Deacreased Weapon Accuracy

Smellyelly · 2007-08-08, 09:41

One thing that always bothered me about PR(or bf2) is that there is no weapon sway, Yes i know it's probiliy hardcoded. Right now all the weapons are way too Accurate (Gameplay wise), right now as riflemen i can take split second long range head shots.

Today i was playing as the Chinese vs the Brits, I went rifleman and a squad was useing a bunker... and i just HS'ed about 3 of them before i felt sorry for them, and I just felt like i was playing unrealistic.
To reduce the accuracy would add much more depth in reality, tactics and mostly cover. No longer will you be aiming at the head but you would aim at the body, because it is more practical!

I always thought PR was about Gameplay realism and not of 100% literal realism.

P.S I have been playing PR for quite awhile but never really participated in discussion.

Ghostrider · 2007-08-08, 10:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smellyelly

One thing that always bothered me about PR(or bf2) is that there is no weapon sway, Yes i know it's probiliy hardcoded. Right now all the weapons are way too Accurate (Gameplay wise), right now as riflemen i can take split second long range head shots.

Today i was playing as the Chinese vs the Brits, I went rifleman and a squad was useing a bunker... and i just HS'ed about 3 of them before i felt sorry for them, and I just felt like i was playing unrealistic.
To reduce the accuracy would add much more depth in reality, tactics and mostly cover.

The weapon sway feature is not hardcoded in BF2. Its not even available as far as I know. I understand it was added for BF2142 though..

Unfortunately, reducing weapon accuracy is not a solution to the problem and will only cause more problems. In the end, there is no problem solved, only one more problem added.

-Ghost

Expendable Grunt · 2007-08-08, 15:07

Ghostrider speaks truth.

$kelet0r · 2007-08-08, 16:35

shame that the improvements in the BF2 engine are not backwards compatible from the 2142 cash cow

VipersGhost · 2007-08-08, 17:39

You know I don't mind that the weapons are so accurate...its kind of something we have to live with until the RL weapon MOA (Minute of Angle...RL deviation) is added in. Now there are a couple of things on my mind for this issue.

1-Now I've heard that artificial weapon sway can be added in (FH2 maybe?)...as your crosshairs float around but gun is still accurate to the center of the screen. NOW I would hate to have artificial sway all the time as theres no way to control it(unrealistic). BUT I would def like to see it(slightl sway) for the first 1 second (more or less) as you site the gun in.

2-Animate the aiming of all the guns like the support gun has.

3- Now this is a strange one, does anyone notice that if you are standing up and bring you sites up....your sites actually take a couple of seconds to become perfectly accurate. It's true, if you watch you scope sites right after you aim...they ever so slightly move and become more accurate as to where the bullet ACTUALLY goes. This is why sometimes we've been running, pulled up our scope and poped a 150 headshot only to see it miss. I'm not sure if every gun is like this but I garuntee its there....but ever so slightly. The reason I bring this up is that its possible that this "site-in" timing could be altered and increased to realistic values.

fuzzhead · 2007-08-08, 17:42

Agree with VipersGhost: there is no way you can be at full sprint, pull your sites up and instant accurate out to 300 meters.... there should be much longer 'site-in' time: minimum 5 seconds IMO.

This will make players who are more stationary, better shots. As it is right now, there is absolutely no reason to EVER stay still in game, and that is very unrealistic

$kelet0r · 2007-08-08, 18:28

problem there is that there is no visual indication to suggest when you have reached that accuracy sweetspot, which would just make things frustrating

VipersGhost · 2007-08-08, 19:16

I agree it should be made easy to recognise.

WHPRaveman · 2007-08-09, 02:53

well then you have to get back to the crosshairs like the old ghost recon for accuracy. I always felt that the first shot should be the winner! Even if I was not the one that shot first. There have been times I was able to spin on people trying to shoot me and I won! Felt like a cheap kill but I was still alive.

