Dispersion to simulate inaccuracy

[instagoat 133]

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.

This.

Weapons are inherently inaccurate. The degree of this is determined by a lot of factors, but the numbers are generally public. For example, an AR-15 with a decent barrel can print 1 to 1.5 MOA groups at 100 yards. That translates into a shot group of 1~ to 1.5~ inches in diameter (About 4 centimeters.). Machineguns have much larger beaten zones, simply because they have many more moving parts, while sniper rifles print sub MOA groups unless they are shit.

What should be done is set up a shooting bench with the rifles on a fixed target, set them up for a target at 100 meters and convert (1 MOA at 100 meters = 2.908 centimeters.). Assault Rifles could be made more diverse simply by making some more accurate than others, thusly. For example, MX would probably be a mass produced, very high volumne rifle with average to high quality, the TRGs would probably Israeli or other nearby Surplus weapons, possibly of lower quality. The FNs may be more recently produced and be more accurate, while the Katiba might be just as high quality as the MX. Again, this is important.

I might even set up a ticket. :I

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=16297

Set up a ticket. I want to know what group size relevant ammunition prints through weapons approximating or equal of type to the guns ingame. The numbers I found in a quick google search online are for civilian off the shelf AR-15s, do military weapons fare better or worse?

Edit: Dispersion values are -too high- ingame. The marksman rifles have the dispersion pattern which assault rifles should have, machineguns and assault rifles are equal. The diameter of the group at 100 meters is about 10 centimeters (as opposed to the 3 - 4 centimeters it should be) for the MX Rifle. The problem lies elsewhere, not with the dispersion of the weapons it seems. I used the bullet trace script to check. Does anybody have a script that accurately marks impact points on a target instead?

Edited November 25, 2013 by InstaGoat

[Kerc Kasha 102]

Sway and recoil are much better than a RNG determining if you hit or not as it allows it to be skill based. There's a reason Counter Strike's cone of fire and recoil patterns were set the way they were as it allows people to compensate and learn the pattern of the guns recoil.

I really wish people would stop asking for 'realistic shooting' when every time its the same old 'please lower recoil to the point i don't have to actually do anything' or 'have the gun compensate for recoil itself because irl my muscles do that for me'

You're holding a mouse, not a rifle, there's no way you can use any of the above and have it behave in anyway like reality as a mouse allows for much more precision than you'd ever likely to have in reality. This is why recoil, sway and the like needs to be exaggerated. Compensating for recoil is something that comes with training in reality, and it's the same in compensating for recoil in arma, you just need to practice it.

[metalcraze 290]

Yeah 5.56 family definitely needs recoil increase as well.

[dnk 13]

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

Right, but most scopes and ironsights in game are not like this.

What exactly is demagogic about this - it's hard to be a demagogue when everyone is against your idea... Actually, that's basically the opposite of being a demagogue.

Frankly your replies have been little more than trolling, and I'm done responding to you after this one.

[Sheepdog 4]

I think the 5.56 is fine, in real life they are basically pellet guns. :p

IMO, I think the way the system is works fine, I have seen people who charge a target and miss shooting less than 10m away, so it all comes down to the player and taking the shot when you know you can make it. I was sniping the other day, guy had exact same rifle in same position, he missed target 3x I hit it on the first shot. I really think this is a non issue.

[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.

Sway and recoil are much better than a RNG determining if you hit or not as it allows it to be skill based. There's a reason Counter Strike's cone of fire and recoil patterns were set the way they were as it allows people to compensate and learn the pattern of the guns recoil.

I really wish people would stop asking for 'realistic shooting' when every time its the same old 'please lower recoil to the point i don't have to actually do anything' or 'have the gun compensate for recoil itself because irl my muscles do that for me'

You're holding a mouse, not a rifle, there's no way you can use any of the above and have it behave in anyway like reality as a mouse allows for much more precision than you'd ever likely to have in reality. This is why recoil, sway and the like needs to be exaggerated. Compensating for recoil is something that comes with training in reality, and it's the same in compensating for recoil in arma, you just need to practice it.

