Auto-scope is breaking mobility

[afp 1]

I just realised one of the reasons that ArmA looks difficult to handle in CQBs, along with "rearming on the move" and "change stance on move" which have already been solved. Also it may be one of the reasons that ArmA was classified as "clumsy" related to controls...

Well, most of us are using scoped weapons, since pistols are too slow to use and there are probably very vew fans of unscoped weapons. Everytime you reload or change your position, the scope is brought automatically back in an unnatural way... most of the times when you change your stance you inted to move or perform another action than just being in "scope" mode again. I studied it again and again, it somehow breaks the actions flow, I think it would be much better if "reload" or "stance change" would remove "scope" mode before.

It should be at least an option, if not in game menu at least in config file or something...

Another thing that also breaks the mobility is the door entrace, I guess the collision checking should be removed too (or option), noone hits the rifle on the walls like that... this may give also a better character handling feeling.

Edited June 29, 2009 by afp

[kremator 1065]

Shouldnt be using scopes in CQB..... schoolboy error :)

[galzohar 31]

Don't catch me on this, but I don't think the term "scope" applies to something with no magnification like the aimpoint. I know some games make all sights have magnification which make it feel like the aimpoint is a magnifying scope, but it isn't (at least not the aimpoint commonly used both IRL and games).

Anyway, scope or not, due to the no magnification aimpoints are GOOD for CQB, not bad... Of course the game is a little messed up as it doesn't simulate the 2-eye-open shooting. Only in quite short ranges should you shoot without using the sights at all, assuming you're playing on expert with no cheating crosshairs.

As for the original post, I don't get what you're trying to say. There is definitely an issue with the game engine that once an animation is starting it can't be interrupted - even if you get killed while getting up from prone, you will only play the death animation after you're done getting up, which looks very funny. In certain situations this kind of animation issue can translate into a feeling of not being able to properly control the in-game character properly. I don't know if anything can be done about it, though, without re-making the engine.

[afp 1]

Yes indeed, since the animations cannot be interrupted they better be good. Of course, even in CQB auto-optics can cause troubles....for example you aimed though an aimpoint while crouched and you want to stand up and move.....the optics just hit you back requiring another click...

Not only its disturbing, but also abnormal because when I decided for another action, I just dont want the old action back...

Edited June 27, 2009 by afp

[Alex72 1]

I dont understand whats hard with right click to stop aiming? Otherwise you had to click again anyway to bring it up again. If you are aiming and need quick reload you would have to right click to get it up again. Now you dont. AiM - STOP AIM = click - click. Pretty straight forward to me. But taste is like the butt - divided. ;)

[afp 1]

Its not about taste, its about an improper design.... If an extra click is required statistically 90% of situations, it better be avoided...

[klamacz 448]

it was designed in Arma1 like you want. I always felt it was inproper. It is players decision when and why turn off optics. I remember topics like "dont turn off optics when changing stance" :)

Anyway, I like it like it is now in Arma2. I think there could be a option so both sides would be satisfied

[CarlGustaffa 4]

How would it work/look if the aiming device on the gun was made partly transparent, as to simulate using both eyes (not the dot though)? I actually find the aimpoint and EOTech too obstructive, even for CQB. Just test it on the firing range and see how you can't see where the targets are popping up when in sighted mode, because the sight itself is blocking the view to the target. Should not be that way on magnified optics naturally, that would be their natural limitation.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

This is why I just use crosshairs in CQB... :j:

[Ka-Oz 10]

also the Dot and Cross on aimpoint and eotech are way to big and intrusive. with the aimpoint an enemy at 150Meters is totaly covered with the red dot making where you hit just luck, you cant aim precisely, neighter can you see the impacts to correct the aiming. and yes nowadays 150m is CQB

[Fireball 16]

Its not about taste, its about an improper design.... If an extra click is required statistically 90% of situations, it better be avoided...

Thing is, that the "zoomed-in" style walking is actually what you would do in CQB, but not with a sniper rifle. But it's not a big deal to click away the zoom with the sniper rifle.

