Weapon Inertia & Sway Feedback (dev branch)

[Sim.M 48]

basically that sort of movement (in the video) makes no sense - why would my weapon move so much unless I was totally worn out by running?

But what I'm talking about is the side to side movement that occurs when I turn towards a target and have my weapon sway from side to side for 2-3 seconds - even if I'm crouched or prone and not tired. This inertia thing is what is making me feel ill as I have to try and get my weapon back under control and it sways even more and it is driving me nuts. When it first showed up I thought something was wrong with my game, but once I found out it was a 'feature' it totally pissed me off. I'm using 3d scopes but it also does it with 2d scopes and it does actually make me feel motion sick.

In my own real life experience my muscle control, body movement and arm position eliminated most of the weapons inertia - and I never had to fight it for several seconds like I do with this new feature. To me it like my weapon is now 6' long and being held on a pivot at its end - which is total BS and in my mind, totally unrealistic.

[St. Jimmy 272]

basically that sort of movement (in the video) makes no sense - why would my weapon move so much unless I was totally worn out by running?

Standing, 100% fatigued and not trying to control the breath is the reason for that sway.

But what I'm talking about is the side to side movement that occurs when I turn towards a target and have my weapon sway from side to side for 2-3 seconds - even if I'm crouched or prone and not tired. This inertia thing is what is making me feel ill as I have to try and get my weapon back under control and it sways even more and it is driving me nuts. When it first showed up I thought something was wrong with my game, but once I found out it was a 'feature' it totally pissed me off. I'm using 3d scopes but it also does it with 2d scopes and it does actually make me feel motion sick.

In my own real life experience my muscle control, body movement and arm position eliminated most of the weapons inertia - and I never had to fight it for several seconds like I do with this new feature. To me it like my weapon is now 6' long and being held on a pivot at its end - which is total BS and in my mind, totally unrealistic.

I agree that it feels weird that when I'm aiming and I turn and then stop the gun but there's side to side sway after that doesn't feel natural. Because it feels like the aim doesn't stop there where I really stopped it but it moves off to left or right a bit and I'm not talking about sight alignment because it happens when the sights are already aligned. If anyone's wondering what I mean you can see it in this video when he turns left-right-left and stops. When he stops the gun moves right and back to left

[roshnak 41]

basically that sort of movement (in the video) makes no sense - why would my weapon move so much unless I was totally worn out by running?

But what I'm talking about is the side to side movement that occurs when I turn towards a target and have my weapon sway from side to side for 2-3 seconds - even if I'm crouched or prone and not tired. This inertia thing is what is making me feel ill as I have to try and get my weapon back under control and it sways even more and it is driving me nuts. When it first showed up I thought something was wrong with my game, but once I found out it was a 'feature' it totally pissed me off. I'm using 3d scopes but it also does it with 2d scopes and it does actually make me feel motion sick.

In my own real life experience my muscle control, body movement and arm position eliminated most of the weapons inertia - and I never had to fight it for several seconds like I do with this new feature. To me it like my weapon is now 6' long and being held on a pivot at its end - which is total BS and in my mind, totally unrealistic.

To address your concerns about the sway, at the start of that video I am worn out from running. I was about 60% fatigued, standing, not using the hold breath feature (which is brutally overpowered), and not attempting to control the sway at all.

I think a video of what you're experiencing and what you don't like about it would really help. Without one, I can really only guess at what exactly you're experiencing, and I can't tell you whether it's normal or not. Is the inertia that you're experiencing more dramatic than what is shown in this video?

A few notes about the inertia system:

The severity of inertia/sight misalignment and the resulting sway is based on your turn speed. Try not to rotate extremely quickly if you don't have to, as it will result in a great deal of sight misalignment and excessive sway.

Some sort of inertia system was absolutely a thing that people were requesting following the release of Arma 3. While I, personally, was fine with it, there were many people on these forums that were very unhappy with the unlimited turn rate that was introduced in Arma 3.

You say that in real life you utilize muscle control, body movement, and arm position to negate weapon inertia -- the argument could be made that the necessity to execute smooth mouse movements to prevent inertia driven sway, or to use manual mouse movements to do so negate sway that results from quick movements is roughly analgous to what you described.