Right, and after a long life of playing FPS games I can compensate fairly well. Note I'm complaining not due to personal inability to deal with recoil but due to the opposite (for me and most players I think). What I want is the soldier simulated as much as everything else. Currently, the soldier is barely simulated. I remember in OA (perhaps it was ACE), severe wounding or fatigue made shooting straight very hard, as it should be. That was done via harder sway, also I found the sway (in ACE I think, but maybe it was ACE1 not 2) harder to compensate for because it was far faster, so the end result was more random. I liked that, and it made combat longer and less instantly lethal, particularly against AI, since players couldn't just sit back and one-shot them all with minimal effort. You either needed a solid DMR/sniper rifle to accomplish that or to get in closer where you were more vulnerable to their fire. It made the game challenging and made run-and-gun far less effective.

Now, I find playing the AI online (at least in SP there are mods) a cakewalk with no skill or challenge required. PvP is of course more difficult, but run-and-gun is very alive there. Players want to claim Arma's this realism bastion, yet almost every MP experience I've had has been a matter of relative supersoldiers and rambos, either against each other or against super-accurate fish-in-a-barrel AI. It's silly, the lack of appropriate recoil and soldier-simulation (of any method) leads to these sorts of tactics being optimal. 500+ meter standoff engagements where you just slowly pick off the enemy one-by-one with a few shots, where it takes like 5-10 rounds most to get 2-3 hits to kill... A single soldier with 15 mags can basically take out a platoon. It's ridiculous and dull.

There's little need for ammo management or tactics when you have superpowers and everyone's a top-tier sniper and CQC expert in one.

Statistically speaking, law enforcement (highly trained with their weapons) tend to hit 1 in 4 or 5 shots within 25 meters, and far fewer outside of that (roughly remembering this). I think typical kill rates in the military are 20 rounds : 1 kill (how accurate this is is open to debate of course).

Edited November 26, 2013 by DNK

[Kerc Kasha 102]

I understand what you're asking for but I think you're going about it the wrong way. The thing is a small deviation in accuracy like you describe is only going to frustrate people as it amounts to whether you hit the target being a dice roll so people will attach accuracy to 'being lucky' instead of 'being good'. Arma already has bullet deviation within the standards of the accuracy of the weapon its based off/the type of weapon it is.

'Simulating' user error is just prone to annoying people and artificially extending fire fights. I realize in reality you don't have perfect focus on the sights nor are they perfectly aligned etc etc, there's thousands of factors to consider when it comes to taking a shot. But this is better represented in the form of sway. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing a project reality-esque method for this, i don't mean the 'cone of fire' that PR has but rather the fact the longer you have your sights up the more accurate you are, but in this instance the more steady your shot will be, to discourage snap shooting.

To explain it better so people don't misunderstand. You sprint around a corner, stop, raise your sights, your sway is much more exaggerated. If you keep it up for a few seconds it becomes more steady

[progamer 14]

I understand what you're asking for but I think you're going about it the wrong way. The thing is a small deviation in accuracy like you describe is only going to frustrate people as it amounts to whether you hit the target being a dice roll so people will attach accuracy to 'being lucky' instead of 'being good'. Arma already has bullet deviation within the standards of the accuracy of the weapon its based off/the type of weapon it is.

'Simulating' user error is just prone to annoying people and artificially extending fire fights. I realize in reality you don't have perfect focus on the sights nor are they perfectly aligned etc etc, there's thousands of factors to consider when it comes to taking a shot. But this is better represented in the form of sway. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing a project reality-esque method for this, i don't mean the 'cone of fire' that PR has but rather the fact the longer you have your sights up the more accurate you are, but in this instance the more steady your shot will be, to discourage snap shooting.

To explain it better so people don't misunderstand. You sprint around a corner, stop, raise your sights, your sway is much more exaggerated. If you keep it up for a few seconds it becomes more steady

But project reality was not all realistic, though it was extremely realistic. The VBS2 sway is fine. If the military did not get this user error added into VBS, why would we add it in for realism?

[Kerc Kasha 102]

But project reality was not all realistic, though it was extremely realistic. The VBS2 sway is fine. If the military did not get this user error added into VBS, why would we add it in for realism?

The system may not have been realistic but it lead to a more realistic outcome where shooting quickly is inaccurate as it doesn't give you enough time to focus on what you're aiming at.

[progamer 14]

The system may not have been realistic but it lead to a more realistic outcome where shooting quickly is inaccurate as it doesn't give you enough time to focus on what you're aiming at.