I use the zoomed in movements like crouch, cover a door, wait a few seconds, stand up and move in still notch-on with the aimpoint fixed - that's how it's done.

You toss the mag, put the new one in, back to aimpoint as quick as possible - exactly what you want in CQB.

One could argue that you don't go prone in CQB but I like it very much how it is done in the game, when you stand up that you keep the aimpoint.

Maybe with a sniper rifle it makes less sense, because to keep the correct aim with the sniper scope while standing up makes you rather superhuman. There it would be more realistic just to make you click to zoom in and aim again, but it would involve a differing between zooming scopes and unzoomed aimpoints, which is not done right now. This would go for a feature request, I guess.

[galzohar 31]

On servers with crosshairs enabled there's absolutely no issue. It's those who actually try play a somewhat realistic game (highest difficulty) where these things matter at all.

[SASrecon 0]

The ACE mod in ARMA1 had an option to change between iron sights/red dot aimpoints to aimpoints and back on weapons with these features (with Shift+F i think)

In ARMA2 i really miss this feature as it really helps in CQB.

In ARMA2 the scoped G36 has a red dot sight just above the scope but i can't seem to use it :-(

i'll hope for the best and add it to my patch 1.03 wishlist :)

[kylania 568]

I dont understand whats hard with right click to stop aiming?

I've noticed in quite a few situations the rclick optics doesn't work well if at all. I've switched to using 'v' again (moved Prance-Over-Obstacle to Numpad 0) and it's working much better for me.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Yes, in statics etc I could not go into optics via RMB. I changed back to old 'v' myself, but obstacle climbing was set to double 'c'.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

On servers with crosshairs enabled there's absolutely no issue. It's those who actually try play a somewhat realistic game (highest difficulty) where these things matter at all.

That's a pretty naive tone you have there. Disabling crosshairs does not necessarily make anything more 'realistic'. Often times it's more unrealistic to disable crosshairs due to the lack of other certain senses in a game, and crosshairs serve as a visual indicator that helps improve your situational awareness. In fact, crosshairs have little to do at all with realism. I could play Unreal Tournament without crosshairs and it wouldn't be at all any more realistic.

I know everyone has personal preferences, but I don't think of ArmA as a shooting sim (and it really isn't). I find it realistic in other aspects, such that things like crosshairs and 3rd person (which I perfer having enabled) are irrelevant. Now I won't argue that turning off crosshairs doesn't improve immersion, as it certainly does. But I hate when people make such judgemental statements about crosshairs being all sorts of blasphemous or noobish, or just dismiss their existance alltogether.

Sorry for off-topic rant.

[afp 1]

I very much agree with you Big Daws, the only issue is about the corsshair look, something less visibible would be nicer. Actually, without crosshair is kinda unrealistic, because the target awarness in real is far better than in ArmA without cursor. We discussed before, "true cursor" would be more apropiate...

[maxter 10]

This is why I just use crosshairs in CQB... :j:

Using crosshairs in Arma/A2?...

/kills self

[galzohar 31]

Crosshairs allow you to shoot at long ranges without aiming. What's the point of even having aiming then? An infantry simulation not simulating shooting and LOS is not an infantry simulation. I don't want a game that's "realistic in X aspect". I want a game that is realistic on as many aspects as possible with a computer game.

Crosshairs mostly don't make up for senses you have IRL and don't have in a game, but they do mostly give you senses in game that you don't have IRL and shouldn't have in game. Same goes for 3rd person view. And yes, I can do pretty much everything in game with 1st person view and no crosshairs, except shooting weapons that don't have their sights modeled (though even with those at medium ranges I can manage getting mediocre accuracy).

A lot of weapons are still missing their sights, (like some TOW launchers), in which case crosshairs work as a temporary solution until BIS/modders make proper sights for them.

[EDcase 87]

afp: Sorry but I think its better the way it is.

If you play with crosshairs/reticule then its no better than playing BF or CoD.

Edited July 3, 2009 by EDcase

[galzohar 31]

Actually, it is "better". In COD/BF the crosshairs are actually inaccurate, while in Arma 2 they're as good as sights (other than the fact you can't hold breath).