Weapon Inertia & Sway Feedback (dev branch)

[roshnak 41]

Sorry I haven't responded to all your demands for more information. Bluntly put; I don't feel the sway improves my gaming experience in any way, shape or form. It makes me feel ill (nausea). I have played the series since OFP, run a server for over 4 years and play nearly every day, but since this 'feature' was put in I find myself becoming very motion sick during games. Do I have to justify that? I should think not. I also feel that since this was a 'feature' I should (and so should every other sever admin) be allowed to turn it OFF.

I'm not going to post videos of my experience, or go over with other folks what they figure is happening - its moot. I want the ability to turn this off - you guys can have it, but to me, it is ruining something that I really enjoy.

BIS - put in a config to let me turn this stupid thing off, please!

I think you are misunderstanding my request. I'm not asking you to justify your opinions (although, honestly, you probably should). The reason that I was asking you to post a video is because several players have encountered a bug that caused the inertia to be highly exaggerated. The way that you were describing the inertia sounded like the same sorts of things others who were experiencing that bug said.

If you don't care to find out whether or not your game is bugged, and just want to turn off the sway entirely, you can follow Jona33's advice. You should know, however, that this variable will have to be set by the mission maker (otherwise it would grant you an unfair advantage over other players).

It's also worth noting that several weapon addons (RH weapons, for example) do not seem to be properly configured for inertia, and whatever default values they are being assigned are very intense. If you are using any of these addons, they could be contributing to your inertia problems.

Edit:

This inertia sucks, Are you guys telling me that a solder can't run a few paces and turn around to shoot at a target with out the weapon swaying two feet to the left and right before you can steady the rifle on your target. the only thing this is doing is making me sick.

What do you consider to be few paces? I'm not having any trouble doing what you're describing in Arma 3.

Granted, I kind of cheated, since I didn't pull up my sights until I had turned around, but who would spin 180 degrees with their sights up to their face, anyway?

Edited November 1, 2014 by roshnak

[twisted 127]

there's nothing tricky about the current sway. it might not be the best solution, but its far better than not having it. biggest tip is manage your fatigue, dont sprint everywhere all the time and dont try carry all the things.

[enex 11]

there's nothing tricky about the current sway. it might not be the best solution, but its far better than not having it. biggest tip is manage your fatigue, dont sprint everywhere all the time and dont try carry all the things.

Further utilize lowering your gun, changing jogging with C, do a few seconds walk then jogg again, and be aware of map (uphill will exaust you/downhill will regain you stamina)

[andersson 285]

Sure, but why can't my avatar hold the weapon stock firm against the shoulder? The type of movement of the weapon is wrong and give no feeling of authenticity.

[Kerc Kasha 102]

Sure, but why can't my avatar hold the weapon stock firm against the shoulder? The type of movement of the weapon is wrong and give no feeling of authenticity.

To give a reason to not use the biggest gun possible.

Arma 2 balanced this shit by having negative mouse acceleration and it made the game feel terrible, this is a better way of doing as you still have the 1:1 mouse movement just now fast movement misaligns your sights.

Stop bringing realism into an argument when you're aiming with a mouse and not a gun

[Variable 322]

To give a reason to not use the biggest gun possible.

I agree that this is a valid motivation, but it's not strong enough. The weapon "dancing" is unrealistic that it detaches you from your avatar and affects immersion.

If toned down a bit, and kick in only once you are HIGHLY fatigued, I think it will be ok.

Edited November 2, 2014 by Variable

[machineabuse 11]

Stop bringing realism into an argument when you're aiming with a mouse and not a gun

With respect, I think you need to think about that statement in regards to the game this discussion is about. Also "the ends justifies the means" is by no means an ultima ratio.

I agree that this is a valid motivation, but it's not strong enough. The weapon "dancing" is unrealistic that it detaches you from your avatar and affects immersion.

If toned down a bit, and kick in only once you are HIGHLY fatigued, I think it will be ok.

Agreed. It will probably be better after tweaking.

