Recoil (again)

[frederf 0]

raptor;1687713']I totally hate the new recoil system and tbh it ruins the whole game-feeling for me. Sure is looks more realistic at first BUT its not when you think about it. A kick is normal yes' date=' but just like IRL the gun automaticly comes down.

I mean have you ever saw someone shoot and stay still with its barrel up in the air...

The old recoil was just perfect, you had to wait for your crosshair to come down. Now when I fire 3 shots I need to pull my mouse down a meter. Boehoe BI![/quote']

It was perfect that you could close your eyes and click and each bullet would be fired with the barrel in 100.0000000% in the same position? Please. "Player in the loop" is a huge improvement over "Doing it all for you." Ruined? Each semi auto shot requires a fraction of a millimeter of mouse movement to compensate.

[aeggwards1 10]

raptor;1687713']I totally hate the new recoil system and tbh it ruins the whole game-feeling for me. Sure is looks more realistic at first BUT its not when you think about it. A kick is normal yes' date=' but just like IRL the gun automaticly comes down.

I mean have you ever saw someone shoot and stay still with its barrel up in the air...

The old recoil was just perfect, you had to wait for your crosshair to come down. Now when I fire 3 shots I need to pull my mouse down a meter[/quote']

As I was saying earlier, my thoughts exactly. When all you play is single player the new recoil is a serious disadvantage against the AI. They can kill you without to many issues in vanilla and it is even easier for them now as I spend half my time wrestling with the mouse. This is supposed to be a game and fun, I don't find it much fun dying because I am wrestling with my mouse. Please tone it down or add an option to return to vanilla.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Considering all the amazingly stupid things the AI do, how is that a bad thing? :p In any case, I think it's fine. If AI is too brutal on you, reduce their accuracy. The old way was simply nuts.

Whilst moving (walking or jogging) the weapon ought to be held at low ready position .

I definitely don't want to be forced into low ready by walking. Currently it is by choice, as it should be, although the low ready in the game is a more relaxed version. Could it use more? Yeah, probably. Do I want to control more? Not really.

Edited July 18, 2010 by CarlGustaffa

[aeggwards1 10]

Fair point, vanilla lack of recoil system sucks, I will agree with that. What I am hoping for is just the current betas recoil to be slighty reduced. Then I would be happy! :)

[Curry 10]

I definitely don't want to be forced into low ready by walking. Currently it is by choice, as it should be, although the low ready in the game is a more relaxed version. Could it use more? Yeah, probably. Do I want to control more? Not really.

The weapon should be lowered in my opinion when you are not in IS mode in 3rd person view. But a position where you can still shoot without a delay.

I can't remember how this was done in OFP but I have a feeling, that in ArmA the animation for holding the gun is much more "machine like". When you are not in IS mode, the soldier holds the gun always in front of his eyes in 3rd person view which is a bit unrealistic for an M240 or even an M4 not only that, it looks stupid as well. These things weigh something and you don't have arms of steel. :D

[Murklor 10]

The new recoil is fine.

Its not really about realism – arma2 does a poor job at emulating weapon handling in any case – whats important is the change in gameplay.

It is now much harder to put down unrealistic levels of perfectly accurate fire. (basically negating AI at certain ranges). For PvP it gets even better because the new recoil ALLOWS manoeuvring – particularly in OA where cover tends to be scarce.

I definetly agree with this. Its the same way damage is handled in other games (such as Bad Company 2). Its not really about absolute realism, its about percieved realism. And that is not getting pegged in the head by a machinegun at 500m in the middle of a warzone, its about massive amounts of firepower.

HOWEVER there is a fatal flaw in this and that is ammo. Most games are quick deathmatches, where say 2-3 MG boxes is plenty and then you die. Not so in A2/OA. Last Domination mission I played with a scoped M249, it just didnt work. Engagement ranges maybe around 300m, just when you start to notice bullet drops. I couldnt hit crap. Which is fun by all means! It was awesome laying down fire instead of being uber-accurate for a change! But not so much fun when I had no ammo after 3-4 dead enemies, averaging 1 kill per box.

