• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/
  • Weve updated the Tripwire Privacy Notice under our Policies to be clearer about our use of customer information to come in line with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) rules that come into force today (25th May 2018). The following are highlights of our changes:


    We've incorporated the relevant concepts from the GDPR including joining the EU and Swiss Privacy Shield framework. We've added explanations for why and how Tripwire processes customer data and the types of data that we process, as well as information about your data protection rights.



    For more information about our privacy practices, please review the new Privacy Policy found here: https://tripwireinteractive.com/#/privacy-notice

Accuracy needs to be reduced on ALL the weapons ingame

palco

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 17, 2011
123
72
0
I think his point is that the game doesn't model many things that make real shooting difficult, not that they should necessarily apply in every case. Representing imprecision in sight alignment and trigger pull would be as simple as adding some degree of deviation, but in RO2 if you put your sight over someone you are guaranteed a hit, which isn't realistic. There's no chance that you were off in your sight alignment and miss by a foot on a 300yd shot, no chance that you jerked the gun when you pulled the trigger, no chance of the recoil driving the barrel up ever so slightly during the shot. It feels less like a gun and more like a laser pointer.
This is exactly my point, thank you;;;;;;

Oh, dear god...
sweet mother of jesus.....
 
Last edited:

Josef Nader

FNG / Fresh Meat
Aug 31, 2011
1,713
1,165
0
Oh? Have you ever played on a map called Spartanovka? From "axis" side church to the "reds" church it happens to be 200m, from inside both building if we imagine that for a second, there is 220m or so.
Is it? I've never played Axis on Spartanovka, and as the Allies I usually don't get a good shot at the enemy until they're within 100-150m. Either way, you're probably right.

Now, I'm thinking of the church near the gullies to the Axis spawn, which is the only unobstructed shot. There's no way you could pull off a shot from the gullies church to the allies last cap simply because of all the crap in the way.

Good luck with that on Red October, if you can see trough the fog and low lighting.
Never said it was easy, but there -are- unobstructed 200m sight lines in RO Factory



[SIZE=+5]............................................________........................
....................................,.-
 

palco

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 17, 2011
123
72
0
Dear god,

I really want to summon....some great pc mp almost pro status players to accurately examine the firing system in RO2, how easy it is relatively.

Cos they know the practical ins and outs of firing system in FPS better than most.

my sweet lord...
Why so many cheaters, hackers, and cirminals, and trolls exist in the world?
Someone really should smack their heads for all those deliberate attempts of malbehavior.

What made them act in so twitsted degenerate ways?

Why the fuxx do they do those?
Criminals, cheaters, hackers, trolls.

I know but why.

Why do they act selectively stupid on seemingly easy to grasp concept? I met some of these trolls in mycrysis forum ID with the noobinator, I don't know why they do these kind of twisted deliberate trolling, but what made them do this obviously apparent things.

I know but why.
 
Last edited:

Josef Nader

FNG / Fresh Meat
Aug 31, 2011
1,713
1,165
0
You don't see the irony in telling me to go play a video game to determine a realistic way of handling firearms when I have demonstrated that I have significant real-life experience with shooting?

So far, RO2 has been the most realistic implementation of weapon handling I've seen. The subtle intricacies are modeled without making the gunplay unnecessarily challenging. There is sway, there are delays to aiming, there is a realistic level of danger to the whole situation to encourage you to play smart. What you guys want is an -unrealistic- amount of sway, an -unrealistic- delay on ironsights, and an -unrealistic- level of safety to the combat situation. You want to make it harder to hit targets at ranges that would be trivial in real life, as Sgt.HL has said, braced shots out to 100m aren't that tough.

You guys are just flankhurt because you die easily, yet you don't want to consider that it might possibly be because you're not playing the game correctly. Instead, you insist that there's something wrong with the game because all the strategies that work in "realistic" shooters don't work in RO2. It doesn't ring as -possible- that these "realistic" shooters might not be as realistic as they claim, instead choosing to be "hardcore", or unrealistically difficult.

