Dynamic recoil

Jonathan_Archer_nx01 · 2007-02-14, 10:34

Is it possible to code dynamic recoil in BF2 engine? Oh yes, what do I mean?!

M4 now seems to be balanced and behaves quite real on full auto. But it is strange how high is the recoil when firing single shots. Would it be possible to add recoil per shot? Example
1.shot - recoil 1.0
2.shot - recoil 1.25
3.shot - recoil 1.5
4.shot - recoil 2.0
5.shot - recoil 2.0
6.shot - recoil 2.0
7.shot - recoil 2.0
...etc. etc.
It would be more real I think because that's exactly how guns with high rate of fire behave. IRL soldiers are forced to fire short bursts with weapons with high rate of fire. I PR you can spray entire magazine.

Heh I assume BF2 engine isn't able to do something like that.
__________________________________________________ __________________________
Anyway great job on G3A3 which has now very high damage. 1 hit to unarmored target = 3 second to get first aid or the target is dead and 2 shots are enough to kill an armored target. BUT its recoil is too low compared to other "5.56mm guns" which need 2/3 hits to armored/unarmored target. I suggest you increase it so as to balance. It would be also real. Here watch the difference between 7.62 × 51 mm NATO and 5.56 × 45 mm NATO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W627SebAFKU (I don't understand it but the video is great) G3 and G41. G41 has high rate of fire (850) and still seem to have lower recoil that 7.62 G3. So the recoil of G3 should be slightly increased
__________________________________________________ __________________________
And then there's AK-47 (type 56) which is really extremely overpowered. It can kill both armored and unarmored targets with 2 shots which devastates the gameplay since armor makes no difference. According to balistic test AK-47 is as strong as M16 so I suggest to slightly decrease its damage(73 dmg for example) so that it will take 2/3 shots to kill armored/unarmored target in order to achieve balance. Ak has already the best iron sight byfar.
__________________________________________________ __________________________
My last idea some may disagree with is based on reports of M4 from Iraq that some rebels were shot over 5 times and were still able to resist. It occures due to short barrel because of which the 5.56 × 45 mm NATO ammunition doesn't reach high velocity thus doesn't fragment and cause only small holes/wounds.
So how about to revert the recoil of M4 and L11 back to PR 0.4 version and decrease their damage to 48 e.g.?. It would then take 3/4 shots to kill armored/unarmored target.

More variety, more balance
__________________________________________________ _______________

{GD}StevenGarcia · 2007-02-14, 14:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonathan_Archer_nx01

So how about to revert the recoil of M4 and L11 back to PR 0.4 version and decrease their damage to 48 e.g.?.

If I recall correctly, the M4's recoil in v0.4 was an error. The M4 should not be a full-auto sniper rifle like it was in v0.4.

Lucid Nightmare · 2007-02-14, 16:07

no, No, NO! Don't let the lasers get me mommy.....

**curls up into the foetal position and starts whimpering**

Jonathan_Archer_nx01 · 2007-02-14, 17:03

It seemed to be a "laser weapon" because all weapons had the same damage. And there was a recoil in 0.4 version but since M4 had high damage and 900 rpm - rate of fire it was really unbalance. Now I suggest that its damage is decresed. It is something completely different.

{GD}StevenGarcia · 2007-02-14, 17:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonathan_Archer_nx01

It seemed to be a "laser weapon" because all weapons had the same damage.

No, it was because the gun had very little recoil in v0.4. It's fine the way it is now.

SiN|ScarFace · 2007-02-14, 17:27

If it went back to .4 recoil it would still suck even with decreased damage, because on full auto and hardly any recoil it will just spray out headshots again.

The m4 would kill you with headshots by minimal recoil and ROF not damage.

Mekstizzle · 2007-02-14, 17:37

Isn't the AK47 round the same as a big rifle round except it's shorter? In other words, the actual bullet is the same one from a proper rifle round except it doesn't travel as fast because there's less propellant because the case is shorter. Therefore it wouldn't be THAT much weaker than a standard 7.62x51mm round. That's what's actually quite cool about the AK47 round, makes you think why the U.S didn't do the same for 7.62X51 NATO and just make a "short" round for it.

Jonathan_Archer_nx01 · 2007-02-14, 18:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by {GD}StevenGarcia

No, it was because the gun had very little recoil in v0.4. It's fine the way it is now.

Ok then I'm not asking to make it as low as it was in 0.4. I'm asking to make it slighthly lower than the recoil of M16.