I know A2/OA is capable of true ammo carrying support, but lets face it - it doesnt happen unless the mission designer force it down your throat.

I hope missions adjust pretty damn fast to this change and gives us more and easier ways to resupply, or even more will turn to snipers :rolleyes:

[CarlGustaffa 4]

@Curry:

High ready is the most natural stance in the game. Most missions are quite action filled, and quite unlike the real deal where you can wait for days for something interesting to happen.

In other words, there tend to be more fighting than waiting in missions. You can go "low ready" (or, relaxed) whenever you feel like it by double tapping ctrl, and I think most do when not in action. I'm willing to "look stupid" as long as the controls aren't getting in the way of me interacting with the game. Having to press fire to get weapon high ready can easily cause accidental discharge of weapon (I've done it myself) - which could become a tactical problem. Keep in mind, sometimes the double tap ctrl doesn't even work for getting weapon high ready.

I agree that running around with M240 in high ready for a prolonged time "looks bad" and is unrealistic even. I tend to be machinegunner or saw gunner myself if I'm given the choice and have no issues with having to lower weapon manually.

I never use 3rd person except when waiting. And then I sit. Frankly it annoys the hell out of me that all veteran servers I find have 3rd person and crosshairs enabled. And there are almost no expert servers around to make up for it. Not sure why you brought up "unrealistic M240 handling" together with "in 3rd person"... When crosshairs are not enabled, and especially for freezone floaters and/or trackIR users, the gun in high ready also shows in which direction you are interacting, without having to look down.

Last Domination mission I played with a scoped M249, it just didnt work. Engagement ranges maybe around 300m, just when you start to notice bullet drops. I couldnt hit crap. Which is fun by all means! It was awesome laying down fire instead of being uber-accurate for a change! But not so much fun when I had no ammo after 3-4 dead enemies, averaging 1 kill per box.

I know A2/OA is capable of true ammo carrying support, but lets face it - it doesnt happen unless the mission designer force it down your throat.

I hope missions adjust pretty damn fast to this change and gives us more and easier ways to resupply, or even more will turn to snipers :rolleyes:

In the Domination I played, I noticed Xeno (appeared fairly unmodded) had only given us 100rnd M249 ammo... I can suppress like mad if I'm given the chance, from far beyond 300m. I don't expect getting kills at that range though, but the idea for me is roleplaying and making sure the enemy doesn't get the chance to hit my squadmates with accurate fire. This enhances the maneuver part. Yesterday I played for about 3 hours and had only 7 kills. Most of the time I just sat around waiting for someone to pick me up (I hate that cheap parachuting thing, completely ruins teamwork - always someone who have to get in early and get spotted so the enemy air is ready for us when we get equipment in) since the admin locked helis (fair enough, fully understandable from what I've seen elsewhere). In that time I think 6 or 7 targets had been solved, I only got to 4 of them, but due to the "speed of this gamemode" I only got to shoot at 1 of them - for everyone else it was just rush rush rush - I finally gave up. I only got killed once though, but due to heavy lag. But that's a point; use the weapon to suppress the enemy instead of always going for the kill - at least with AI you'll live longer - and I hate dieing :D

I think you would have liked my Domino though (Arma2/ACE2). Same "game mechanics" as the original (but more infantry oriented, greatly toned down armor, but increased artillery but with higher survivability, and quite limited everything - a very tight concept, unlike the original which is extremely open), but most of the "free goodies" were either turned off by default, or completely removed. Played out pretty good where I joined it.

Edited July 18, 2010 by CarlGustaffa

[wamingo 1]

Do I want to control more? Not really.

I do, I want to control more. This game is too arcady :)

Haven't seen you complain about any of the number of new things to control that BIS added with OA either...

Seriously though, see my proposal here:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1684709&postcount=8

I think it would feel pretty automatic and realistic.