Why can't we just get some vbs dispersion scripting commands then? Because that's the only way anything is going to happen rather than a continuous debate here on the forums.

Here: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=16301

VBS2 allows for dispersion control via two scripting commands called getDispersionFactor and setDispersionFactor.

[james2464 177]

I agree with Jimmy, only variables like wind should influence dispersion not randomization at least for ArmA. IMO. :)

[progamer 14]

I agree with Jimmy, only variables like wind should influence dispersion not randomization at least for ArmA. IMO. :)

Virtual Battle Space 2 has dispersion as scripting commands. But they were scripting commands not forced upon everyone because some military would have been debating with others just like we are now.

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=16301

[froggyluv 2136]

VBS2 doesn't need player dispersion - trying to aim one of their rifles is like trying to swing an 800lb Hollywood Panavision camera!

And as much as I sympathize with OP in that aiming is just a little too easy -random dispersion literally fires my rage neurons in a way I care not to go into.

[progamer 14]

VBS2 doesn't need player dispersion - trying to aim one of their rifles is like trying to swing an 800lb Hollywood Panavision camera!

And as much as I sympathize with OP in that aiming is just a little too easy -random dispersion literally fires my rage neurons in a way I care not to go into.

What I'm saying is scripting commands are better than this thread going on forever.

[Kerc Kasha 102]

Why can't we just get some vbs dispersion scripting commands then? Because that's the only way anything is going to happen rather than a continuous debate here on the forums.

Here: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=16301

VBS2 allows for dispersion control via two scripting commands called getDispersionFactor and setDispersionFactor.

You can already do this with a simple eventhandler

[dnk 13]

To explain it better so people don't misunderstand. You sprint around a corner, stop, raise your sights, your sway is much more exaggerated. If you keep it up for a few seconds it becomes more steady

I also like this approach.

VBS2 doesn't need player dispersion - trying to aim one of their rifles is like trying to swing an 800lb Hollywood Panavision camera!

And as much as I sympathize with OP in that aiming is just a little too easy -random dispersion literally fires my rage neurons in a way I care not to go into.

Seems like you're not alone in that huh :)

[John Kozak 14]

Right, but most scopes and ironsights in game are not like this.

What exactly is demagogic about this - it's hard to be a demagogue when everyone is against your idea... Actually, that's basically the opposite of being a demagogue.

To call me a troll you'll have to give something more than what you've written so far... For example, listening to what other people say might help.

And now I can say for sure you are a troll. Quite a common pattern:

1. drop in some nonsense
   
2. appeal to emotions
   
3. ignore what others say, until everyone is angered
   
4. potray a victim of "evil part of community"
   
5. call those who try to reason "trolls"
   
6. attempt to split up the community by suddenly agreeing with somebody
   
7. repeat
   

Too fat.

Edited November 26, 2013 by DarkWanderer

[Bouben 3]

Isn't the weapon sway enough? I mean people are complaining how big the sway is (I am not, I like it) and now you suggest more dispersion? And moreover random?

[best2nd 10]

Weapon dispersion should only occur when weapon barrel is overheating. This is somewhat simulated in A.C.E. 2.

Since Arma 3 doesn't feature heat buildup you can forget about dispersion...

You can write all you want, devs won't include it. (out of scope)

[byku 13]

No artificial dispersion... no way in hell :P.

[dnk 13]

To call me a troll you'll have to give something more than what you've written so far...

Yeah, clearly I've not written substantive replies, unlike yours. Here, let me try to raise myself to your level.

ORLY :D

No artificial dispersion... no way in hell :P.

Heh, seems to be the consensus. Edited November 27, 2013 by DNK

[Tonci87 163]

Artifical dispersion? Only in combination with weapon overheating. Everything else would be stupid.

[John Kozak 14]

Yeah, clearly I've not written substantive replies, unlike yours. Here, let me try to raise myself to your level

Yes, please do exactly that.

Edited November 27, 2013 by DarkWanderer

[dnk 13]

Yeah, post #11 and #14. You responded "ORLY :D", which was quite substantive compared to my point-by-point responses, so yes, you win the thread.

[maddogx 13]

Guys, the reasoning for this discussion being in the dev branch section (instead of the "wishes and ideas" thread) is already tenuous at best, but if you're going to start an argument here now, this thread definitely won't last much longer.