Weapon accuracy

[Silver Falcon 0]

I disagree, if you've ever fired a gun you know that there's a difference between the potential accuracy of a firearm and the actual precision of a firearm when used by someone who is or isn't experienced.

What you're proposing is currently what we're stuck with right now, and it's resulting in weapons not performing as realistically. Why don't we just use something stupid and completely unrealistic like an expanding ring system by that logic?

I have fired a gun a few tims. It was not my gun, however "mistunning" didn´t appeard i ve hit the bullseye. An the time my shot was not so good, it was not due to wind, mistuning or so, it was due to sway of my hand or unideal moment to pull the trigger.

Have you some smart and simple idea how to make player to feel the strenght and direction of wind? Until that I realy dont care for wind simulation in ballistics. I guess wind affects accuracy only little in comparsion of shooting skills (not talking about unusualy strong wind).

There are many more factors that are hard to simulate, but affects the accuracy only little.

Of course it would be more realistic when the accuracy is affected by the way you pull the trigger, but to simulate this you need analog mouse button.  

Now tell me would you make expensive mouse to do this?

Do you think programmers would waste time on factors that are hard to simulate to affect atmosphere and realism a LITTLE bit?

I realy dont like to be affected by "experience" of my avatar in game, I want to influence the accuracy by concentaring to reduce swaying (anitmoves) and wait for the ideal moment and breath to pull the trigger. I see no point in simulating avatar to pull the trigger bad way.

Of course, swaing may be done by litle more sophisticated script, recoil should be better (partitialy cummulative, bit more to right and bit random,...) and breathing could influence accuracy too. However its not easy even in AAO to hear the breathing properly in noise of firefight to influence it and till the time of nerve connectors I won´t feel it. The worse with other factors, especialy those minor.

By the way, my logics are not to make it unrealistic, but find the right balance between how the feature affects realism or gameplay/ how much work it take. I think you go far over.

I think that this part of forum is quite overloaded by such features, however many are wiser.

Note that everything cannot be simulated lo last details and focusing on one too much means weaken some other features.

I quite agree with Friedchiken.

EDIT:

Quote[/b] ] kind of WANT that disorientation because at really far distances or even at intermediate distances because then people won't be firing like mad and scoring hits at fairly ridiculous ranges. It forces you to make every shot count.

Well, not bad idea, but right recoil and aimprecision do nearly the same work (not let you fire as mad on longer distances). Yes, I agree that distortion would be good way to improve realism at low work cost aside of improving basic elements.

Weight of bullet would be great too since different calibers have different ballistic curve even when have same muzzle velocity and it means only to update ballistics. (223 -more flat ballistics but loses velocity qicker, 308 - loger range, but curve is less flat)

[Baphomet 0]

Mistuning is generally not an issue with iron sights, or any type of non-scope sight.

I don't use a scope because

1: Zeroing them is a skill, one that is best left to those who know what they're doing. Using a non zeroed scope can be more detremental to a shooter than simply using iron sights.

2: General storage and use of a rifle tends to affect the zeroing of the scope and therefore you must zero it once more.

With an iron sight of any kind it's pretty much about your ability to use them as they are, some iron sights can be moved but at any rate aiming correctly with them can be just an intuitive process.

Quote[/b] ]I realy dont like to be affected by "experience" of my avatar in game, I want to influence the accuracy by concentaring to reduce swaying (anitmoves)

Now that's a bit ridiculous. A steady hand is not so much a skill but a trait. You either have it or you don't, so basically what I understand is you want to be unencumbered by any realistic limitations on the average shooter. Something I REALLY hope is not present in OFP 2.

Again, with my experience the only way to stop an unsteady hand is to brace your weapon. End of story, so exaggerating the sway of a weapon is just plain unrealistic unless you're attempting to simulate someone who can barely hold a gun or has some kind of neurological damage.

It is true the way someone pulls a trigger can affect a shot just as much as anything else. However it's not impossible to simulate. Squeezing a trigger whilst temporarily stopping the breathing process greatly improves accuracy. I would assume the best way to simulate that would be by having you hold down the mouse button until the trigger is fired. Again the length of time required to do so would be a characteristic defined by the character you're playing.