The big counter argument is it introduces delay, but I think the delay is actually part of what would be realistic. ArmA needs to be a bit slow. The word "instant" doesn't exist in the arma-dictionary.

Yesterday I fell over a old feature request on the CIT that suggested that it should take a a couple of seconds to switch positions in vehicles. And I thought hell yeah, that's exactly what arma needs! Don't have to go over the edge about it, but enough to symbolize that: yo man, solo operating a whole tank is kind of silly, mkay? ;)

I forgot to vote though..

[Wolfstriked 11]

A change to controls would cure this.Bring up optics(Rmouse)changed so that when clicked it looks like the shouldered view we have now and when you click Rmouse again it drops weapon down.Makes it easy to bring weapon up and down....animations for this should be enhanced also.Now if you wanna aim down sight you hold Rmouse and weapon comes up and zooms.

[Curry 10]

In other words, there tend to be more fighting than waiting in missions. You can go "low ready" (or, relaxed) whenever you feel like it by double tapping ctrl, and I think most do when not in action.

I do it too. ;)

I'm willing to "look stupid" as long as the controls aren't getting in the way of me interacting with the game. Having to press fire to get weapon high ready can easily cause accidental discharge of weapon (I've done it myself) - which could become a tactical problem. Keep in mind, sometimes the double tap ctrl doesn't even work for getting weapon high ready.

I don't see a problem with the controls getting in the way of players interactions when the 3rd person animation adjusts to the 1st person animation. When you are not in IS mode, you soldier ingame lowers the gun. This should be seen in 3rd person view. You would still point the gun in front of you and you would still see where you aim at and you can still fire the gun. ;)

What I explained is just a lowered position in 3rd person view just like the unsighted 1st person view. Nothing would change except the 3rd person animation for an unsighted gun.

Accidental discharges already happen with the lowered weapon animation when you press control twice and you minimize arma to get to your desktop. You click on the Arma icon in your taskbar with the LEFT MOUSE button and there you have your accidental discharge.

With my suggestion of a lowered weapon animation in 3rd person view nothing would change in the current game mechanics.

I never use 3rd person except when waiting.

On my squad server this is always disabled same goes for crosshairs.

Not sure why you brought up "unrealistic M240 handling" together with "in 3rd person"...

When you look at your team mates ingame and their guns are always in sighted position when standing, crouching and laying it becomes annoying and quite unrealistic. With my "system" you would see them only with sighted weapons when they are in IS mode. Otherwise their guns would be lowered but still pointing forward and ready to shoot just a bit lowered that they can rest their guns on their leg when in crouch position or resting on their hip when standing.

The big counter argument is it introduces delay, but I think the delay is actually part of what would be realistic. ArmA needs to be a bit slow. The word "instant" doesn't exist in the arma-dictionary.

As I wrote already in your thread that won't work. ;)

This would hinder you more then anything else. I think a "low ready" position for your gun in 3rd person view when you are not in IS mode should do the trick. ;)

Edited July 18, 2010 by Curry

[wamingo 1]

As I wrote already in your thread that won't work. ;)

This would hinder you more then anything else. I think a "low ready" position for your gun in 3rd person view when you are not in IS mode should do the trick. ;)

Not liking delay and not working is not the same thing.

An un-equal 1st and 3rd person animation I think will be regarded as worse than the current system. (As I wrote in option 2).

You don't want an animation to occur first person that doesn't happen 3rd person. You want it to be equal.

Try starting up editor with a rifleman, and turn on time acceleration, then repeatedly lower weapon and raise weapon and see if you think the little delay would be a game killer for you. Of course it'd have to be fluent with movement and all that.

[Curry 10]

Not liking delay and not working is not the same thing.

With not working I mean you will see hardly any people that want this system. So an implementation in Arma will not work. :D

As you see, even my little suggestion for a better 3rd person animation for an unsighted weapon isn't welcome. ;)

An always sighted gun position seems what people want.

