Cone of fire

[skedel 0]

Alright first off I loved the realism of Flashpoint and am really looking forward to the strategic and tactical aspects of this game. One question that I have been pondering is how they are going to handle the trajectory paths of the bullets.

Basically many games out today use a 'cone of fire' which means the bullet will have a random path once it leaves the barrel. It is normally meant to be a handicap to new players who do not have years of honing their accuracy with rail guns in games such as Q3.

It is very noticable in games such as BF2 where you can go prone a few meters from a wall for best accuracy, then fire off single shots and observe the results. You will notice that you will not always shoot straight as you would expect too, but instead the bullets will come at random angles, sometimes as drastic as a 45 degree angle from the barrel.

The main thing I am getting to is how the bullets will act in ArmaA.

Will the rifles have effective range and perform like they do in real life, ultimately leading to bullet drop outside of their effective range, recoil aside.

Basically I am curious if I am prone and have my rifle in a steady position, (Red Orchestra does this wonderfully, as you can rest your rifle on a ledge or a small bump ahead of you for dead on accuracy with a icon displaying so) will I be hitting the target dead on without much randomization with the bullet path - am talking well aimed single shots, not a spray and pray.

[Spetz 0]

Well OFP didn't have random generated bullet spray, we can expect the same in ArA. It had simulated the bullet dropping and the wind affecting the accuracy

[NeMeSiS 11]

Well OFP didn't have random generated bullet spray, we can expect the same in ArA. It had simulated the bullet dropping and the wind affecting the accuracy

Actually there was some dispersion in OFP, but it was almost nothing (changeable in the config). And it was always the same amount of dispersion, no matter if you were walking, running, standing or lying down.

[llauma 0]

In OFP the bullet went where you aimed your rifle just as it does in real life, of course with a bullet drop but that's what objects do in gravity. The small dispersion (fraction of a percent) was a way to compensate for the lack of wind affecting the bullet I suppose.

OFP has a system which is quite different to other games. The bullet is an actual object which follows the direction of the barrel. So no matter if you'd run or lay prone the bullet will always follow the direction of the barrel. As the weapon moves alot while running it's impossible to aim well but if you would fire at the exact time as the weapon is pointing at an enemy you will hit him. So it's all about the actual direction of the weapon which means that you will hit what you aim at unless it's very far away so that the small dispersion makes a difference.

Other games have bullets spawning with a randomized direction. The direction of the barrel as an object has no significance what so ever. If you sprint and aim precisely at an enemy you won't probably hit him due to the 'cone of fire'.

[codarl 1]

There are two kinds of dispersion in OFP.

One is the "dispersion" (your "random spray") , that cannot be predicted. However, most modern firearms have good accuracy if used in their designed range.

The other one is the "sway". Note that in OFP, your crosshair is made out of two items. the "T" that follows your mouse exactly, and the "dot" (not cone) in the center, that points EXACTLY where the bullet will travel once it leaves the barrel.

You can edit the config so that the "dot" has a random sway. this type of sway can be seen (the dot moves around). this is to simulate that with a rifle weighing almost 3 KG, you cannot expect to aim perfectly without your arms shaking, or the wind blowing against them.

the "sway" depends on how fatigued you are, and wether you are standing, kneeling, or lying down. but no matter what, with sway you can still see EXACTLY where the bullet will be traveling.

EDIT: a little extra: The bullet will always spwan relative the the GUN, and not the person holding it! though this does not matter with distances over ten or so meters, you should remember that your eyes are not inside the barrel of your gun, but fifteen centimeters to the left and fifteen centimeters to the top of it.

Also, in THIS image, the projectile will always travel relative to the weapon's direction... get my drift?

[Second 0]

This is one reason that i love OFP. In Farcry i look at enemy's gun and think: "Ha-hah! he's pointing it totaly different direction. Now i run and chop him down with my machette!" WRONG! when i'm two meter away from him, the gun point totaly wrong direction, and then... Enemy shoots and bullets leave the barrel in 100 degrees angle... towards me, dead-me! When saying that some games have better AI when it comes to matter of hiding behind objects, well there is a reason how they do it. They don't have to aim at you, like in OFP.