I think that it's also worth noting that BIS has stated that it is not their intention to create a one-to-one simulation of the experience of handling a firearm.Doing so can't really be accomplished with a mouse and keyboard, and they decided instead to implement what some would consider "gamey" mechanics to roughly represent the various weapon characteristics. Weapon sway, while not completely realistic and perhaps exaggerated, is designed to make using a weapon more skill based than it previously was and to curb the common situations in previous games where players would routinely engage targets at ranges far exceeding what would be considered reasonable in the real world. The weapon inertia is designed to represent the decreased mobility and agility that comes with carrying a heavier or longer weapon over a lighter or shorter one. With that in mind, it may be more helpful to suggest alternative ways to represent those characteristics if you find the current system unsatisfactory (although I suspect that it's unlikely to change much, if at all, at this point).

Of course, if the inertia that you're experiencing is significantly more dramatic than what was shown in the above video, then this is all moot because you just have a bugged install.

Edited October 26, 2014 by roshnak

[machineabuse 11]

What I really find annoying is how 3D scopes move independently from the PoV. In reality my face would be pressed down on the stock in a tight cheekweld to use a magnified optic. In A3 the scope is moving about like it has a life of it's own.

This results in my mouse inputs moving the PoV in order to try and line up a drifting reticule on a static environment. With TrackIR, the natural tendency is to try and stabilize one's head movement to the environment. So in the end the player ends up juggling alignment of anywhere between 3 and 4 planes of movement which is infuriating.

I can see why some TrackIR users would call it nauseating even if I don't personally suffer any ill effects other than annoyance. Our group has been staging a proliferation of head tracking devices and our two newest Freetrack users both report the hardest part of learning headtracking is the small arms sway behavior.

In my opinion the sway behavior should move in lockstep with the PoV when looking through 3D scopes. Also head tracking should be locked while looking through 3D scopes (that has been on the issue Tracker since the inception of 3D scopes and it's still an annoying issue.).

[devilslayersbane 28]

What I really find annoying is how 3D scopes move independently from the PoV. In reality my face would be pressed down on the stock in a tight cheekweld to use a magnified optic. In A3 the scope is moving about like it has a life of it's own.

This results in my mouse inputs moving the PoV in order to try and line up a drifting reticule on a static environment. With TrackIR, the natural tendency is to try and stabilize one's head movement to the environment. So in the end the player ends up juggling alignment of anywhere between 3 and 4 planes of movement which is infuriating.

I can see why some TrackIR users would call it nauseating even if I don't personally suffer any ill effects other than annoyance. Our group has been staging a proliferation of head tracking devices and our two newest Freetrack users both report the hardest part of learning headtracking is the small arms sway behavior.

In my opinion the sway behavior should move in lockstep with the PoV when looking through 3D scopes. Also head tracking should be locked while looking through 3D scopes (that has been on the issue Tracker since the inception of 3D scopes and it's still an annoying issue.).

You're arms will move independently of your head, mind you. This, combined with the fact that the pivot point is just below the head, means more movement on the scope than your head. However, your eye actually adjusts to this and follows the crosshair.

[andersson 285]

It looks like the weapon inertia (movement lag..) is towards the stock, not the barrel. That makes it look so wrong as the backside of the gun should be against the shoulder.

[drill 1]

It's a unrequested modification to the game that is very annoying to many of us.

Well, I've requested that kind feature (as the many other people) even before the release (there's even ticket in bugsystem). So it is requested modification.

Edited October 26, 2014 by Drill

[DancZer 65]

I like this feature. It has given sense for smaller weapons.

[twisted 127]

Well, I've requested that kind feature (as the many other people) even before the release (there's even ticket in bugsystem). So it is requested modification.

a pretty heavily requested feature. right now its really managable. just dont run full pace all over the place then expect to have super calm accuracy. makes things a tiny bit more tactical. but that video above looks bugged - way more inertia/sway than i every have. try a check chace on steam man.

It looks like the weapon inertia (movement lag..) is towards the stock, not the barrel. That makes it look so wrong as the backside of the gun should be against the shoulder.

good point. coincidentaly i always found it starnge that to actually see so much of the arse end of the gun - my avatar should have a good cheek weld so i should see mainly the iron sights and top of the rifle. not so far back and even quick a lot of the stock.

[roshnak 41]

It looks like the weapon inertia (movement lag..) is towards the stock, not the barrel. That makes it look so wrong as the backside of the gun should be against the shoulder.

It would definitely be better if the pivot point was at the shoulder, but I'm not sure if that's possible with the camera trick system that they're using.

