate of fire, probably based on the above

- vertical climb of recoil (as suggested above). Hasn't this been disproved enough? I'm sure there's data describing the exact recoil patterns of different weapons.

- and very importantly and not mentioned at all in this thread is that every inaccuracy system will have to concern the AI as well as the player.

So if you want to work on any system to get the game (or simulation if you wish) more fluid yet requesting skill to master it, I'm sure you will find many to support your efforts, especially if you agree on what's most important or what would be the best way.

Thanks for not flaming me and being gentle! ;-)

Surf