I think his point is that the game doesn't model many things that make real shooting difficult, not that they should necessarily apply in every case. Representing imprecision in sight alignment and trigger pull would be as simple as adding some degree of deviation, but in RO2 if you put your sight over someone you are guaranteed a hit, which isn't realistic. There's no chance that you were off in your sight alignment and miss by a foot on a 300yd shot, no chance that you jerked the gun when you pulled the trigger, no chance of the recoil driving the barrel up ever so slightly during the shot. It feels less like a gun and more like a laser pointer.
As I said above, these things -are- modeled into the game, they're just subtle. Most of the combat ranges in-game are very short, especially given the weapons in question. Rifle shots from 50 meters are -not freaking hard-. You don't have to have perfect sight alignment to put a bullet on a man sized target from 50 meters. The target is so close that it's just a matter of leveling out the barrel quickly. Real soldiers don't aim for headshots, you're aiming for center mass. A 7.62x39mm bullet is going to cause some incredible damage even if you hit them in the bloody gut. You don't need to have sniper-like accuracy at 50 goddamn meters.

Dear god,

I really want to summon....some great pc mp almost pro status players to accurately examine the firing system in RO2, how easy it is relatively.

Cos they know the practical ins and outs of firing system in FPS better than most.

my sweet lord...
Why so many cheaters, hackers, and cirminals, and trolls exist in the world?
Someone really should smack their heads for all those deliberate attempts of malbehavior.

What made them act in so twitsted degenerate ways?

Why the fuxx do they do those?
Criminals, cheaters, hackers, trolls.

I know but why.

Why do they act selectively stupid on seemingly easy to grasp concept? I met some of these trolls in mycrysis forum ID with the noobinator, I don't know why they do these kind of twisted deliberate trolling, but what made them do this obviously apparent things.

I know but why.
Heaven forbid RO2 do something different from the other FPSs in the world. I don't give a sonic rainboom that other shooters have weapon handling a certain way. I don't like how they do it. It feels unresponsive and clunky to me. I like how RO2 has done it. If you don't, those other shooters are still there. So far, RO2 is the only "realistic" game I've played that actually feels like handling my rifles sober.
 
Last edited:

palco

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 17, 2011
123
72
0
Rifle shots from 50 meters are -not freaking hard-. You don't have to have perfect sight alignment to put a bullet on a man sized target from 50 meters.

I can land most rifle headshot for target of 50m with slowly moving ADS,

Do you really think it's realistically well presented?

Not FLINCHING TORSO SHOT, I can land about +60% of them right on the head and it's easy all I gotta do is place the iron sight exactly on targets head while slowly moving ADS, and it hit on 50 meter target on the head, right on, at the very least 6 out of 10.

Do you think it's well done enough?

What's worse is I wasn't that good range shooter in most other fps games I listed, and when I got to RO2 bam! I am a more than a simple marksman.

What do you think about those?
 
Last edited:

DiedTrying

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jan 17, 2011
1,433
843
0
USA Prime Credit
No, there isn't. Rifles tend to be very accurate in real life. Barring any sort of defective ammunition or weaponry, you're going to get a very tight spread from a benched rifle. Ignoring the human factor, a rifle is going to put a bullet within a very small diameter of where the shooter wants to place it.
I wouldn't really consider a fouled barrel to be "defective"

I know a few times my rifles have fired like smooth bore muskets if I've forgotten to clean them! But you won't see this in game.
 

Pip-boy

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 16, 2011
40
6
0
There's no chance that you were off in your sight alignment and miss by a foot on a 300yd shot, no chance that you jerked the gun when you pulled the trigger, no chance of the recoil driving the barrel up ever so slightly during the shot. It feels less like a gun and more like a laser pointer.
+1
Exactly and to the point as far as stances go.

As for laser pointers: recently I played for axis using MKB 42 and found myself running around like some CS bunny, with insta-ironsighting at any occasion.
Pretty much when you get used to this millisecond draw time weapons have, there is no problem sprinting around like crazy, stopping on a dime, aiming, shooting, and running again in what... 2 secs? Little less maybe?
 

palco

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 17, 2011
123
72
0
So what else would you guys like TWI to simulate? Your soldier's dysentery?
A little less accuracy due to haman factors less than perfect triggering, less than perfect sway,

you don't like RO2 being a little more realistic and hardcore.

but most of us do.
 