Something like this what I had in mind:

Ironsight view for both 1st and 3rd person:

Low ready view for both 1st and 3rd person:

holstered gun for both 1st and 3rd person:

Edited July 18, 2010 by Curry

[no use for a name 0]

raptor;1687713']I totally hate the new recoil system and tbh it ruins the whole game-feeling for me. Sure is looks more realistic at first BUT its not when you think about it. A kick is normal yes' date=' but just like IRL the gun automaticly comes down.

I mean have you ever saw someone shoot and stay still with its barrel up in the air...

The old recoil was just perfect, you had to wait for your crosshair to come down. Now when I fire 3 shots I need to pull my mouse down a meter. Boehoe BI![/quote']

Wrong, the gun doesn't "automatically" move down to where it was before you shot. Yes, it does move down due to weight and the shooter knowing where to follow up the next shot; but in the old recoil system it would move back to exactly the same spot which is not realistic. Sorry, guess you can't unload a full magazine and hit a 2-square-foot area at 300+ meters anymore :o:

[Wolfstriked 11]

The "low ready" view looks like hip firing in first person while shouldered in third.Reason is that the camera view point is not looking out from where the player model's eyes are but instead is way above the head.You see this when someone made a sunglasses mod and the sunglasses in first person where way down on bottom of screen.You also notice this while driving...you cant look out the side windows in certain humvees.But,if they had not done this,then the weapon scopes would block so much view.

I am all for Rmouse bringing up and lowereing weapon with hold Rmouse aiming and zooming.

[rübe 127]

Physically correct or not, at this point I'm quite sure that - gameplaywise - it would be much better to simply randomize the direction of the recoil in such a controlled way, that the randomization doesn't add up into any particular way. The gun wouldn't jump back to the previous position as in vanilla, but also it wouldn't drag your weapon away from the target into any particular direction. You'd still have to adjust slightly after every shot, sometimes a bit more, sometimes less, always into another direction. But it would end this constant mouse draging while shooting, which is a pain in the ass for a lot of weapons. Really.

[arthur666 10]

Physically correct or not, at this point I'm quite sure that - gameplaywise - it would be much better to simply randomize the direction of the recoil in such a controlled way, that the randomization doesn't add up into any particular way. The gun wouldn't jump back to the previous position as in vanilla, but also it wouldn't drag your weapon away from the target into any particular direction. You'd still have to adjust slightly after every shot, sometimes a bit more, sometimes less, always into another direction. But it would end this constant mouse draging while shooting, which is a pain in the ass for a lot of weapons. Really.

Yes yes yes. This is what I want. This most accurately represents what I find when I shoot in real life, and would be the least irritating while making the game a little more challenging, in a good way. Yes, almost all guns kick up when you shoot them. But after you shoot, gravity does the lowering for you, however you still have to take a moment to re-aim afterwards. If, in Arma, as in RL, you fire rapidly or in full auto, the muzzle should or will climb, respectively.

I do however admit that I have gotten used to the 72107 recoil model, and I could live with it ( as opposed to what? abandon the best military game ever? or never update it again?), but still don't think it is perfect.

Edited July 19, 2010 by arthur666

[Chumba 10]

I agree with both ruebe and arthur666 - but when all's said and done my biggest personal issue is the speed of the recoils regardless of how they're done - maybe I drink too much coffee or something but all weapons in ARMA2 and OA feel like old time muskets - "click - BOOM" - and I end up with serious timing issues when laying fire.

BIS: MAKE RECOILS MUCH FASTER.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

@Curry: Ok, I now see why I don't agree. The "low ready" I know looks a lot more like your "holstered". "My low ready" is being in a ready pose (vs the relaxed pose in the game), but with rifle buttstock firmly placed and gun pointed downward. That's the reason I think it wouldn't work well.

Even with todays high ready, the gun is barely visible when zoomed in (concentration mode, or actual FOV if you will). So there is not much to go on at least in 1st person view.