Smellyelly · 2007-08-09, 05:38

I'm only talking minor Unaccuracy so that people go for chest shots insted of head shots and cover is a bit more effective. Right now all guns are just a tad to accurate.

2007-08-08, 09:41	#1
Smellyelly Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 13	Deacreased Weapon Accuracy One thing that always bothered me about PR(or bf2) is that there is no weapon sway, Yes i know it's probiliy hardcoded. Right now all the weapons are way too Accurate (Gameplay wise), right now as riflemen i can take split second long range head shots. Today i was playing as the Chinese vs the Brits, I went rifleman and a squad was useing a bunker... and i just HS'ed about 3 of them before i felt sorry for them, and I just felt like i was playing unrealistic. To reduce the accuracy would add much more depth in reality, tactics and mostly cover. No longer will you be aiming at the head but you would aim at the body, because it is more practical! I always thought PR was about Gameplay realism and not of 100% literal realism. P.S I have been playing PR for quite awhile but never really participated in discussion.
Smellyelly Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 13

2007-08-09, 02:53	#9
WHPRaveman Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 174	well then you have to get back to the crosshairs like the old ghost recon for accuracy. I always felt that the first shot should be the winner! Even if I was not the one that shot first. There have been times I was able to spin on people trying to shoot me and I won! Felt like a cheap kill but I was still alive.
WHPRaveman Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 174

2007-08-09, 05:38	#10
Smellyelly Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 13	I'm only talking minor Unaccuracy so that people go for chest shots insted of head shots and cover is a bit more effective. Right now all guns are just a tad to accurate.
Smellyelly Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 13

2007-08-08, 15:07	#3
Expendable Grunt Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 4,728 Mongolia Location: Lexington Park, MD	Ghostrider speaks truth.

2007-08-08, 16:35	#4
$kelet0r Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 1,418 Location: Dublin, Ireland	shame that the improvements in the BF2 engine are not backwards compatible from the 2142 cash cow

2007-08-08, 17:39	#5
VipersGhost Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 1,171 Location: Portland, OR	You know I don't mind that the weapons are so accurate...its kind of something we have to live with until the RL weapon MOA (Minute of Angle...RL deviation) is added in. Now there are a couple of things on my mind for this issue. 1-Now I've heard that artificial weapon sway can be added in (FH2 maybe?)...as your crosshairs float around but gun is still accurate to the center of the screen. NOW I would hate to have artificial sway all the time as theres no way to control it(unrealistic). BUT I would def like to see it(slightl sway) for the first 1 second (more or less) as you site the gun in. 2-Animate the aiming of all the guns like the support gun has. 3- Now this is a strange one, does anyone notice that if you are standing up and bring you sites up....your sites actually take a couple of seconds to become perfectly accurate. It's true, if you watch you scope sites right after you aim...they ever so slightly move and become more accurate as to where the bullet ACTUALLY goes. This is why sometimes we've been running, pulled up our scope and poped a 150 headshot only to see it miss. I'm not sure if every gun is like this but I garuntee its there....but ever so slightly. The reason I bring this up is that its possible that this "site-in" timing could be altered and increased to realistic values.

2007-08-08, 17:42	#6
fuzzhead Retired PR Developer Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 7,440 Canada Location: Vancouver Blog Entries: 10	Agree with VipersGhost: there is no way you can be at full sprint, pull your sites up and instant accurate out to 300 meters.... there should be much longer 'site-in' time: minimum 5 seconds IMO. This will make players who are more stationary, better shots. As it is right now, there is absolutely no reason to EVER stay still in game, and that is very unrealistic

2007-08-08, 18:28	#7
$kelet0r Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 1,418 Location: Dublin, Ireland	problem there is that there is no visual indication to suggest when you have reached that accuracy sweetspot, which would just make things frustrating

2007-08-08, 19:16	#8
VipersGhost Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 1,171 Location: Portland, OR	I agree it should be made easy to recognise.