Pip-boy

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 16, 2011
40
6
0
No, there isn't. Rifles tend to be very accurate in real life. Barring any sort of defective ammunition or weaponry, you're going to get a very tight spread from a benched rifle. Ignoring the human factor, a rifle is going to put a bullet within a very small diameter of where the shooter wants to place it.
:eek:

I am scared that people can be that stupid.
 

CaptHawkeye

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jun 23, 2009
131
93
0
A little less accuracy due to haman factors less than perfect triggering, less than perfect sway,

you don't like RO2 being a little more realistic and hardcore.
Shut up please. I hate buzzwords.

but most of us do.
I hear this justification used EVERY TIME as the basis to introduce mechanics into a game where they serve no purpose or meaning other than to please a tiny cadre of milsim nerds.
 

palco

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 17, 2011
123
72
0
Shut up please. I hate buzzwords.



I hear this justification used EVERY TIME as the basis to introduce mechanics into a game where they serve no purpose or meaning other than to please a tiny cadre of milsim nerds.
I don't want to offend you but
hardcore, realistic is hardly regarded as buzzwords in general.

remember all of us here is not attending junior hi as of now. some might have a degree not from community college.

Let's just stick to the very topic of weirdly accurate rifle firing systme of RO2.

If you read the lastest 2 or 3 of my posts in this thread, you'll know what I mean by above sentences, don't try to exaggerate and escalate the very topic more.

I am talking about too easy and too accurate rifle firing system only. don't try to exaggerate and escalate the very topic more.

I am talking about too easy and too accurate rifle firing system only. don't try to exaggerate and escalate the very topic more.

I am talking about too easy and too accurate rifle firing system only. don't try to exaggerate and escalate the very topic more.
 
Last edited:

Josef Nader

FNG / Fresh Meat
Aug 31, 2011
1,713
1,165
0
Thats a 7.62x39mm round the round the AK47 uses (M43), NOT what the Mosin Nagant uses or has ever used.
Good catch. My mistake. As I said, I'm far from an expert, and I've never shot a Nagant.

The Nagant fires 7.62x54mmR. Honest mistake.

This game needs more weapon sway. Period. Debate over. Seriously, like it or not, there isn't a realistic amount of weapon sway. Add a bit more, and there will be. You can sit here and argue that there is enough sway, but could you pull off some of the shots you do in this game, IRL, even at a range? Sure, sit and camp a min or two and shot a guy that walks into your line of fire, but then you see someone off in the distance that is about 75m away. It only takes a second or two to get a headshot no matter how you have to adjust yourself.
EDIT: I need to stop making these superposts. I'm starting to lose people I'm responding too in the mess.

Says you. The vast majority of other people seem pretty happy with it.

http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showpost.php?p=907245&postcount=43

Actually I can deny this :) One of the worse mistakes you can make as a designer (and I am assuming you're a designer if your hanging out in the level design forums) is to assume that "everyone" feels the same way as you do. A small but vocal group of people on a gaming forum does not constitute "everyone". We made this mistake back in the early RO days. There was a feature in the game (I can't remember what it was) but "everyone" on the forums said they wanted it changed. Every time there was a poll 90%+ of people would say that they wanted it changed. So we listened to "everyone" and changed it. Guess what happened. As it turns out the real "everyone" (as in the masses playing the game) actually liked it how it was ORIGINALLY before we changed it. There was outrage in the general RO community, and a rash of people coming to the forums to express that they loved the feature the way that it was, and wanted it changed back. As it turned out about 90% of the people playing the game liked it and didn't want it changed.
Also, I just want to say that your experience with firearms does not equal combat experience, nor does your childhood reading training manuals. Besides, that is irrelevent to the debate anyway.
And I never claimed it to equal combat experience. He was asking where I was making my assertions from, and I told him. I'm no expert, and I never claimed to be. However, I have applied a lot of the stuff we're talking about here to meatspace, not just in a game.