All because of damage decrease. No worries about this. If this change is included, the devs would certainly test it and find the most suitable recoil.

k30dxedle · 2007-02-14, 18:53

If anything, IRL shouldn't the M4 have higher recoil than the M16, since it's lighter? E.g. firing a 9x19 round from a 92FS as opposed to an assault rifle-size weapon?

I've never fired an actual gun, so I wouldn't know definitively, though.

SiN|ScarFace · 2007-02-14, 18:53

Why would the M4 with a shorter barrel (14.5in) have less recoil than an M16 (20in)?

2007-02-14, 10:34	#1
Jonathan_Archer_nx01 Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 326 Europe	Dynamic recoil Is it possible to code dynamic recoil in BF2 engine? Oh yes, what do I mean?! M4 now seems to be balanced and behaves quite real on full auto. But it is strange how high is the recoil when firing single shots. Would it be possible to add recoil per shot? Example 1.shot - recoil 1.0 2.shot - recoil 1.25 3.shot - recoil 1.5 4.shot - recoil 2.0 5.shot - recoil 2.0 6.shot - recoil 2.0 7.shot - recoil 2.0 ...etc. etc. It would be more real I think because that's exactly how guns with high rate of fire behave. IRL soldiers are forced to fire short bursts with weapons with high rate of fire. I PR you can spray entire magazine. Heh I assume BF2 engine isn't able to do something like that. __________________________________________________ __________________________ Anyway great job on G3A3 which has now very high damage. 1 hit to unarmored target = 3 second to get first aid or the target is dead and 2 shots are enough to kill an armored target. BUT its recoil is too low compared to other "5.56mm guns" which need 2/3 hits to armored/unarmored target. I suggest you increase it so as to balance. It would be also real. Here watch the difference between 7.62 × 51 mm NATO and 5.56 × 45 mm NATO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W627SebAFKU (I don't understand it but the video is great) G3 and G41. G41 has high rate of fire (850) and still seem to have lower recoil that 7.62 G3. So the recoil of G3 should be slightly increased __________________________________________________ __________________________ And then there's AK-47 (type 56) which is really extremely overpowered. It can kill both armored and unarmored targets with 2 shots which devastates the gameplay since armor makes no difference. According to balistic test AK-47 is as strong as M16 so I suggest to slightly decrease its damage(73 dmg for example) so that it will take 2/3 shots to kill armored/unarmored target in order to achieve balance. Ak has already the best iron sight byfar. __________________________________________________ __________________________ My last idea some may disagree with is based on reports of M4 from Iraq that some rebels were shot over 5 times and were still able to resist. It occures due to short barrel because of which the 5.56 × 45 mm NATO ammunition doesn't reach high velocity thus doesn't fragment and cause only small holes/wounds. So how about to revert the recoil of M4 and L11 back to PR 0.4 version and decrease their damage to 48 e.g.?. It would then take 3/4 shots to kill armored/unarmored target. More variety, more balance __________________________________________________ _______________

	Last edited by Jonathan_Archer_nx01; 2007-02-14 at 10:40..

2007-02-14, 18:53	#9
k30dxedle Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 163	If anything, IRL shouldn't the M4 have higher recoil than the M16, since it's lighter? E.g. firing a 9x19 round from a 92FS as opposed to an assault rifle-size weapon? I've never fired an actual gun, so I wouldn't know definitively, though.
k30dxedle Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 163

2007-02-14, 16:07	#3
Lucid Nightmare Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 538 Location: Western Australia	no, No, NO! Don't let the lasers get me mommy..... curls up into the foetal position and starts whimpering

2007-02-14, 17:03	#4
Jonathan_Archer_nx01 Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 326 Europe	It seemed to be a "laser weapon" because all weapons had the same damage. And there was a recoil in 0.4 version but since M4 had high damage and 900 rpm - rate of fire it was really unbalance. Now I suggest that its damage is decresed. It is something completely different.

2007-02-14, 17:27	#6
SiN\|ScarFace Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 5,818 United States of America Location: Murica	If it went back to .4 recoil it would still suck even with decreased damage, because on full auto and hardly any recoil it will just spray out headshots again. The m4 would kill you with headshots by minimal recoil and ROF not damage.

2007-02-14, 17:37	#7
Mekstizzle Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 882 Location: London, England	Isn't the AK47 round the same as a big rifle round except it's shorter? In other words, the actual bullet is the same one from a proper rifle round except it doesn't travel as fast because there's less propellant because the case is shorter. Therefore it wouldn't be THAT much weaker than a standard 7.62x51mm round. That's what's actually quite cool about the AK47 round, makes you think why the U.S didn't do the same for 7.62X51 NATO and just make a "short" round for it.