There are black ops and snipers and conscripts for a reason in OFP. Each should in my opinion have abilities that differ in respect to the average skill level represented by their roles. That way if you want to play a multiplayer game in which everyone is a sniper, go for it. Personally I'd be forcing all my multiplayer games to be played with conscripts so people don't get lazy and actually have to think. No 500m gunfights for me thank you very much.

One might complain that that reduces the amount of shots you can pull off... well yeah. That's the point. I've shot with many experienced hunters and I've -never- seen any of them not take time to make an accurate shot.

In the end all I want is a semi-realistic way to curb lethal gunfights at longer distances 300m+ Unless we're all trying to be super soldiers who are ridiculously superhuman in their accuracy at that distance it shouldn't be that easy.

[Silver Falcon 0]

Well I actualy fired both scoped and nonscoped riffles but I am talking about scoped ones since it demonstrates the factors of shooting better.

Trough the scope, you see that your swaying of hand is significant when you want to shoot small target for example on 80-100m. From laying position its no problem to hit head or even smaller target when you have time. I guess I would be very very lucky to hit head (not believe that much) at that from standing position due to the swaying of riffle (especialy hunter or sniper riffles are heavy on forward while ARs and so  are better ballanced).

Quote[/b] ]Squeezing a trigger whilst temporarily stopping the breathing process greatly improves accuracy.

I totaly agree that is what I meant to implement breathing...

I personaly disagree with the simulation of skills of avatars. It would make an RPG from it. Yes, AI snipers would be better shooters than just common marksmen, but I would left the skills on player - I want to rely on my skills not avatars.

If I play sniper I want to be as good sniper as I am, not as avatar is - just let make it harder, the more aimprecision, the harder to use a sniper riffle and the better is MG.

So only a good shooting players would be good snipers and the rest would rather choose AR of MG since on higher (far higher than FDF) aimprecision its extremely difficult to hit man on 500m (400 should be considered as effective range/ on 300m its not that hard) with sniper riffle and AR one houndred less. Then the MGs are more effective on higher ranges than AR (about 400m), especialy when have small recoil.

I got those facts testing shooting on desert island as on marksman range and the real engagement ranges are 300m and less (on desert island). It is very hard to shoot moving target on that range and the ranges are rather less in chaos of battle.

I used edited FDF config for that increasing the values of aimprecision and using JAM (nonHD) and Earl&Sucheys weapons (less recoil; since recoil is generaly multiplied by aimprecision).

I tried some BIS missions and found out that the real engagement ranges were about 200-100m and less since shooting moving targets on 300m was wasting af amunition.

I was surprised that I can miss lying enemy few times even on 100m when in stress of battle due to aimprecision.

It was even worse with sniper riffle in stress.

That is what I want to archive while trying to find the easiest way.

[funnyguy1 0]

It is true the way someone pulls a trigger can affect a shot just as much as anything else. However it's not impossible to simulate. Squeezing a trigger whilst temporarily stopping the breathing process greatly improves accuracy. I would assume the best way to simulate that would be by having you hold down the mouse button until the trigger is fired. Again the length of time required to do so would be a characteristic defined by the character you're playing.

What about mousewheel?

It can simulate pushing the trigger slowly...

Only in sniper rifles maybe?

On the other hand...

If you`re shooting in real life you don`t think about so many things. I mean, maybe if you`re some kind of beginner...if no,

You just do it automatically.

If the simulation is realistic you will control about 10 buttons (breathing etc.) and the mousewheel to just shoot.:/

[Harnu 0]

What needs to be done is not something exaggerated like weapon sway, but a better simulation of human error when handling and firing a gun. WIND -needs- to be simulated no matter how. I too am sick of seeing the guns in ofp sniper rifle accurate..

Any thoughts on how? Since we can't feel the in-game wind, what do you suggest? Some kind of wind meter every time you go to fire your weapon?

[Baphomet 0]

Sound? The sound of how intense the wind is. That's the obvious choice to me. You have a general idea of how strong the wind is, but you will no doubt have to, through trial and error, correct your aim... with time you'd be gradually more accustomed to hearing a certain wind intensity and getting a GENERAL, not EXACT idea of what to expect. The whole point would be to increase the difficulty of it. So in the end, yeah it's going to make things harder. I personally would want that. At a short range wind isn't going to do a hell of a lot unless it's a strong wind and a low caliber ammunition like a .22, at a long range is where you get buggered. Where it counts to me.

