Weapon Inertia & Sway Feedback (dev branch)

[sqb-sma 66]

Rather than inertia, the prone stance is the one instance where I personally think a limited turn speed (even with the resulting "negative mouse acceleration") would be appropriate, because being able to do a split second 180° turn while prone is plain ridiculous. Just my opinion.

100% agree. Prone should be all about sacrificing movement for stability/firing platform.

[-Coulum- 35]

Bigpickle; yes the most stable but the least agile. Weapon inertia isn't about stability, it's about limiting the ability to rapidly make gross movements of the muzzle and get on target quickly.

If me thinking that turning 90 onto a target is somewhat more difficult while prone is comedic then I apologize but I'm inclined to assert that sway is ArmA 3s expression of positional stability.

Yes exactly. Pronte should have far slower realignment time and sway distortion.

[enex 11]

Agreed, funny prone spinning have no place in arma.

[maddogx 13]

I just realized that turn speed restrictions aren't really the subject here and should probably be discussed elsewhere, so sorry for bringing them into the discussion. :o

On the other hand, what SQB-SMA said about stability vs. mobility while prone is true - if you reduce both inertia and sway while prone without any kind of trade off, I would argue that it becomes unrealistically powerful. So barring any other limitations, I would agree with Machineabuse about increasing inertia while prone.

[cyrus231 1]

Surely this is not intended behavior.

[roshnak 41]

Surely this is not intended behavior.

Nope. You are experiencing highly exaggerated effects. Are you running with mods?

[maddogx 13]

Surely this is not intended behavior.

That looks totally wrong. Are you using any mods or something, because I can't replicate that behavior on my end.

[Tonci87 163]

Surely this is not intended behavior.

Can´t replicate, you must be using something.

[cyrus231 1]

Nope. You are experiencing highly exaggerated effects. Are you running with mods?

No mods at all. Fresh install of dev branch. I will validate the files and try again. I knew it didn't seem right at all.

[Greenfist 1863]

You're at least third person in this thread with the same bug. I haven't heard anyone been able to fix it yet.

I can't reproduce it either. And I've tried everything.

[miketim 20]

Do you have fatigue disabled in the options or something like that, maybe inertia gets lumped in?

[cyrus231 1]

You're at least third person in this thread with the same bug. I haven't heard anyone been able to fix it yet.

I can't reproduce it either. And I've tried everything.

Thankfully a full re-install fixed it. At first the files validated correctly but I was still having the issue.

I think the inertia feels good at this point but I do wish fatigue could be adjustable via difficulty settings. In most cases I'm fine with it as is but some less serious missions could do without. I think it's always better to give the players and server admins some choice.

[chortles 263]

If you're creating the mission or otherwise have control over the mission, then enableFatigue = false is an option; and you could probably use getFatigue / setFatigue in a mission script if you want to enable Fatigue but with lesser/more gradual effect.

[Ophichius 10]

You're at least third person in this thread with the same bug. I haven't heard anyone been able to fix it yet.

I can't reproduce it either. And I've tried everything.

Just to clarify for the record, the bug I experienced was not identical to Cyrus123's video. His video has normal sight behavior while aiming, but the weird jello arms otherwise. I was experiencing that behavior at all times. (And I'm currently re-installing and hoping his fix works for me too.)

[twisted 127]

Surely this is not intended behavior.

woah what the heck is happening there? way more than i have, and wierdly you have sway when the when isnt 'sighted' which hasnt been implmeneted yet. what funky mods do you have

[gatordev 214]

I'm not sure if this is under the weapon inertia category or the fatigue category, but generally, I'm okay with the inertia changes and completely get the intent that BIS was going for. However, the act of "holding breath" seems to diminish the overall inertia "upgrade." If I just barely tap the hold breath command and then release it, my aim immediately goes crazy for .5-1 sec. That should be the case. I understand what they're going for, but maybe make it lag for a second or two before fatigue (or inertia) sets in.

Otherwise, with 3-D scopes, anyway, I'm enjoying the new results.

[blackpixxel 53]

Weapon sway after holding breath should be dependend on the duration of holding breath. But I guess it is too much work for BI :386:

[-Coulum- 35]

On the topic of hold breath:

Do people not agree that the limitations of hold breath are rather nonexistant. Here's how I found it to work the last time I played:

1. You can hold breath for a full 8 seconds
   
2. takes about half a second to take effect
   
3. Hold breath virtually eliminates all vertical sway
   
4. After you release breath or 8 seconds are up you have about a second and a half of intense sway
   
5. Sway the then returns to normal
   
6. You can then immediately hold breath for another 8 seconds with the same efficiency
   

Most of that is fine and dandy, except for the bolded points 2 and 6. I think these make hold breath too effective, especially point 6.