Edited November 2, 2014 by Machineabuse

[Kerc Kasha 102]

With respect, I think you need to think about that statement in regards to the game this discussion is about. Also "the ends justifies the means" is by no means an ultima ratio.

You're missing the point.

I'm saying that making arguments like 'this doesn't happen in reality' doesn't apply because in reality you can't spin on the spot immediately and there's a million other factors involved when it comes to aiming that is impossible to recreate in a game played on a 2d screen. Having rock steady aim 24/7 makes shooting completely effortless and dull, and it seems that some people want this for whatever reason but a lot of people actually want shooting to require some level of skill as it makes for a more interesting experience.

Not to mention the fact that the common argument against these systems (Recoil, Inertia) has always been 'well my avatar is supposed to a trained soldier they should be able to manage all these things!' Which completely ignores the idea that the player themselves should learn to manage these things like a real soldier would.

It's like if you play a true sim like DCS or whatever and then go "hey my avatar is supposed to be a trained pilot why do i have to do this complex start procedure"

[maturin 12]

Really. It's not like the inertia is even difficult to manage.

[machineabuse 11]

You're missing the point.

Your point stating the obvious was already covered in the discussion. We've been talking for the most part about both bettering the system, working along means of making the simulation better and some have been discussing the merits of an option to disable the system.

In all cases realism is always worth discussing as long as it remains the basis for game mechanic systemizing in ArmA. Even the Inertia system itself is an effort to systemize reality. So it would be inane to NOT discuss it.

[andersson 285]

To give a reason to not use the biggest gun possible.

Arma 2 balanced this shit by having negative mouse acceleration and it made the game feel terrible, this is a better way of doing as you still have the 1:1 mouse movement just now fast movement misaligns your sights.

Stop bringing realism into an argument when you're aiming with a mouse and not a gun

I didn't, I brought authenticity into the argument. Which is a what BI themself is trying to do, they used that exact word. I don't mind misaligned sights, I mind having the stock of the weapon flying around in my face.

[chortles 263]

I didn't, I brought authenticity into the argument. Which is a what BI themself is trying to do, they used that exact word. I don't mind misaligned sights, I mind having the stock of the weapon flying around in my face.

... so, how's about the same basic idea ("camera trick") but with a different weapon pivot point?

[andersson 285]

Not really sure how they do it now, but if the camera is moving how can they change the weapon pivot point? But if it looks like the stock is firm against the shoulder and the sway is a bit less and quicker to align the sights sure I'm all in :)

[St. Jimmy 272]

From other topic:

Hi, yes - it makes sense to do an iteration of the times as we head towards Marksmen DLC (because weapon handling once again becomes a focus). We do have at least one person on the team who has beaten gold for all CoFs after those tweaks :)

What we have now might not be final ;)

[Strick 1]

The more and more I dissect this feature the more and more I feel like a puppet. For example: When I press the "W" key to move forward the aim of my weapon goes up and down like a puppeteer would mimic the action of walking. When I move my mouse left and right the aim of my weapon goes left and right just like a puppet's arms would rest after a puppeteer's action is completed. So I have come to the conclusion that I'm just a puppet and no longer a puppeteer. I have tried many init commands and still nothing disables or changes its settings.

[roshnak 41]

The more and more I dissect this feature the more and more I feel like a puppet. For example: When I press the "W" key to move forward the aim of my weapon goes up and down like a puppeteer would mimic the action of walking. When I move my mouse left and right the aim of my weapon goes left and right just like a puppet's arms would rest after a puppeteer's action is completed. So I have come to the conclusion that I'm just a puppet and no longer a puppeteer. I have tried many init commands and still nothing disables or changes its settings.