Quote[/b] ]What about mousewheel?

It can simulate pushing the trigger slowly...

Only in sniper rifles maybe?

On the other hand...

If you`re shooting in real life you don`t think about so many things. I mean, maybe if you`re some kind of beginner...if no,

You just do it automatically.

If the simulation is realistic you will control about 10 buttons (breathing etc.) and the mousewheel to just shoot.:/

America's army does a good job of simulating a breathing pattern, it doesn't have to be that complicated. It's just little things, any things to keep people from being able to rapidly click and perdict things like where the rifle is going to come down from when it returns from the recoil. I don't know of anyone who can do that in real life. That's just not... human.

Basically I'm FOR any simulations that increase the difficulty and randomness of human or environmentally imposed error. However done in such a way that you're not firing a gun and having bullets spray off in completely different vectors such as with an expanding ring system.

Basically to keep people from being able to reliably time after time pull off the same shot over and over at unreasonable distances.

Then running about in a hail of gunfire will actually be a plausible and in my opinion immersive and enjoyable experience. Right now it's pretty much super uber laser m16 snipe at 300 yards.

[Silver Falcon 0]

Sound is not that good since you can hardly hear from what side it blow.

We all want the same (decrease the accuracy on long ranges), some of us are just seeking for compromise (trade-off) to implement it well in virtual enviroment and warn about (great) troubles appearing when trying simulate absolute realism there.

Funnyguy and Harnu have a point dont you think?

I guess AAO is in about 85% best realism/vitrual enviroment troubles trade-off, combined with some (rebalanced) Flashpoint features it would be 95%. Enough for most players I guess rather than "enjoy" V. E. troubles.

[Baphomet 0]

Another thought had come to mind considering factors that affect the accuracy of weapons, and how it could be applied to OFP 2.

I think the game needs to support and utilize recoil randomization for a single firearm. Handling recoil is never perfect and exact. Sometimes if the gun isn't climbing up it might try to push to the side at times. This kind of handling of firearms is what I'd like to see in OFP 2. This is also a significant factor in determining the overall accuracy of weapons.

example

Notice how the guy wobbles as he's compensating. This would affect accuracy considerably, even though it's not much to look at. Even slight pitches and dips in the gun account for precious inches or even at greater distances, feet that may find your bullet not hitting it's mark.

example

This guy's all over the place, he's going diagonally up he's wobbling all over the place keeping it straight, and look at the groups.

No. Bullets don't just fly out of a gun at 45 degree angles like we'd surmise after playing rainbow six (or insert any expanding ring system based shooter). He's spraying so erratically because it's hard to keep a pistol on full auto at some 1000 rounds a minute steady.

example

Then there's this video of a full auto shotgun. This is a good example of where random recoils could really add realism to the overall accuracy of firearms as well as the game as a whole.

example

[Friedchiken 0]

Someone mentioned the Unreal Tournament mod Infiltration at the Iron-Sites discussion.

Just downloaded it and played with it a bit off and online. The weapons handing is nice but I didn't like the enclosed maps of the mod. While I used the training level a bit, I just don't like the gameplay and the cramped maps.

I guess I prefer OFP's outdoor landscapes.

But seriously, is there anyone who likes Infiltration alot to add some suggestions?

[Silver Falcon 0]

Ooops, maybe we misundrstanded each other a bit.

Of course I´ d like improvement in recoil system (at least like in AAO), by the random dispersion element I meant such a minor or random factors like unideal way of pushing trigger, wind, unideal ammo, factors like heating barrel and so on together .

Swaying (aiprecision), recoil and prehaps breathing should be simulated quite precisely.

However I think that recoil in AAO isn´t that bad - try to fire long bursts with saw and you see you must compensate.