For 3rd person view, yeah, maybe the gun could be offset a little to indicate gunner not being in the sights. But only as long as 1st person view isn't touched. And I think that is a problem with the engine; nothing really changes in terms of animation. When you go sighted, all that happens is a change of camera position. Easily verified with hinting animationState player.

So it's not that I don't want the change, I just don't find it easily implemented in the current engine. Too much to rewrite. And currently 1st and 3rd person animation states have to be equal. And again, I really wouldn't want 1st person "low ready" (which is really high ready) to be changed in order to "fix stupid 3rd person look".

[7 0]

Can you please take the low-ready discussion in another thread? I want to read people's opinions and arguments on the new recoil.

[frederf 0]

Most people that have a considered, non-polarized opinion on the ArmA recoil development all seem to agree on three things as far as I have read in the various threads on the subject:

1. Old recoil was bad because it automatically returns your point of aim exactly where it started with no human "in the control loop."

2. New recoil is better because it it removes the 100% automatic and unrealistic return to center after the recoil pulse keeping the shooter "in the control loop," requiring skill on the part of the player, and reducing performance to believable levels. However the annoying side effect is that all return to center must be done by the player, requiring a directional net mouse drag over several recoil recoveries.

3. The ideal (or at least better than #1, #2) would be a combination of some automated return-to-center but not perfectly so. The user would still be "in the loop" having to correct for displaced point of aim after each shot but would not be required to do all of it. The two simplest models are "partial linear recovery" and "random circular recovery."

Partial linear recovery would, in the simplest example case mean that without mouse input a shot aimed at (0,0) center of the screen might jump up to (0,1) due to the recoil and then settle down to (0,0.5) all "hands off." Thus it would be up to the player to adjust the aim from (0,0.5) to (0,0) manually to fire the next shot in the same direction as the previous. The benefit is that the amount of user correction is reduced (thus reducing mouse input) while still having non-perfect automatic recovery.

The unique benefit over the method I'm about to describe next is that because the recovery point is in line with the initial point and the point of maximum recoil and thus there is a tendency for the muzzle to drift (usually climb) in one direction. This adds in the possibility for a skilled user to be faced with a muzzle drift tendency during rapid fire and being able to compensate for it with skillful opposite mouse drag.

The random circular recovery method is to have the final recovery point randomly located in a circular area from the original point of aim. Starting at (0,0) as before and the recoil deflecting the muzzle to (0,1) as before, but this time the automatic "hands off" recovery destination might be (+0.2, -0.4) down and to the right. Firing again might cause the muzzle to climb from (+0.2, -0.4) to (+0.2, +0.6) (an increase of 1.0 vertically) and then return automatically to perhaps (+0.1, +0.3) which would be slightly left and below where it started before firing that second shot.

The unique feature of this over the linear partial recovery method is that sustained fire statistically does not have the muzzle drift in any particular direction preferentially. The rest of the recovery (after the automatic portion which is done by the player) is also not always the same to return to the original point of aim. Firing sustained means that mouse pad limits should not be reached as the corrective mouse movements would be in different directions canceling out their net displacement.

Real life is of course probably a combination of these two simple methods. A M1 Thompson 0.45 cal sub machine gun would probably be primarily the first linear type exhibiting profound muzzle climb but with some circular method because of the shooter.

A bipod M240 would be the reverse, experiencing very little muzzle climb and having most of its post-recoil aim point displacement be circular.

Edited July 19, 2010 by Frederf

[wamingo 1]

sustained fire statistically does not have the muzzle drift in any particular direction preferentially.

I think you meant to write "settle down to (0,0.5)"?

Anyway, while it's probably true that drift isn't one direction in reality, I think it might be wise to stick to one direction, because the predictability actually encourages the player's constant involvement. If you have a completely random distribution, ie one without "forced trends" then it only make sense to get involved when the distribution has made outliers. And after outliers you can often expect a regression to the mean and you may have a tendency to overshoot the correction, "dramatically".