2 : In reality it takes time to control your breathing to help make a precise shot. You don't hold your breath on half a seconds notice and get a good shot. This is why I believe:

The time it takes for hold breath to take full effect should be extended to at least over a second.

6 : In reality, controlling your breath for proper shooting takes more time to recover from, before you can do it effectively again. Right now you can basically make it so your soldier inhales every 8 seconds forever... and this makes you shoot better! That's just ridiculous. Holding breath for a few moments can help a shot, but repetitively depriving yourself of oxygen is not going to help anybody shoot better. It gets even sillier when you find out that you can still do this while fully fatigued. This is why I believe:

The time required to hold breath again should be equal to the time the breath was originally held for. Hold for 3 seconds, wait 3 seconds (after the inhale) till you can hold breath again. This recovery time would then be further increased depending on fatigue. At 50% fatigue, hold for 2 seconds, take 10 seconds till you can hold breath again.

These changes would make the system far closer to reality, and make hold breath something that needs to be used wisely, rather than something you constantly spam.

And as a side note, I believe firing a shot should automatically end hold breath.

[Bouben 3]

Weapon sway after holding breath should be dependend on the duration of holding breath. But I guess it is too much work for BI :386:

A bit of a respect to the devs would be nice from you.

[bigpickle 0]

On the topic of hold breath:

Do people not agree that the limitations of hold breath are rather nonexistant. Here's how I found it to work the last time I played:

1. You can hold breath for a full 8 seconds
   
2. takes about half a second to take effect
   
3. Hold breath virtually eliminates all vertical sway
   
4. After you release breath or 8 seconds are up you have about a second and a half of intense sway
   
5. Sway the then returns to normal
   
6. You can then immediately hold breath for another 8 seconds with the same efficiency
   

Most of that is fine and dandy, except for the bolded points 2 and 6. I think these make hold breath too effective, especially point 6.

2 : In reality it takes time to control your breathing to help make a precise shot. You don't hold your breath on half a seconds notice and get a good shot. This is why I believe:

The time it takes for hold breath to take full effect should be extended to at least over a second.

6 : In reality, controlling your breath for proper shooting takes more time to recover from, before you can do it effectively again. Right now you can basically make it so your soldier inhales every 8 seconds forever... and this makes you shoot better! That's just ridiculous. Holding breath for a few moments can help a shot, but repetitively depriving yourself of oxygen is not going to help anybody shoot better. It gets even sillier when you find out that you can still do this while fully fatigued. This is why I believe:

The time required to hold breath again should be equal to the time the breath was originally held for. Hold for 3 seconds, wait 3 seconds (after the inhale) till you can hold breath again. This recovery time would then be further increased depending on fatigue. At 50% fatigue, hold for 2 seconds, take 10 seconds till you can hold breath again.

These changes would make the system far closer to reality, and make hold breath something that needs to be used wisely, rather than something you constantly spam.

And as a side note, I believe firing a shot should automatically end hold breath.

Your forgetting 2 major key factors:

1.) When shooting you hold breath after the exhale finishes and not on the inhale, therefore you don't get the crazed sway when returning to breathing. Generally a trained military shooter can and will shoot in every breathing state know to mankind and does so effectively, its part of basic training and you wont pass unless you can drop targets.

2.) Bullets travel roughly around 700/900 meters per second taking into consideration round size and atmospheric conditions, your 8 seconds mean nothing.

In short the hold hold breath feature is flawed at point 1.

[-Coulum- 35]

1.) When shooting you hold breath after the exhale finishes and not on the inhale, therefore you don't get the crazed sway when returning to breathing. Generally a trained military shooter can and will shoot in every breathing state know to mankind and does so effectively, its part of basic training and you wont pass unless you can drop targets.

Yeah I am aware that breath control is practiced alot differently in game than in real life. The goal of my suggestions was to make the general results, limitations and benefits of breath control more accurately match that of real life. Not the actual method it is achieved by. And regarding basic training and "trained military shooter" who can drop a target in every breathing state known to mankind... I have seen guys who get through basic and can't shoot for shit. When their rested. I also know people who have been shooting many years, who I would consider to be excellent shots, who never even considered joining the army. I think your statement that soldiers can shoot (accurately) in any breathing state might be a bit unrealistic. 15 weeks of basic training definitely isn't guaranteed to turn you into a super marksman.