BTW: If you want little improvement in OFP1:

1) open FDF (or another) config

2) click on search and write "aimprecision"

3) change these moves aiprecision to those values:

Quote[/b] ]class Lying: Default

{

preload = true;

actions = LyingActions;

file=leh.rtm;

speed=SPEED_STATIC;

looped=true;

onLandBeg=true;

onLandEnd=true;

soundEnabled=false;

duty = RestDuty;

visibleSize = 0.25;

//aimPrecision = 0.3;

aimPrecision = 2.2; // FDF

recoilSuffix = "fixed";

};  

class Crouch: Combat

{

preload = true;

actions=CrouchActions;

file=klek.rtm;

speed=SPEED_STATIC;

variantsPlayer[]={};

variantsAI[]={};

visibleSize = 0.6;

//aimPrecision = 0.5;

aimPrecision = 5.5; // FDF

recoilSuffix = "halffixed";

};

class Default // default state

{

access = ReadOnlyVerified;

actions = StandActions;

file=""; // default - no file

looped=true;

speed=0.5;

disableWeapons=false;

enableOptics=true; // note: this is tested only when disableWeapons is false

disableWeaponsLong=false;

showWeaponAim=true;

enableMissile = false;

enableBinocular = false;

showItemInHand = false;

showItemInRightHand = false;

showHandGun = false;

onLandBeg=false;

onLandEnd=false;

onLadder=false;

duty=-0.5;

visibleSize = 1;

//aimPrecision = 1;

aimPrecision = 7.0; // FDF

recoilSuffix = "";  

Play with FDF mod turned on, test with another weapons with lower recoil (JAM,BAS, Earl&Suchey...)

Sniping is fun now from 300-400m.

Note that enemy experience counts quite much - experienced AI snipers can kill on 300m-400m by one shot, rookies only waste ammo or hesitate to fire.

The ORCS units are good since they are extra sharp - tough and sometimes long firefights on 300m.

Try lying aimprecision on 2.0-2.5; crouching 5-6.5; and standing 6-7.5 then tell me what you find the best ballance.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

A lot of people get the idea of how shooting works from movies.. .which are invariably nonsensical.

IRL there are several factors affecting how accurate fire is.

1) The accuracy of the weapon itself. Imagine a rifle held in a mechanical vice. This varies from weapon to weapon, but the most important consideration is barrel length. Pistols are usually completely inaccurate at distances above 25 metres (+ - depending on model). And so on. For comparison, the basic infantry rifle of the British Army can, in the hands of a hallf- decent shot, reliably hit man-sized targets out past 500m - on short exposures.

2) The skill of the shooter. I have trained with some of the best competition shots in the world. Their aim still sways when they aim. They are just better at predicting it and correcting for it. Stock OFP does NOT have enough sway by a long way. FDF mod is a lot closer to reality. Swaying of the aim is influenced by how steady a position the firer is in. Standing is not very steady, more so if the weapon is heavier/ badly balanced (cough LSW). Kneeling is slightly more steady, but not nearly as steady as prone. Sitting is very steady, and prone is *almost* rock steady. - although if, say, you turned round a fair amount, there would be significant disturbance until you were steady again.

Any of these positions SUPPORTED, however, are very very steady - standing supported is almost as steady as prone. Supported positions would be firing with a fixed object - a windowsill, a sandbag wall, whatever, supporting the hands also.

Hold. The hold of the weapon is also very important, but I think it'd be fair enough to just have all the soldiers in OFP2 having decent hold, because its not something you can simulate, really, and because basic training *should* teach soldiers how to hold the weapon properly.

3) Movement. Movement of the shooter or the target. Either of these will greatly reduce accuracy, but with practice it can be adjusted for. Someone gave an example of US soldiers blazing away at an iraqi and missing everything - TBH, sounds like they just were bad shots.

A good friend of mine, or possibly me, was shooting the moving target competition recently. Thats a man sized running silhouette, moving at running speed, across a 5 metre frontage, obscured until it starts moving. The main scoring area is a rectangle on the chest roughly 6 inches x 13 inches. He put 7 rounds into that area and the other 3 right beside it on the chest. And he didnt even win the competition.

As distance increased, the difficulty rises - but its not *that* difficult to hit moving targets, especially if they are going in a straight line, and especially if you can see them for a while.

4) Environmental factors.

Wind does not affect rounds below 100m except in very exceptional circumstances. Beyond that it is important.

