roshnak

You could make that argument for every mechanic that has ever been put in a video game.

The solution you posted (1mm tremble) does nothing to solve the problem of players being able to easily and accurately engage targets at unrealistic ranges without any kind of practice or training, and it's not realistic because it does not take into account the larger movement caused by breathing.

You're leaving out probably the most important factor in weapon sway: breathing. Any time someone talks about only experiencing tremble when they're shooting I immediately assume their primary experience is benchrested shooting. Feel free to not play the "mouse-chasing minigame" if you want. You can just as easily (although probably not as quickly) predict the sway pattern and fire when your sights align with the target. That's the more realistic way to do it, anyway. Also, there is no way that aiming and firing a rifle is as natural for you or anyone else as standing is. This is by no means a fair or reasonable comparison to make. Therefore, this entire line of reasoning is invalid.

That never really stopped BIS from adding other weapon systems that should have advanced capabilities (javelins, titan launchers, etc.). They just don't give them those features. This arguably applies to the damage model issues or the railgun tank as well.

That's not really weapon sway, though. It's drift, which is different from consciously trying to counter movement caused by breathing and something that is not modeled in Arma. And it shouldn't be -- it would be really annoying. It's simply not accurate to say that in real life you should be using fine muscle control to compensate for breathing and involuntary muscle movement. That's quite likely to have a negative impact on your accuracy. I like the new sway mechanics and I think they have a positive effect on gameplay, but I also don't think that spreading inaccurate (or less than accurate) information is going to do us any favors with people who are also familiar with the topic. Edit: Also, pointing with your finger isn't really the same thing as pointing with a rifle. A rifle generally has a lot more support than just your outstretched arm would. There are a lot more points of contact. A great deal of your body is helping to point the gun where it's supposed to be pointed. There will be some drift if you close your eyes, but it would probably be a lot less than what you would think. If you're holding the rifle right, it will probably be pretty close to where you would expect it to be. Actually, here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_point_of_aim

Everybody should probably stop arguing with Cephel. He is almost certainly trolling and you're letting him draw you into an entirely irrelevant argument.

If it's true that the F-35 was only being used as a placeholder (and we have good reason to believe that was the case), I can't think of any reason to believe that the same wasn't true of the Osprey. I wouldn't count on seeing it in an official release.

I've bolded what I consider to be the relevant part of this argument. The answer: Pretty much the same amount of sway that you would experience with your eyes open, assuming that you are holding the rifle properly. While muscles are certainly involved, the goal is generally to minimize their influence, not expand upon it.

This really depends on how you're defining the process of steadying a rifle in reality. Actual shooting isn't about countering sway. What you're actually doing is just holding the weapon correctly, such that you have the maximum amount of bone support possible. There isn't a whole lot of muscle work involved. So would the process of not putting any effort into steadying your weapon just be making a conscious decision to not hold it correctly?

This is a whole lot of words to justify an opinion that is based on a bunch of false assumptions.

I wonder what your definition of a long range engagement is. In my experience, this game has long been defined by unrealistically long engagements. People frequently don't think twice about accurately engaging and killing targets from 300-500 meters, standing or crouched, with an assault rifle or carbine, while under fire. Unorganized, public PvP games have an incredibly high percentage of snipers engaging from over 600 meters away. Counter-point: From a realistic standpoint, you have some guys with real life military and weapon experience saying that the sway is not 100% realistic, but that it's in the realm of realism. From a gameplay perspective, it's a good mechanic that encourages more realistic engagements and provides an impediment to long range shooting that can be overcome and mastered by good players who are willing to put in the time and learn the system.

Let's say I accept this argument (I don't. It's dumb and history proves you wrong.). What percentage of the military is comprised of combat arms, again? And what would preclude me from making a mission where the other 80% of the military is represented?

I'm not 100% sure what you're trying to say here. Surely you aren't suggesting that the poor performance should be viewed as a game mechanic? Also, you can turn mouse smoothing off, right?

Yep. Here's a post from the weapon sway thread roughly outlining the sway patterns in various stances.

Conversely, maybe they are making a distinction between mechanics which seem realistic or unrealistic on the surface and whether or not those mechanics provide realistic results and gameplay.

No, it won't. It's worth nothing that the sway is currently undergoing changes on the dev branch. You might want to check it out there and give feedback in the related threads.