I'm really not sure what this means, but I can say that the aim of your weapon going up and down when walking is absolutely a realistic thing (note: I am not saying that the specific pattern or amplitude is necessarily completely realistic, as it probably varies from person to person). With view bobbing turned off, Arma does a fairly reasonable job of approximating the fact that while your eyes may dampen the movement of walking very well, that doesn't mean that your body isn't moving around. I really feel like your opinion on this matter can be linked back to your suggestion that people try walking around their houses pointing a broom at things as an example of how there is too much sway in Arma. As I said before, simply taping a laser pointer to the end of that broom would probably drastically change your opinion of how steady you are able to hold it.

The thing about the left and right movement is very confusing to me, though. Can you elaborate on what you mean?

It appears that I also forgot to reply to this post:

Good points all. I have found a few tricks in to avoid the weapon inertia and sway punishment. First and foremost align your body toward incoming targets. Next raise weapon to engage threat. Double tap "alt" key to go into freelook mode. Next hold breath to get a precise shot. Fire! After target has been eliminated from the field off battle tap "↠turn left" or "→ turn right" to change direction of body to traveling direction. Rinse and repeat! It seems as the though when your weapon is at the high ready position and freelook is engaged the weapon inertia and sway is not factored. Brilliant! Or maybe a bug... Anyways enjoy.

So I guess now is a good time.

Everything about what you're describing here seems excessive. It would almost certainly take longer (probably a lot longer) to perform these steps than to just wait for almost any inertia induced sway to subside. The fact that you feel that it's necessary to go to these lengths to avoid inertia really doesn't sound right to me. Are you sure that what you're experiencing is similar to what is shown in the following video?

As you can see, it's not terribly difficult to be reasonably accurate even with relatively high turn rates.

Edited November 4, 2014 by roshnak

[Strick 1]

This wasn't as constructive as I intended it to be so I'm editing it to convey a topic of interest in relation to the subject at hand, weapon inertia and sway.

"The more and more I dissect this feature the more and more I feel like a puppet (meaning that my player in game is controlled by my actions with mouse and keyboard). For example: When I press the "W" key to move forward the aim of my weapon goes up and down like a puppeteer would mimic the action of walking (the cross hair of my weapon moves in a vertical pattern). When I move my mouse left and right the aim of my weapon goes left and right (moving in a horizontal line) just like a puppet's arms would rest after a puppeteer's action is completed. So I have come to the conclusion that I'm (my player in game ) is just a puppet and no longer a puppeteer. I have tried many init commands and still nothing disables or changes its settings."

I started looking at this feature in relation to how a puppeteer handles a puppet using strings and gravity where as Arma controls the players weapon and sight picture using anchors from its body. While moving forward and only forward I can clearly see for myself that the sight picture of my weapon bounces up and down in the opposite direction of my footing so my best guess is that there is a link between front sight and feet. The other link with rear sight might be attached to shoulder but I'm guessing. Seeing how fatigue (breathing) plays a critical role in weapon orientation and sight picture if I shift to a walking pace the value of vertical bounce negates, so countering this effect is to reduce speed.

Speed seems to be the key with the vertical bounce or sway. But here is what realy bugs me about weapon inertia and sway. The horizontal zig zaging of my crosshair if my body shifts left or right. It honestly feels like when moving left or right my arms (sight picture) goes limp as a noodle until the engine (or formula for weapon inertia and sway) figures out I'm aiming away from my last point of view. But thats not all folks. Further testing has found an even more in depth analysis. There is one fatal flaw in my opinion of the weapon inertia and sway formula. And that is if you as a player have your weapon in the high ready position and then engage freelook by turning to your extreme left or right you will see that your crosshair when reaching the farthest point AUTOMATICLY redirects to the opposite direction for a brief second. What is that?

My feedback from a player's perspective is that the penalty for rotating body and weapon on a horizontal plane should not be an automatic pull in opposite direction once a turn has been completed.

If there is to be a default sway or inertia horizontally of any weapon it should reflect a players movement in the direction they are turning and only in that direction. An example of such is the follow up motion of a right hook being projected into a punching bag to maximize its end user power.

When turning left or right the cross hair of my weapon should mimic my controls and only my controls, not a formula. If anything should change when rotating my body and weapon it would be that of a forced speed reduction after alignment of both has been reached within a person's set stance.