I can see sprinting then trying to aim as something that doesn't happen with great results often, but thats not all the "BS" shots people are seeing. Take for example: I'm slowly walking around a corner with my sights up, see an enemy at about 60m-80m away, then a second later, I kill him. Not even crouching, although if I was crouching, then it would be harder to move with the sights up anyway. Try doing that as quickly as you can in-game, IRL. Good luck with that. Another example, I move to cover, but before I get there, I see a guy, same distance away. I ADS, stand up and kill him within less than a second, and I'm back down again. Even under mg fire. Literally within a second, I can peek around corners, cover or what-have-you and still be stable enough to get a 75m shot within 1-2 seconds. I play airsoft, which has much lower ranges, and I train almost constantly to pull of shots at 120' with that speed. It's down right impossible for the average soldier to accomplsih, much less EVERYONE. Increased weapon sway would add 2-3 seconds to all of those shots, or require you to shoot again since you missed. That would remove the unrealistic, and dare I say without getting flamed to death, CoD feel to this damn realistic shooter.
Forgive me if I don't see snapping off 50m shots with a rifle that unbalanced. Maybe CoD has spoiled us into thinking that all weapons are useless outside of 50 yards unless they're sniper rifles.

I have played airsoft, and it does require quite a bit of training to hit anything outside of 25 yards. However, let's do a quick comparison:

Most Airsoft guns are capable of shooting from 50 m/s (160 ft/s) to 125 m/s (410 ft/s), although it is also possible to purchase upgraded internals for some Airsoft guns that will enable up to 210 m/s (690 ft/s) projectile velocities.[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airsofthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airsoft

Muzzle velocity Light ball, ~ 865 m/s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosin_naganthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosin_nagant

A rifle is launching a projectile over 4x the speed of the most high-powered airsoft weapons on the market. It's apples and oranges here.

Okay so back at this thread I suppose. Believe whatever whoever you want - this after all the internut - but lets talk shop here.

To those saying 100m shots are easy - even in off hand, and even for new shooters - that's not true at all. You'd be surprised what people can actually do with a rifle once they get out to a range. I get it, "but its only 100 meters and a person is a big target", thats great. You're talking a whole human body - clear shot through and through. Now even in that scenario you're looking at needing a hit in the head (T-box) or roughly center of mass, both of those sections are at or less than a 8'' circle. "But 8'' is really big! Especially at only 100m!" No its really not, especially when offhand (standing) and especially when not on a calm range. You can not reduce weapon sway to none - and what I've noticed in game is that standard ADS is what the sway should be like when you hold that little "focus" button and zoom in.
I hear what you're saying, and I agree. However, as I've said, making a snap shot at 50 meters doesn't require absolute precision when aiming for center mass. Maybe it's because I've done it all my life, but I can reasonably hit a milk jug at 50 yards with pretty respectable speed. I don't see folks in-game making snap shots out to 100m. I just don't. Maybe I'm playing on servers with bad players who can't aim right, but it seems plenty hard enough to hit an enemy in-game from 100m without cover and resting. I've never had a running soldier snap-shoot me from over 50 meters, and more often than not snap shots happen at 25 meters or less, when we bump into each other at very close range.

I can't do it, I don't see other players doing it. I feel like I'm arguing against this hyperbolic myth of super human aimbot robot quickscoping, and nobody wants to provide proof that it happens as often as they say it does.

To those saying "I was in the military and we qualified out to X-hundred yards/meters". Yah I get it, qualifying and range shooting is a lot easier on the shooter than combat shooting or even joint qualifying where multiple shooters are on the line and shooting at the same time. In fact the US Military (DoD) did a study, the same study saying that most combat happened within 300m, showed that even as close as 100 and 200m soldiers (first they tested expert marksmen and then green straight from basic) had trouble hitting targets consistently and this was amplified when more than one person was shooting at the same time. Qualifying is not combat shooting, its a different type of everything. Nerves aren't shot, you're often not tired for a qual, you usually qual from a prone or prone assistance position, and even your stance changes. Look at the 'rattle battles' that happen around the USA such as Camp Perry events. These guys can make their hits at 200/300/600yds with Garands, M1917s, whatever you name it. But they also 'game' it. They wear special coats, special glasses, special gloves, special everything to make sure they maximize their ability and even doing all of that doesn't create zero "sway". If you've qualified and have also seen combat you know what I'm talking about. If you've qualified with a rifle and then worked a desk or ran a truck you may not.