I would probably have to see it in action really, but I suspect random direction muzzle drift, or even forced trends muzzle dirft, could end up being impossible to adjust for.

[Curry 10]

@Curry: Ok, I now see why I don't agree. The "low ready" I know looks a lot more like your "holstered". "My low ready" is being in a ready pose (vs the relaxed pose in the game), but with rifle buttstock firmly placed and gun pointed downward. That's the reason I think it wouldn't work well.

Even with todays high ready, the gun is barely visible when zoomed in (concentration mode, or actual FOV if you will). So there is not much to go on at least in 1st person view.

For 3rd person view, yeah, maybe the gun could be offset a little to indicate gunner not being in the sights. But only as long as 1st person view isn't touched. And I think that is a problem with the engine; nothing really changes in terms of animation. When you go sighted, all that happens is a change of camera position. Easily verified with hinting animationState player.

So it's not that I don't want the change, I just don't find it easily implemented in the current engine. Too much to rewrite. And currently 1st and 3rd person animation states have to be equal. And again, I really wouldn't want 1st person "low ready" (which is really high ready) to be changed in order to "fix stupid 3rd person look".

Okay, understand your concerns also. :)

It was just an idea to indicate others that you are not in IS mode. Maybe this can be done with another solution.

[frederf 0]

I think you meant to write "settle down to (0,0.5)"?

Yeah I wrote the first part and then had to go back and change some numbers to make it match the second part. I missed a correction.

predictability actually encourages the player's constant involvement. If you have a completely random distribution, ie one without "forced trends" then it only make sense to get involved when the distribution has made outliers.

I would probably have to see it in action really, but I suspect random direction muzzle drift, or even forced trends muzzle dirft, could end up being impossible to adjust for.

Well I would think that "actually hitting your target" would be the primary motivation. The circular distribution means that for slow semi fire in the "aim, shoot, adjust" cycle is applied for each shot. The shooter isn't going to thing "well, screw it, since there's no predictable trend I'm just going to spray and pray" since there's plenty of time for evaluation and correction between each shot and this seems to agree with common sense.

It's fully automatic fire where this changes. Since there is no time to adjust between shots and the adjustment required is not predictable then the shooter simply must accept the fact that the point of aim will "jitter around" during the burst which seems to match videos of such shooting rather well qualitatively. This encourages the 3-10 round burst, stopping occasionally to check that the point of aim is close to where it should be.

Also one could get a difference of behavior simply because the automatic recovery takes time that might be longer than the time between shots at the cyclic rate of fire. Thus you could have circular error for slow semi M16 fire but using the same system get muzzle climb with the M249 at full cyclic rate. The directionality comes from the fact that the post-shot recovery destination may be unbiased in direction but it hasn't been allowed to arrive from the upward-biased recoil because the next shot interrupts the downwardish travel! With this interruption on the way down from the recoil peak you introduce directional tendency simply because of the timing of it all.

"Hands off mouse" shooting would mean that several shots spaced out in time would have no directional tendency but for shots of lesser time interval than the recovery time there would exhibit a directional tendency (e.g. muzzle climb.)

Edited July 19, 2010 by Frederf

[nkenny 1051]

I think you meant to write "settle down to (0,0.5)"?

Anyway, while it's probably true that drift isn't one direction in reality, I think it might be wise to stick to one direction, because the predictability actually encourages the player's constant involvement. If you have a completely random distribution, ie one without "forced trends" then it only make sense to get involved when the distribution has made outliers. And after outliers you can often expect a regression to the mean and you may have a tendency to overshoot the correction, "dramatically".

I would probably have to see it in action really, but I suspect random direction muzzle drift, or even forced trends muzzle dirft, could end up being impossible to adjust for.

Absolutely. Random recoil may sound like a novel feature, but in practice it fails.

[frederf 0]

In practice you fail at reading. The recoil isn't random, the recoil recovery (would be) is. If you hold a broomstick and I smack it on the end with a small hammer, your return to where it was pointed will not be perfect.