An example is looking straight at 0 degrees with the weapon in the high ready (optics enabled) position +18/-18 degrees=fastest: +18 to +36/-18 to -36 degrees=fast: +36 to +54/ -36 to -54 degrees=normal: +54 to +72/ -54 to -72 degrees=slow: +72 to +90/ -72 to -90 degrees=slowest. The value of 0 degrees is only reset when weapon is put into a low ready (optics disabled) position.

And my video of the day showing a bonk left and right:

Edited November 4, 2014 by Strick

[St. Jimmy 272]

You can make quick left & right turns but when you make for example right turn and need to settle the aim the aim goes all over left from right before it settles. It's even random how it goes so it's very hard to counter and many times I try to counter it I just make it worse.

So the more calmer you're trying to aim the worse the inertia is but logic says it should be the other way around. This is all because of the unnecessary horizontal sway that happens after you stop the weapon (your turning).

Roshnak you should try to make it so you try to aim for 1 sec before shooting and from longer range like 50m.

Edited November 4, 2014 by St. Jimmy

[Stublerone 10]

I generally find it hard to aim. Generally because Arma was always a game, where you have worse mouse feeling than in any other game. It is inertia, sway, etc. that disconnects you from what you are doing with your mouse.

And I must say, that I never experienced that in real life weapon treatment. The problem in my eyes is not the sway itself so much, it is okay, when you are out of iron sight. But as soon as you switch to combat mode, the sway should completely connect to the view and not sway seperately. I always have the feeling, that I have a bit of freelook mode on. All these "delays" causes, that even experienced Arma players always had some sort of problem in close combat and fast situations.

It seems, they really tried everything to simulate all that, but always remember, that reactions in real life is something different than with mouse on a monitor. So, I really really would like to see some improvements there, as it sometimes is soooo disconnected, that 2 people are meeting within 10 meters and both cannot fire a single shot into target as it sways, although you tightly press your weapon to your chest and contract your neck muscles to stiff all that. In real life, this is much easier to acomplish. I hope you know what I mean.

I already had dozens of situations, where you just have NO chance to fire back, although the enemy is strafing 10 m in front of you. You must see: It is and was always a Arma specific movement to run with strafes. In most cases, noone hits you, especially when the enemy also was in motion, before he saw you.

What bothers me since the Arma2 patch (i think it was somewhere with introduction or first patch of operation arrowhead), where it starts with the weapon spray was no longer recentered, although you would always do with a stiff body. You shoot and as long you shoot, you cannot really control the shots and it goes up. BUT: As soon as you stop, your stiff body would readjust down pretty quickly and not stays looking up in the sky.

This was my first major problem and disconnected me completely and still is a mechanic, that I do not understand, as I never behaved like that in real life! :)

And next is simple in the same spot: I stiff my body and press my weapon to my shoulder. And while I do this, my view is tightly connected to the whole sway! And the weapon not sways in front of me. It simply is another disconnection.

And there is one thing, that should never happen in shooter (especially with those close combats in the beautiful cities of Altis): You should never introduce mechanics, that disconnect you from the game. And the reactions in reallife and with mouse are also a balancing factor. Sure, you shouldnt hit like in most other fps, but in reallife you would never mess around with all that in a combat situation. Disconnecting mouse is making the life in the game harder, than it would be in reality. Especially in close quarters combat. You would simply be more effective in reallife.

So: 1.) Spraying and not recentering somehow makes you feel disconnected and 2.) weapon sway, although in ironsight/sight is disconnected from the view, which I think,is not realistic (you sway with your weapons and not only the weapon in front of you) -> this disconnects you was well (press your weapon to your shoulder and stiff your body means, that weapon movement is doing the same movement as the head. It would not sway in front of you like crazy).