[Sim.M 48]

Well, I've requested that kind feature (as the many other people) even before the release (there's even ticket in bugsystem). So it is requested modification.

So you're happy that something that doesn't affect the AI or really heavy weapons (tank guns for example) is applied to the infantryman when he moves 10-20 degrees off center to a target and the sway can last anywhere from 2-5 seconds? This is something you wanted in Arma? I've never (in real life) had that sort of movement unless I was firing off-hand (that means standing straight up) and trying to keep my sights on target for an excess of 20 seconds. Combat shooting (Target, ID, Aim, Fire) usually takes about 2-3 seconds - total time - with this I now have to got Target - Sway (2-3 seconds) - ID - Aim (2+ seconds) - Fire - making it near impossible to do accurate fire in under 2-3 seconds. Of course the AI don't suffer this disadvantage (nor do large heavy weapons) - so I'm getting taken out a lot more in game than before, even if I spot the enemy first.

If you guys 'want' this sort of BS that's fine - just give me and other server Admins the ability to turn it off in our server configs.

[roshnak 41]

So you're happy that something that doesn't affect the AI or really heavy weapons (tank guns for example) is applied to the infantryman when he moves 10-20 degrees off center to a target and the sway can last anywhere from 2-5 seconds? This is something you wanted in Arma? I've never (in real life) had that sort of movement unless I was firing off-hand (that means standing straight up) and trying to keep my sights on target for an excess of 20 seconds. Combat shooting (Target, ID, Aim, Fire) usually takes about 2-3 seconds - total time - with this I now have to got Target - Sway (2-3 seconds) - ID - Aim (2+ seconds) - Fire - making it near impossible to do accurate fire in under 2-3 seconds. Of course the AI don't suffer this disadvantage (nor do large heavy weapons) - so I'm getting taken out a lot more in game than before, even if I spot the enemy first.

If you guys 'want' this sort of BS that's fine - just give me and other server Admins the ability to turn it off in our server configs.

Have you read my last post on the previous page? I'm still trying to figure out exactly what you're experiencing and whether or not the behavior is intentional. I've certainly never experienced 5 seconds of sway resulting from inertia.

[machineabuse 11]

Have you read my last post on the previous page? I'm still trying to figure out exactly what you're experiencing and whether or not the behavior is intentional. I've certainly never experienced 5 seconds of sway resulting from inertia.

What 7th_Serf is trying to say is that compared to real life shooting the sway feels nothing like it, which is an opinion I concur with.

Fun fact; in reality you don't see the rise and fall of your sights with breathing unless you are prone or have your weapon steadied on something. What you do see is the sights jittering on target because of involuntary muscle movement and that looks very much like how ArmA 2 did fatigue related aiming interference.

[roshnak 41]

What 7th_Serf is trying to say is that compared to real life shooting the sway feels nothing like it, which is an opinion I concur with.

Fun fact; in reality you don't see the rise and fall of your sights with breathing unless you are prone or have your weapon steadied on something. What you do see is the sights jittering on target because of involuntary muscle movement and that looks very much like how ArmA 2 did fatigue related aiming interference.

If that is the case, why does he keep talking about inertia?

In the post that I referred Serf to, I addressed the issue of the sway and inertia not acting exactly as they do in real life. I wrote a whole paragraph on it. No one (recently) has claimed that those systems are 100% realistic -- they aren't supposed to be, so arguing that they aren't is missing the point. If someone has a problem with those systems, they would be better served by suggesting alternative ways to accomplish what those systems do, in what they perceive to be a more realistic manner. Although, I believe that the sway, at least, is more realistic than some people would like to give it credit for.

But, again, none of this matters if what Serf is suffering from the not-too-uncommon inertia bug, which he may very well be. What he is describing (5 seconds for sway to settle following sight misalignment, 7+ seconds to acquire and engage a target) are not consistent with what I'm experiencing. I am certainly capable of acquiring and engaging targets in 2-3 seconds with the new mechanics. I can only conclude that, assuming he isn't just whipping his aim around like he's playing Quake, 7th_Serf is either exaggerating his experiences, or suffering from the inertia bug.

[machineabuse 11]

To make it short, I observe as well that sway kicks in only after inertia has settled which again is not how it works in reality relative to authenticity in the game.

I think we all can appreciate that you feel that the way Inertia and Sway is now is good enough for you mate. There are still many of us who feel it could improve. The system's merits speak for themselves and don't require a vicarious defense. We only want to have a better implementation of those merits.