Try JAM's HD-mags or Unsung mod forexample, they have HUGE dispersion. Shoot to 100 meters and bullet hits sometimes even 2 meters away of the aimpoint (those really are lucky shots).

[whisper 0]

Well, I think every real weapon HAS a dispersion factor, depicted in OFP "dispersion" parameter. wind was not taken into account in OFP, it should be in ArmA

And like explained, there is no "cone of fire" concept like in other FPS. CoF is supposed to depict the effect of your movement, breathing, recoil, on your gun accuracy. In OFP, all these elements are already visible, existing, AND impacting your bullet trajectory, so there is no "CoF" to depict them.

The question is, will there be, like in RO:OF, the possiblity to rest your weapon on obstacles and such. No mention of this yet, so I think we shouldn't expect this in ArmA

[InqWiper 0]

I would like all weapons to have the same dispersion they have IRL. In OFP you could probably hit someone with the first shot with an M16 from 1km if you had a good scope on it. I suspect that this is not possible IRL or there would be no use for sniper rifles. If people still think the guns are too accurate they can always add sway to the gun or add a cone themselves.

-edit

The Bizon spreads pretty much, I dunno what that is supposed to simulate though.

[Garcia 0]

Quote[/b] ](...)

When you come to a corner you lean to the side and back to keep in cover, while you attack enemy troops. You will experience that the trajectory of the bullet is like in the real world. (...)

Quick translation from a recent interview with Placebo with a norwegian gaming site.

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

I would like all weapons to have the same dispersion they have IRL. In OFP you could probably hit someone with the first shot with an M16 from 1km if you had a good scope on it. I suspect that this is not possible IRL or there would be no use for sniper rifles. If people still think the guns are too accurate they can always add sway to the gun or add a cone themselves.

-edit

The Bizon spreads pretty much, I dunno what that is supposed to simulate though.

Not if you havent tried it before.

It was even hard to hit some1 with the sniper at 1 km because of bulletdrop.

[speeder 0]

But I only thought the Dragnov was hard to use with it's bulledrop, even though it has it's build in "drop-scale"

[InqWiper 0]

I would like all weapons to have the same dispersion they have IRL. In OFP you could probably hit someone with the first shot with an M16 from 1km if you had a good scope on it. I suspect that this is not possible IRL or there would be no use for sniper rifles. If people still think the guns are too accurate they can always add sway to the gun or add a cone themselves.

-edit

The Bizon spreads pretty much, I dunno what that is supposed to simulate though.

Not if you havent tried it before.

It was even hard to hit some1 with the sniper at 1 km because of bulletdrop.

Im not talking about the bullet drop, Im talking about dispersion. The bullet shouldnt go so straight that it is possible to hit someone with the first shot with a scoped M16 from 1km even if you know exactly how to aim. Looking at wikipedia I find that the M16A2 would spread about 0.5 meters at 1km. This doesnt really matter much though since noone will try to hit anything at 1km first shot with an m16. Im just saying I like weapons to have a realistic spread which is only depending on how accurate the actual weapon is and not the guy firing it. Hope Im making atleast some sense... really tired  

[Denwad 0]

yeah, in ideal conditions the rifle would fire straight as an arrow

but sand in the muzzle because you dropped your rifle, couple shots off target

quality control messed up in the ammunition factory, bullets aren't perfectly shaped

you dove into cover and landed on your rifle, bending it ever so slightly

you haven't alinged your sights correctly and don't notice.

etc.

as you can imagine, there's lots of conditions on a battlefield that could affect the accuracy of the weapon so that it isn't going to shoot exactly where the sights ( not the barrel, the sights could also get knocked around... ) are pointed at.

[strango 5]

yeah, in ideal conditions the rifle would fire straight as an arrow

The situations you mention are definitely valid, but you can trace other variables back to the design of the rifle. How tight is the chamber? (affects precise alignment of the bullet) What rate of rifling twist does the barrel have? (affects stabilization of the bullet) What length is the barrel? (gives more time for stabilization and increases muzzle velocity)

At shorter ranges none of the above really have that big of an impact since deviation is something that gets greater over distance.

[Denwad 0]

duly noted

[TheDude 0]

the best simulation of recoils is americas army, ofp recoil was god at the time but is not realistic these days the guns ware to acurate. i hope that arma will have americas army recoil type thats a realistic recoil