Long text, but I hope you get it. :) In many cases, the game pace is suitable to manage all that. But a nice (really nice) city fightin Kavala would be so much more fun, if the weapon sway would not disconnect you soooo extremely. Sometimes you are in a house and simply can do NOTHING to shoot the enemy on the street downstairs as you arrived shortly and have no control over your movement. In reallife in a life/death situation, I would be able to stiff my body so hard, that it hurts and I would be able to shoot. In the game you wobble without muscles.

To fatique: I am seeing more and more sense in all that. One thing is crazy: When I had to quickly regroup, had a lot of movement, the char simply gets exhausted from back and forth. And then, crossing a street is a dumb idea. In a combat situation, I personally would be able to cross the street. In the game I am not. And I dont understand, why I can regain my fatique sooooo fast in laying position compared to standing.

While I understand more and more of all that, we always have to remember, what the game needs. We gained some pretty good dynamic movements in Arma 3, but we now destroy a good general feeling with some "realistic" features, that you cannot put 1:1 from reallife to mouse. Please rethink, especially fo the sake of playability in close combat as I feel, like I am not controlling anything. You not hit a running target 20m away out of an own move (even just a readjustment of 1 m to the side means, you wont hit him until he is in cover ...sometimes). I wouldnt miss these shots in reallife tbh.

[roshnak 41]

When turning left or right the cross hair of my weapon should mimic my controls and only my controls, not a formula. If anything should change when rotating my body and weapon it would be that of a forced speed reduction after alignment of both has been reached within a person's set stance.

An example is looking straight at 0 degrees with the weapon in the high ready (optics enabled) position +18/-18 degrees=fastest: +18 to +36/-18 to -36 degrees=fast: +36 to +54/ -36 to -54 degrees=normal: +54 to +72/ -54 to -72 degrees=slow: +72 to +90/ -72 to -90 degrees=slowest. The value of 0 degrees is only reset when weapon is put into a low ready (optics disabled) position.

Again, I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this, but it sounds like you're suggesting reduction in mouse sensitivity the farther you rotate from your starting point. If this is the case, that sounds awful.

As for your video, that looks sort of like what my sway does, but like 10 times faster. It looks way more abrupt than mine does. Mine also doesn't consistently sway back in the direction that I turned from. Although I will agree that the sway resulting from inertia is not ideal at all. We were discussing this earlier in the thread. It seems like it might just be bumping up the sway at the end of rotations, and the sway just gets picked up wherever it would normally have been at in the cycle, so if it was going to sway left it will sway left a lot, and if it was going to sway up, it will sway up a lot. There also seems to be a weird delay before it kicks in sometimes.

I can't comment on the freelook behavior, because I don't use freelook while sighted in.

Here is a video of my inertia. You can see that it looks similar to yours, but a little smoother and more drawn out.

Roshnak you should try to make it so you try to aim for 1 sec before shooting and from longer range like 50m.

What is this in reference to?

Edited November 11, 2014 by roshnak

[St. Jimmy 272]

What is this in reference to?

It was about your last video. The problem isn't right when you stop the mouse movement but bit after that when the random horizontal sway starts. I can also make quick shots like in your video but slower shots are hard to keep on target. You can shoot right where you're really aiming just before you stop the mouse movement but if you want to do that 0,5s later the horizontal sway makes it freaking hard just like your latest video shows. You can't learn that horizontal sway because it's too random, you can only shoot freaking quickly before the sway happens or you need to wait for the horizontal sway to settle.

In short you can be lucky and end your mouse movement at the right spot and shoot instantly. If you don't shoot instantly you need to play for a waiting game until the sway settles or crosses the target.

[-Coulum- 35]

As for your video, that looks sort of like what my sway does, but like 10 times faster.

Which I assume is inteded behaviour - he is using a clunkier weapon.

I went to do some testing an I am actually quite perplexed as to how people can have huge problems with it. Even with the MGs it is pretty straight forward to do a near instant 360 and hit a target 10 metres away. Longer range targets are harder to hit quickly. after 50 metres it starts to become worth it to wait until the inertia effect wears off - but is that unreasonable?