This discussion benefits nothing from flinging accusations around at other participants.

The sway is only realistic insofar as anyone has read any instructional publication on how to be a more accurate shooter, which frequently omits the fact that the rise and fall of a breathing pattern is only observable in a supported position which they assume you will take when you want to maximize your stability. What involuntary body movement looks like when unsupported (and/or tired) is markedly different. Again; more like how A2 does it.

Repeatedly bringing up that the current implementation did not aim to reflect reality is not a constructive counter argument. It leads to a place that presumes nothing can or should be done towards improvement.

Edited October 28, 2014 by Machineabuse
explanation

[mjolnir66 48]

really heavy weapons (tank guns for example)

Why would it? Why would it effect tank guns? In fact, how would that even work? How could you possibly misalign the sights on your tank gun?

[roshnak 41]

To make it short, I observe as well that sway kicks in only after inertia has settled which again is not how it works in reality relative to authenticity in the game.

7th_Serf never said anything about having a problem with the sway only kicking in after the inertia has settled, so I didn't address it. I agree that it's not ideal, however. Would you feel better about the system if the sway was present throughout the sight misalignment period? This is a serious question.

This discussion benefits nothing from flinging accusations around at other participants.

What are you talking about? How am I flinging accusations at anyone? I merely stated that his experiences don't line up with my own and that I suspect he is either exaggerating his experiences (not at all uncommon in this thread), or he is suffering from a bug in the inertia system (also not uncommon, and certainly not his fault).

The sway is only realistic insofar as anyone has read any instructional publication on how to be a more accurate shooter, which frequently omits the fact that the rise and fall of a breathing pattern is only observable in a supported position which they assume you will take when you want to maximize your stability. What involuntary body movement looks like when unsupported (and/or tired) is markedly different. Again; more like how A2 does it.

I don't really want to get into this again, but we have had as many military personnel (including one I know personally) saying that the system is closer to right than not as we have had saying the opposite. Could the system still be tweaked? Of course, but that doesn't mean that it's completely wrong or unrealistic.

Either way, surely you would agree that the Arma 2 system resulted in battles at extreme and unrealistic ranges and made it trivial to engage targets at 500+ meters.

Repeatedly bringing up that the current implementation did not aim to reflect reality is not a constructive counter argument. It leads to a place that presumes nothing can or should be done towards improvement.

Nowhere have I said that nothing can or should be done to improve the system. In fact, I have done the opposite. I have repeatedly stated that it is not helpful to simply claim the system isn't realistic, but that people should instead actually suggest ways of changing or improving the system while still accomplishing the things that BIS is trying to accomplish with the current sway and inertia mechanics.

Edited October 28, 2014 by roshnak

[machineabuse 11]

7th_Serf never said anything about having a problem with the sway only kicking in after the inertia has settled, so I didn't address it. I agree that it's not ideal, however. Would you feel better about the system if the sway was present throughout the sight misalignment period? This is a serious question.

I posit porting the behavior from A2 for anything other than a supported position would be ideal.

What are you talking about? How am I flinging accusations at anyone? I merely stated that his experiences don't line up with my own and that I suspect he is either exaggerating his experiences (not at all uncommon in this thread), or he is suffering from a bug in the inertia system (also not uncommon, and certainly not his fault).

I'm sure asking him to further elaborate his position would be more fruitful.

I don't really want to get into this again, but we have had as many military personnel (including one I know personally) saying that the system is closer to right than not as we have had saying the opposite. Could the system still be tweaked? Of course, but that doesn't mean that it's completely wrong or unrealistic.

Either way, surely you would agree that the Arma 2 system resulted in battles at extreme and unrealistic ranges and made it trivial to engage targets at 500+ meters.

I cannot speak for A2 vanilla as we played mostly ACE2, however in my experience in ACE2 weapon stability at all ranges was handled well. In optimal conditions hitting at 500+ is not particularly difficult especially if you have an ACOG. Things change as you get tired/wounded/suppressed and also due to the fact that ACE2 had included modeling for wind and more authentic weapon dispersion.

Nowhere have I said that nothing can or should be done to improve the system. In fact, I have done the opposite. I have repeatedly stated that it is not helpful to simply claim the system isn't realistic, but that people should instead actually suggest ways of changing or improving the system while still accomplishing the things that BIS is trying to accomplish with the current sway and inertia mechanics.