Humidity etc are really only considerations for extremely long range shots.

[funnyguy1 0]

Hmm how to begin.

I`m a big fan of 3d modeled sights, like in vietcong....

It can simulate aiming really well if it`s done correctly.

The part of the gun which is really swaing is barrel, particularly the end of it (because where you`ll hit depends on where the end of the barrel had been pointed (recoil)). And if you`re holding a gun, you do not see it`s swaing, because in fact you can`t see the barrel. What you see is just a gunsight.

I realised that when i was watching the `field of view` through the gunsight (especially when I was on the move) there`s really small difference between the sight faults.

And the reason I was missing (small ranges) was rather the recoil than the aiming things. Of course things are different if you use a scope, because you can really preciesly see the swaing.

And imho they should focus on the best way of mapping the swaing sight (of course in fully 3d, nearly as in R6, but not using the `hip shooting`).

sorry for bad english

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

The part of the gun which is really swaing is barrel, particularly the end of it

... The barrel is attached very firmly to the rest of the weapon on everything except some sniper rifles. If the barrel is swaying, the rest of the weapon is.

Quote[/b] ] (because where you`ll hit depends on where the end of the barrel had been pointed (recoil)).

I may be misunderstanding what you mean here, but recoil is not what that is called. Recoil does affect where the weapon is pointing - but not before you fire the first time.

Quote[/b] ]

And if you`re holding a gun, you do not see it`s swaing, because in fact you can`t see the barrel. What you see is just a gunsight.

Utter nonsense. Sorry. You do see the weapon swaying, especially through the sight.

[funnyguy1 0]

The part of the gun which is really swaing is barrel, particularly the end of it

... The barrel is attached very firmly to the rest of the weapon on everything except some sniper rifles.  If the barrel is swaying, the rest of the weapon is.

Quote[/b] ] (because where you`ll hit depends on where the end of the barrel had been pointed (recoil)).

I may be misunderstanding what you mean here, but recoil is not what that is called.  Recoil does affect where the weapon is pointing - but not before you fire the first time.

Quote[/b] ]

And if you`re holding a gun, you do not see it`s swaing, because in fact you can`t see the barrel. What you see is just a gunsight.

Utter nonsense.  Sorry.  You do see the weapon swaying, especially through the sight.

That`s rather popular phenomenon that the barrel is attached to the gun:)

I simply didn`t know how to write it.

"You do see the weapon swaying, especially through the sight."

Yeah...and that`s the point, because you look "through" (that word) the sight, and if you`re holding gun near your hip,

and watching some stupid crosshair the whole stuff with the swaying ect. is pointless.

What I want is to make ppl who`ll play the game get used to the natural sights (v key?). Only then swaying is visible and player is able to control it, or have an influence on it.

About the recoil, I mixed up something....I just wanted to say that recoil is quite important, and it`s one of the factors making your shooting inefficient...but it`s rather obvious thing, and explaining it (especially on this forums:) is quite silly.

and...yes...my english IS baaad:)

[gandalf the white 0]

you can already disable the crosshair in the options menu .

However, in real life you can actually FEEL the weapon, so you have a *slight* guess at where the bullet is going .

[LepparD 0]

Well, the only gun i ever fired, was the H&K G3, which also uses 7.62.

Hitting a head at 100 metres isnt a problem. I was the best shot in our platoon (a year before we got the canadian m/16), but hitting a special part of a man at 300 hundred metres standing is allmost impossible. I was the best shot with 10 hits at 300 metres, but frankly i have no idead where i hit it. Prone or kneeling makes it easier, but you cannot make a headshot without luck at that distance.

Anyway, I know that the g3 is more accurate than the ak47, but it still uses the same ammunition (7.62x51mm (.308 Win).

The recoiil is tough on it, and good shoters can make an accurate shot every 4 seconds. full auto is just plain dumb at over 5 metres.

[Madus_Maximus 0]

The AK-47 uses a shorter round, 7.62 x 39mm (Russian), which was designed for close combat and was used in their Tokarevs and some older pistol/sub-machine guns (think the Spagin used the same round). It does more damage at closer range than the NATO version but isn't designed for extreme range. They use the 7.62 x 54mm (Russian) for that.