The sway seems a bit random, true. I think this basically just comes down to how the inertia multiplies the current sway. If there is very little/no initial sway and you do a 360 you will still have little/no inertia. If there is a bit of sway and you turn... well it will become alot of sway. It would be nice to have it a bit more predictable, that is more intune with your rotation direction and force, but honestly I don't see it as all that important. The overall goal is achieved either way.

The only thing I have a big issue with in the system is the ability to track medium ranged moving targets with iron sights. Right now you just can't accurately. You have to aim ahead of them, wait for the sights to align and wait for the target to line up and fire. You can't actively track them.

To fix this, I think that inertia should not be applied to very slow rotation speeds. Right now it kicks (although with minimal effect) with the slightest touch of the mouse. This should not be the case. Very slow methodical movement should not cause inertia.

The problem in my eyes is not the sway itself so much, it is okay, when you are out of iron sight. But as soon as you switch to combat mode, the sway should completely connect to the view and not sway seperately.

Yes I think that would be a better more traditional way - have entire screen sway rather than the just the weapon. Or even metter, make it like 85% screen movement and 15% weapon movement - in real life your weapon can/does sway independently of your eyes slightly.

Sometimes you are in a house and simply can do NOTHING to shoot the enemy on the street downstairs as you arrived shortly and have no control over your movement.

Honestly the only time I have had these problems (when two people meet in CQB and neither can drop the other) is when the players:

• Panicked
  
• Strafing
  
• Were fatigued/wounded - fatigue/wounds + inertia makes for very difficult aiming
  
• Combination of the above.
  

And in those case, really I don't think it is actually unreasonable that they miss each other. Sudden CQB has a tendancy to involve lots of missing in real life as well, despite combatants being so close, and very competent in "training" situations at the same range.

Edited November 4, 2014 by -Coulum-

[roshnak 41]

It was about your last video. The problem isn't right when you stop the mouse movement but bit after that when the random horizontal sway starts. I can also make quick shots like in your video but slower shots are hard to keep on target. You can shoot right where you're really aiming just before you stop the mouse movement but if you want to do that 0,5s later the horizontal sway makes it freaking hard just like your latest video shows. You can't learn that horizontal sway because it's too random, you can only shoot freaking quickly before the sway happens or you need to wait for the horizontal sway to settle.

In short you can be lucky and end your mouse movement at the right spot and shoot instantly. If you don't shoot instantly you need to play for a waiting game until the sway settles or crosses the target.

Well, the video was made to mimic a real world exercise that Machineabuse posted. It wasn't intended to show slower target acquisition, it was intended to show rapid target transitions. Performing the drill slower would have defeated the purpose.

I've already agreed that the sway resulting from inertia can be problematic at times and should be changed to be more consistent.

I do think I should point out, however, that if I had time to pause for a second before shooting, or was engaging targets at a longer range, I would not need to be moving my viewpoint as quickly, resulting in less inertia penalties like sight misalignment and sway.

Edit:

Which I assume is inteded behaviour - he is using a clunkier weapon.

I don't think so. Here's another video using the same weapon that Strick is. If you compare them, you'll see that his sway is coming to very abrupt stop after only a portion of a cycle, whereas mine features a gradual slowdown to normal sway levels.

To fix this, I think that inertia should not be applied to very slow rotation speeds. Right now it kicks (although with minimal effect) with the slightest touch of the mouse. This should not be the case. Very slow methodical movement should not cause inertia.

This could certainly work. Personally, I think it would be better to tie the inertia to acceleration instead of velocity, so that smooth movements caused no inertia penalties, but jerky ones did.

Yes I think that would be a better more traditional way - have entire screen sway rather than the just the weapon. Or even metter, make it like 85% screen movement and 15% weapon movement - in real life your weapon can/does sway independently of your eyes slightly.

On the other hand, if you think people are complaining about nausea now, try shifting their entire view around and see what happens. I suspect moving both the screen and weapon might be even worse.