The first step to fixing a problem is acknowledging the presence of the problem. The frequency and recurrence of a complaint is also useful data. I'm sure BI will do what BI does regardless of the discussion, it does help though that complaints are heard and to a certain extent humored to see where they go. This is why I'm inclined to at least give 7th_Serf the benefit of the doubt with his observations ;)

[roshnak 41]

I'm sure asking him to further elaborate his position would be more fruitful.

I did. Three times. With multiple example videos. Did you even read the posts that I've been referring to?

Number one: In which I suggest that he may be encountering the inertia bug and provide a video from another user as an example.

Number two: In which I ask him to elaborate on whether it is the inertia or sway that is causing him to feel nauseous, and provide a video of high sway as an example.

Number three: In which, having clarified that it is the sway that he is having a problem with, I ask him to explain exactly what he's experiencing, suggesting that a video would be helpful. I then provide my own video of what normal sway looks like and ask for confirmation that this is what he is experiencing.

Number four (this is where you come in): In which I refer 7th_Serf back to post number three, stating that I would still like clarification on what exactly he is experiencing.

In optimal conditions hitting at 500+ is not particularly difficult especially if you have an ACOG.

Okay.

[machineabuse 11]

From my point of view honestly it seems like you are insistent on attributing his subjective experience to the inertia bug rather than taking his posts at face value that he just doesn't feel that the current system is reasonable.

[St. Jimmy 272]

Could the horizontal sway be taken out from the weapon inertia simulation? It would be much better if the only gun drags behind the heavier it is. Sometimes with the current system it feels like that but sometimes it's very wrong and the gun sways left and right when you stop the mouse. I'll upload a video later and say when it feels right and when it's wrong.

---------- Post added at 03:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:06 PM ----------

Here's a video about what I mean. There you can see that it feels sometimes right but many times wrong. It almost feels like there's a pattern that every now and then it's right so there's one animation that is good and other ones are bad. I can only get one good and then multiple bads and then one good again.

[five_seven5-7 56]

IMO the sway its wrong, most of the guns are placed at the shoulder, as a point of fixation. If the torso moves the gun follows the movement. Depending on how is the grip made on the front, the gun sway its mostly the rotation on the axis itself.

The present sway the game on its common to occur in pistols.

Modern shooting positions reduce the sway instead of the old ones.

[roshnak 41]

From my point of view honestly it seems like you are insistent on attributing his subjective experience to the inertia bug rather than taking his posts at face value that he just doesn't feel that the current system is reasonable.

I'm not insistent on attributing his experience to anything. That's why I'm asking these questions. You're the one who is jumping to conclusions based on your own feelings.

Here's an idea: instead of trying to argue with me about what 7th_Serf really means, we could just wait for him to reply and tell us.

Could the horizontal sway be taken out from the weapon inertia simulation? It would be much better if the only gun drags behind the heavier it is. Sometimes with the current system it feels like that but sometimes it's very wrong and the gun sways left and right when you stop the mouse. I'll upload a video later and say when it feels right and when it's wrong.

---------- Post added at 03:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:06 PM ----------

Here's a video about what I mean. There you can see that it feels sometimes right but many times wrong. It almost feels like there's a pattern that every now and then it's right so there's one animation that is good and other ones are bad. I can only get one good and then multiple bads and then one good again.

I'm not sure, but I think the "wrong" section of the video is the intended behavior. The gun continuing to move a little bit after you stop turning seems like what you would expect the inertia system to do, although it does seem to be a bit extreme.

Either way, it's definitely weird and probably wrong that the behavior is inconsistent. Does the same thing happen with vanilla weapons?

Edit: After some testing, I would say that the sideways movement doesn't feel quite natural. It seems like there is a weird delay before it kicks in sometimes. I think that the sideways movement is caused by the increased sway caused by inertia, and the reason that it only moves sideways like that sometimes is because the sway is getting picked up at that point in its cycle. I'm not sure if it's intentional, but it definitely feels weird.

Edited October 30, 2014 by roshnak

[machineabuse 11]

Here's an idea: instead of trying to argue with me about what 7th_Serf really means, we could just wait for him to reply and tell us.

Great success. ;)

[St. Jimmy 272]

This is how inertia is done in DayZ. The gun only drags behind but it settles down where you stopped your mouse and doesn't make weird left and right movements like in Arma 3. That's more like it should be in my opinion. Pretty much the same as in my right part of the last video.

Edited October 30, 2014 by St. Jimmy