Methinks you mean the C7 when you say "Canadian M16". It's basicly a modified M16A2 which is a hell of a lot more reliable and built better. Jams less, has full auto, and the barrel doesn't bend and warp to the extremes that the M16 does (that's why they use burst, to make the barrel last longer).

AK's are pretty accurate on the first shot upto about 300 - 400m (depending on the shooter obviously), just the recoil makes the following shots less so. I'm sure it's easily capable of removing someones head from that distance with one shot.

[stgn 39]

The AK-47 uses a shorter round, 7.62 x 39mm (Russian), which was designed for close combat and was used in their Tokarevs and some older pistol/sub-machine guns (think the Spagin used the same round). It does more damage at closer range than the NATO version but isn't designed for extreme range. They use the 7.62 x 54mm (Russian) for that.

Methinks you mean the C7 when you say "Canadian M16". It's basicly a modified M16A2 which is a hell of a lot more reliable and built better. Jams less, has full auto, and the barrel doesn't bend and warp to the extremes that the M16 does (that's why they use burst, to make the barrel last longer).

AK's are pretty accurate on the first shot upto about 300 - 400m (depending on the shooter obviously), just the recoil makes the following shots less so. I'm sure it's easily capable of removing someones head from that distance with one shot.

There are some slight dimension changes on the C7 but other than that its the same as a M16A2 as its a milspec weapon build on the M16 prints from Colt, not a dublicat like a Bushmaster. The Big difference is the barrel which is cold hammer forged which and from what I hear they have a longer service life ones Colt uses. Whats the bull about 3rd burst being for making the barrels last longer? It dosen't matter that much if you put a 1000 bullets threw it on 3rd burst than fullauto. The 3rd burst was added to make sure soldiers diden't misused the Fullauto like they sometimes did in Vietnam with spray and pray tactics. Besides Colt has just bought Diemaco so you might se the things done to the C7 on a M16 in the future.

STGN

[DanAK47 1]

The logic would be that because only 3 rounds are being fired at a time, the barrel does not heat up as rapidly.

[funnyguy1 0]

you can already disable the crosshair in the options menu   .

However, in real life you can actually FEEL the weapon, so you have a *slight*  guess at where the bullet is going   .

no comments

3d (which looks better) or 2d....guns must have animated sights (which would show swaying etc.)

and hip shooting should be as inefficient as it is in real life.

So crosshairs only in cadet mode! And gun sticked to your face.

well, maybe some large circle suggesting where the bullets might fly in CQB, but It should be useless in veteran mode...

I would rather see several types of aiming with use of iron sights, for ex.

the best effectivenes - gun is situated nearest your face, and you`re moving slow

less effective - gun is a bit lower, or you`re moving a bit faster, so swaying is more visible and your shooting is less accurate

and so on...

I thought about controling it with the mousewheel, so one fast rotation could bring your weapon to the face level...

And I think this thread should help...

[Baphomet 0]

In OFP the issue of 3d versus 2d ironsights is a moot one. Or any game that does not both simulate both the involuntary movements of both the weapon you are holding and the movement of your head.

[Madus_Maximus 0]

The logic would be that because only 3 rounds are being fired at a time, the barrel does not heat up as rapidly.

What he said. In 'Nam the old full auto M16 and M16A1's overheated too quickly and the barrel warped quite a lot. If you look around US bases at old weapon caches you can probably find old rifles with worryingly out of shape barrels from overuse. Well, if you're lucky enough to see them before they're melted down.

[this fella 0]

who thinks the crosshairs that spread out and contract are gay. I don't know why but they just seem immature or something. Just add a bit more sway when you turn quickly. That would be more realistic. But we don't want crosshairs at all in opf2 i guess.

Maybe make the iron sights or scope sway a bit more when you turn quickly, at least when your body has to change position when prone. I know it would take the fun out of those quick snap shots to the head, but they probably happen to often anyway.

[AC_BLu 0]

I agree with you

[BlackScorpion 0]

A bit like in America's Army? You have crosshair, which you can choose yourself, and it stays in one place.

I got 24/40 on marksman test before I realized that you actually can use the ironsight...

Then I got 36/40 and none missed.

I used the aimpoint style crosshair.