Edited November 5, 2014 by roshnak

[-Coulum- 35]

I don't think so. Here's another video using the same weapon that Strick is. If you compare them, you'll see that his sway is coming to very abrupt stop after only a portion of a cycle, whereas mine features a gradual slowdown to normal sway levels.

Yeah his sway looks like it ends quick - but then again it is hard to tell because he doesn't give it much time to settle before moving the mouse - and the fps doesn't seem the greatest... My inertia looks like in your video.

This could certainly work. Personally, I think it would be better to tie the inertia to acceleration instead of velocity, so that smooth movements caused no inertia penalties, but jerky ones did.

I am skeptical as to whether the acceleration idea would work well. Basically every time you start to move the mouse, you would have acceleration and thus inertia effects - so you could be sitting crouched, not touching the mouse at all, and then slowly start to track a target moving across your LOS yet the moment you touch that mouse, no matter how slow, you are going to have high acceleration and thus inertia effects. That kind of defeats the intended purpose of being able to track targets with aligned sights.

On the other hand, if you think people are complaining about nausea now, try shifting their entire view around and see what happens. I suspect moving both the screen and weapon might be even worse.

Yeah... I guess that's a good point. Though, to be quite frank, I see those nausea claims as exaggerations and frustration more than anything. Sorry guys maybe I am wrongly judging, but honestly, everything on the screen is moving. If the weapon moving around makes you sick I don't see how you could play video games at all. Call me ignorant and inconsiderate but that's just how I still remain unsympathetic to these sort of stories.

It was about your last video. The problem isn't right when you stop the mouse movement but bit after that when the random horizontal sway starts. I can also make quick shots like in your video but slower shots are hard to keep on target. You can shoot right where you're really aiming just before you stop the mouse movement but if you want to do that 0,5s later the horizontal sway makes it freaking hard just like your latest video shows. You can't learn that horizontal sway because it's too random, you can only shoot freaking quickly before the sway happens or you need to wait for the horizontal sway to settle.

In short you can be lucky and end your mouse movement at the right spot and shoot instantly. If you don't shoot instantly you need to play for a waiting game until the sway settles or crosses the target.

I don't really see he point of that video would be. It seems like your want to prove the point that if you don't quickly compensate for the sway with mouse movement than you have to wait for the sway to either die down or drift on target. Yes that is true. But ingame you can compensate for the sway by quick mouse movement and shooting. So what's the purpose of purposely trying "slowly" compensating for the sway which does not work well? Or am I misunderstanding?

Edited November 5, 2014 by -Coulum-

[roshnak 41]

I am skeptical as to whether the acceleration idea would work well. Basically every time you start to move the mouse, you would have acceleration and thus inertia effects - so you could be sitting crouched, not touching the mouse at all, and then slowly start to track a target moving across your LOS yet the moment you touch that mouse, no matter how slow, you are going to have high acceleration and thus inertia effects. That kind of defeats the intended purpose of being able to track targets with aligned sights.

I'm pretty sure you could control for this sort of thing. But, honestly, either method works fine for me. The system definitely needs to be tweaked a bit.

I don't really see he point of that video would be. It seems like your want to prove the point that if you don't quickly compensate for the sway with mouse movement than you have to wait for the sway to either die down or drift on target. Yes that is true. But ingame you can compensate for the sway by quick mouse movement and shooting. So what's the purpose of purposely trying "slowly" compensating for the sway which does not work well? Or am I misunderstanding?

I believe that what he is saying is that I am firing before the sway has a chance to kick in after I bring the mouse to a stop (since there is sometimes a delay before it kicks in), which is true. I'm really not doing anything to counter inertia or sway in that video.

What he would like me to do, if I'm understanding him correctly, is to wait for the sway to kick in before making my shot. This is where I have a problem, since, if I have time to wait for the sway to kick in, I probably have time to avoid causing the increase in sway in the first place.

Honestly, though, inertia is something I don't even think about during normal gameplay.