2.) Bullets travel roughly around 700/900 meters per second taking into consideration round size and atmospheric conditions, your 8 seconds mean nothing.

I'm not exactly sure how the speed of the bullet really pertains to hold breath... care to elaborate?

In short the hold hold breath feature is flawed at point 1.

So... you want the feature scrapped entirely? You want it to be more limited? less limited? How would you improve upon what we already have?

[roshnak 41]

Your forgetting 2 major key factors:

1.) When shooting you hold breath after the exhale finishes and not on the inhale, therefore you don't get the crazed sway when returning to breathing. Generally a trained military shooter can and will shoot in every breathing state know to mankind and does so effectively, its part of basic training and you wont pass unless you can drop targets.

2.) Bullets travel roughly around 700/900 meters per second taking into consideration round size and atmospheric conditions, your 8 seconds mean nothing.

In short the hold hold breath feature is flawed at point 1.

First of all, just to clarify about your second point, Coulum is saying that it doesn't make sense that you can hold your breath for 8 seconds and 1.5 seconds hold you breath for another 8 seconds, and repeat this cycle forever.

As for your first point, why would I ever fire my weapon without holding my breath if there is essentially no penalty involved in doing so? Wouldn't the ability to hold your breath whenever you want without penalty basically negate the whole point of the weapon sway in the first place?

[Smurf 12]

Disclaimer: I don't play the game in a while and I might have missed something along the thread but:

How's the feeling while holding launchers?

Static weapons and crew membered ones? (or these fall ont "vehicle turrets"?)

First of all, just to clarify about your second point, Coulum is saying that it doesn't make sense that you can hold your breath for 8 seconds and 1.5 seconds hold you breath for another 8 seconds, and repeat this cycle forever.

As for your first point, why would I ever fire my weapon without holding my breath if there is essentially no penalty involved in doing so? Wouldn't the ability to hold your breath whenever you want without penalty basically negate the whole point of the weapon sway in the first place?

Hmmm.... Hold breath + fatigue + plausible stamina bar from other discussions; We might get somewhere with these?

Edited September 9, 2014 by Smurf

[bad benson 1733]

Static weapons and crew membered ones? (or these fall ont "vehicle turrets"?)

yea those are turrets i think.

[Frankdatank1218 39]

This is all fine and dandy, but can we get a fix for the 3d optics "swaying" completely off screen before this goes into effect?

edit: Having read the full oprep and done some testing, I have the following feedback/criticism:

In the oprep is the following statement:

While I agree with this, I think there is a massive breakdown between this inertia simulation and the recoil simulation in game. This same standard is not evenly applied across different weapon handling simulations.

In game, all weapon recoil goes "up", which is already unrealistic. Due to multiple reasons - training, knowledge of firearms handling, muscle memory, etc - recoil in real life doesn't just go up and stay there. Whether in single-fire mode or in automatic-fire mode, trained, experienced shooters are able to, and capable of, handling recoil. When you fire a weapon, your weapon sights should end roughly where your aim started regardless of the amount of upwards recoil the weapon itself has, you automatically(muscle memory) pull the weapon back down. This is not simulated in ArmA 3. When you fire a weapon in A3, your weapon recoils up and simply stays there.

Now above, you state that heavier/larger weapons have different handling characteristics, which is absolutely true. A heavier weapon firing the same round(in this instance we'll use the 6.5mm from in-game) should have -less- upwards recoil than it's lighter counterpart. Let's take the MX Rifle vs the MK200 LMG in game. They both fire the same round. The MK200 is heavier by a large factor, yet the Mk200 has -more- upwards recoil than the MX rifle, which weighs less.

An easy real life comparison would be a soldier firing an M4a1 on full-auto vs an M249 SAW on full auto. Both soldiers will be able to control their upwards recoil, but the SAW gunner has to apply almost no effort to doing so because the weight of the weapon itself almost completely eliminates upwards recoil.

My whole point here is that you are talking about how different weapons handle differently and trying to apply a realistic approach to weapon movement while in-game, but not applying the same approach to other parts weapons simulation(recoil). I feel that these things aren't being evenly considered or applied across the board.

Additionally, it seems as though you're adding this mechanic in that is going to make weapons handling harder(yes more realistic, but harder) overall, but without first adding in the one thing that almost completely negates these inertia changes and recoil handling, which is weapon resting/bracing on various surfaces and bipods.

Why do you value realism so much?