Vanz0r

Select special kills with the ASP-1 1st person

So I hopped in a vehicle sat in the back and marveled at the being able to sight and fire from it, that is until it started moving... The implementation is very poor, in a vehicle you basically have a mounted weapon now, better still it's gyroscopically stabilised. I know the vehicle physics are very much drawn from a cartoon version of the world but surely some sway could be built in???

And as far as I can recall it took him 9 shots to get a hit...

Love the weapons pack although I only use it playing Wasteland, however, we've experienced some wild anomalies with it, the various sight combinations and since the most recent update the odd performance of the suppressors. Some of the more tech minded folks have been doing some testing and here are the results: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/110351145/Image/2015-02-10_00001.jpg (150 kB) And to quote from the author: "5. Some about supressors The silencer increases the initial speed and damage by 10%. In the case of the ar-15 series(include .300BLK) - initial speed of 5% and damage by 26%. (Probably a bug, because gemtech 5.56 coefficient of typical speed = 1.2, which should reduce the damage of 1.2 times, but instead , for some reason, the damage increases) But the muzzles also have a little disadvantage - looks like zeroing calc ignores muzzle coefficient of initial velocity, which cause some distance error." Wonder if you guys have experienced this and/or whether you could point me in the direction to getting it resolved?

Fantastic project! Would be great if Sa-Matra and the other WL mods would support this.

Do a video illustrating the left right sway, this is the greatest problem area.

Sway is far too great in its current iteration, I'd suggest reducing it by 50% and much like head bob make it user/mission configurable.

As has been pointed out the implementation is 'human turret' with no vertical distortion whatever the attitude of the vehicle and no weapon sway. Something can be fun and 'feel' authentic, using a weapon from a vehicle in the current human turret system is frankly laughable.

Not if you're using stock sounds you can't, or maybe you're referring to people running on tarmac? If you're sitting still patiently watching and waiting then the 3p sound distance seems fine, do it in 1p and everyone has ninja running/walking skills.

Are the 1st person and 3rd person sounds configured back to front? I find it very odd that in 1st person your sound appreciation is far worse than when in 3rd person, the distance and clarity is a lot worse (I'm sure someone can give the exact values for the settings). To me this seems counterintuitive - I'd expect greater fidelity in 1st person?

I'm just waiting to be killed by a human turret and for folks to figure out that jumping in the backs of vehicles gives them the best possible firing solution, albeit static. Can't wait to see the impact of folks firing from little birds (look out for the rain of 40mm). What's more frustrating is we have this unfinished and comic addition to the game yet I get to enjoy the same vehicle engine sound for 5 hours because someone messed up the coding...

As it happens I do play 1p PVP - which is why I'd like to see the enhanced sound from 3p on 1p - or (because there are 10x more 3p lame servers and hence I have to play on these) would like to see 3p sound nerfed to 1p.

Perhaps I didn't explain this very well. Has anyone else tested or noticed that in 3rd person you can hear people walking near you about 3-4 times further away than you can in 1st person? This seems very odd to me, I know many people love 3rd person but to add sound distance perception to the advantage of 3rd person is surely a mistake? A simple fix would be to swap the settings for the two modes or if that's too complicated either up the 1st person distance range to 3rd person or reduce 3rd person to the 1st person settings. If you do a simple test in 1st person I think you'll be both surprised and disappointed at the results.

I haven't looked at the code so can't see the various options for the fatigue system but I suspect it's very rudimentary something like 25%, 50% 75% etc.? So sure it would be good to have standing 25% fatigued as the default. As far as 'being hostile' sure I'm unhappy, this game has had years of development as well as thousand upon thousands of considered and well presented suggestions by a dedicated community of enthusiasts. Sounds like those on, invited and participating in the dev branch are from the full retard section of this community...or so fanboyed up that they don't want to criticise the developers. There's no denying that the current implementation is both lazy, flawed and not worthy of the game/sim the majority of the community want to play. You can draw your own conclusions about the devs. my money is on them being high on coke, drunk on champagne and under the influence of women of easy virtue thanks to the millions of $ from the Dayz project(s). That seems more plausible than them being incredibly incompetent, arrogant and stupid don't you think?

If you think firing from a moving vehicle is anything like what is in Arma3 then you're deluded. Obviously rolling around and scrabbling for grip as the car goes round sharp turns is way beyond the physics engine of any game or tech now. However, to have it so that as you go over uneven ground you retain a rock solid tripod mounted firing position is farcical. As far as tips and implementation advice go then all you' need to do is make the default setting in a vehicle being the standing firing stance, that would have been a simple, dirty solution that would have been way better than this mounted rubbish. As far as it being a rant I'd counter that everything I've said is fact, you might not like the presentation of the facts but everything I've said is true.

ROFLOL - this looks un-tested to me, you're more accurate in a vehicle doing 100kmph over uneven ground than lying prone and motionless.

Thx used JSRS in A2, but stuck on servers that don't support JSRS.

I find that the aimpoint ranges in the RPG42 sight are wildly off, does anyone else have an issue with these? As an example I spotted a target and manually ranged it at 528m (using the map and waypoint marker). Using the 500m mark in the sight I nestled it on the top of my target fully expecting the round to impact either just short or at track height. Alas the round sailed over the top of the target. Second round I used the 400m mark only to see the round again fly high over the top. Finally aimed at the 300m mark to see the round impact just short (where I might have expected the original 500m round to land). Is this a know issue or is it something my end?

This could be it, I'll try flat but my experience has been it's more Kentucky Windage than accuracy.

While using the MRCO on the MK18 it seems as if the MRCO sight is missaligned when in normal or zoomed mode (not the high power zoom). It looks to me as if the verticle part of the reticle is offset from the iron fore sight by one of two pixels? Does anyone else see this? Might sound trivial but it looks very odd and a bit heath Robinson to me. I haven't tested to see if the impact point is also affected by this misalignment.