I'm not mocking you, man. I know plenty of people with hand and wrist injuries (unsurprisingly, it's not uncommon in the gaming world). My sister isn't supposed to lift anything that weighs more than 5 lbs because of a pinched nerve in her elbow. It sucks that your injury is causing you pain while playing the game, but don't try to argue that it's not realistic because it hurts you to use the mouse and it doesn't hurt you to hold a gun, because that's a fallacy. If you want to argue that the new sway mechanics make it difficult for some players with injuries to adapt, then that's a discussion we can have, and it will go totally differently than if you try to argue that holding a mouse should have the same physical impact as holding a gun.

It's our business as long as you continue to complain about its effects on game mechanics on a public forum. I don't even know why you would be sensitive about this. You're not the only person in the world to have a hand injury, and unless you broke your hand masturbating or something, it's nothing to be embarassed about. You can't compare holding a rifle to using a mouse. The fact that running around in real life doesn't make my wrists hurt doesn't give me license to complain that using the keyboard to run in Arma aggravates my carpal tunnel.

Obviously using a scope isn't going to be a solution because that will just amplify the effect of weapon sway. On the other hand, I don't really understand how you're having significant trouble hitting targets at 300 meters (I'm assuming you mean meters, since that's what the game measures distance in). There have been multiple videos of people accurately engaging targets at that distance and beyond with ease. Well, it's not fair to even bring this up, then. It doesn't hurt other people to use the system because they don't have a hand injury. You can't really blame the game mechanics for aggravating an injury that will presumably get better at some point. This comes down to a difference in game design philosophy. Some people want the sway to be exaggerated, but counterable in order to stand in for the skill involved in accurately aiming and shooting a rifle. It's just a different way of looking at the game. I don't want it to be impossible to be precise while shooting the gun. I want it to possible to be very precise if I practice, in a different, but analogous way to practicing with a real rifle. Another thing to note is that 300 meters is on the far end of a typically expected firefight, and it's quite far for a standing, off-hand shot in combat. Accurately engaging targets beyond 300 meters is the realm of specially trained designated marksmen and snipers. The system you are describing doesn't sound like it would create that kind of gaming situation. It sounds like people would still be able to take accurate potshots with carbines out to 500m.

He's not, but in the interest of not setting back the progress we've made in this topic, because I already stated that I would be fine with a system that gave a corresponding increase in vertical sway for the decrease in horizontal, and because it's not my place to talk up someone else's military service, we should just drop it. If you'd like to discuss this more, we can take it to PMs. If not, that's cool too. I think you might be misunderstanding my suggestion about this. The way I saw it was that if you combine your system of slowing down the sway while holding your breath with my system of a natural pause at the top and bottom of each breath, it would naturally create a lengthened pause if you hold breath at those times. Otherwise, it would behave exactly like you suggested. Technically, it would always behave like you suggested, there would just be a natural pause at the end of each breath cycle.

This is basically how the guy I was talking to described it, with the added sideways movement towards your off hand, since the weapon is pivoting from your strong side (where it's nestled into your shoulder) down to your weak side (where you are supporting it with your off hand). This is cool, but I think we're assuming that you aren't firing from a stable position, since weapon resting isn't implemented yet. It would be cool to see in the Marksman DLC, though, if weapon resting makes it in.

Hey again, guys. Just wanted to remind you that we've got a ton of discussion about this in the post patch thread.

I don't feel super comfortable bringing someone into this argument who isn't even registered for the forums. It's why I was hesitant to bring it up in the first place. I'd really rather not just be quoting other people's opinions. The feeback he gave was that he thought the sway was slightly too circular. That he experienced weapon sway when firing off-hand as sort of a diagonally slanted figure eight, from the bottom left to the upper right. He thought the actual pattern should be more randomized. He said the sway wasn't outside the realm of believabity. Personally, I would get rid of the hold breath feature, and just have the sway pause at the top and bottom of each breath, but that's probably out of the question at this point. Perhaps a combination of the systems could make it more advantagous to hold your breath at the top and bottom of each breath by allowing you to lengthen the natural pause at the those times (I hope this description isn't confusing). Also, your whole post is super cool, even though I could not disagree more about suppression mechanics.

The reason I think the horizontal sway is realistic is because I've fired guns before, I ran multiple internet searches to corroborate my experiences and make sure I wasn't talking out of my ass, and then I talked to a guy I know who served in the infantry and has shot a lot more guns than me. There's really no reason to talk down to me. That might work for fatigue, but the problem with linking sway to difficulty is that it actually makes it more difficult for players to learn to deal with the system, since they could encounter up to 4 different levels of sway based on the server they join. It hampers players' ability to form any kind of muscle memory for countering the sway. I think if this was a single player only game it would be fine, but for a multiplayer game I think it's kind of problematic.

Hey guys, there's actually a thread about this that was created this year that you can post in.