Why do I think I'm right? Well what is right? Do I think the game needs more 'sway'? - Yes. Do I play the game right now anyways? - Yes. Is it a good game without adding more sway? - Yes. All I (and some others are saying) is that it is as about as realistic as having MKBs all over the place.

I've shot and trained with current Marines, US Army, NYPD vice units, Homeland Security Units, WW2 Veterans, Vietnam Veterans, and many more. I have access to most of the guns in this game and shoot them on a regular basis. I'm not just someone who knows about guns from reading but I run firearms on a regular basis.

You can check some videos of what I do here:
http://www.youtube.com/user/mini4m3http://www.youtube.com/user/mini4m3

I understand exactly what I'm saying and why I'm saying. Please do not believe everything you read online because as we can see from this thread its a lot of poop.
Absolutely, and I've made the disclaimer several times that I'm no expert. I've been around gun experts, and I've absorbed most of the basics, but all I really know after hanging out with them is that I don't know **** about guns. I'm a hobbyist, a weekend shooter, someone who isn't concerned with getting the best performance out of his guns or gathering data on his performance. What I do is basically piddling. I drag my Mossberg out to an open field a few times a month with a box of clays and reduce them to dust. I've been hunting a few times with friends and relatives with borrowed rifles. I own a Browning bolty that was given to me, and to be honest I can't even tell you the exact model number, because I'm really not that in to all the specifics.

That being said...

No offense (I hate when people say that because its so cliche) but you're quite wrong. You didn't even know what round the Mosin Nagant fired and you look like you've never seen a gun before holding that M11/9.
Please don't be a douche. You seem like someone that might know what they're talking about. I may not be an expert by any strech of the imagination, and I never claimed to be. From the very beginning I have said that all of my assertions are based on my personal experiences with firearms and playing around in psudo-war stuff like paintball. Never once have I ever claimed to be professionally trained, or an expert in the field. However, I did grow up among a serious gun-culture. While my family didn't let me own guns till I was old enough to buy them myself, I grew up shooting with friends, relatives, and neighbors. I may not know all the ins and outs, but I can handle a firearm with a fair bit of skill, and I've shot dozens of different makes, models, and styles in my 20 years on this earth.
 
Last edited:

Inuki

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 11, 2011
204
105
0
Just add weapon sway. It means the gun still fires straight but it's down to player skill to aim the bugger and keep it on target. We can't really change the recoil because that is supposedly accurate to the guns specification.

Adding sway means adding human factor. It's too easy right now to sprint for 20 seconds see someone on the corner of your screen and in 0.2 seconds wack his face with your peanut butter jelly time shooter rifle.
 

CaptHawkeye

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jun 23, 2009
131
93
0
Read my post, and try not to get overwhelmed by the big words ok bud?

I'll just re-iterate. People love to come into these threads with a laundry list of elements and features they perceive as important. They are, to gun nerds, professional marksmen, and soldiers.

Not to a video game. At least not enough to waste time on development, balancing, coding, and engine changes to portray them.

But no of course not. Not enough rust on my leaf sights!
 

Josef Nader

FNG / Fresh Meat
Aug 31, 2011
1,713
1,165
0
I don't want to offend you but
hardcore, realistic is hardly regarded as buzzwords in general.


Let's just stick to the very topic of weirdly accurate rifle firing systme of RO2.

If you read the lastest 2 or 3 of my posts in this thread, you'll know what I mean by above sentences, don't try to exaggerate and escalate the very topic more.

I am talking about too easy and too accurate rifle firing system only. don't try to exaggerate and escalate the very topic more.

I am talking about too easy and too accurate rifle firing system only. don't try to exaggerate and escalate the very topic more.

I am talking about too easy and too accurate rifle firing system only. don't try to exaggerate and escalate the very topic more.
Repeating yourself doesn't make it any more true.
Repeating yourself doesn't make it any more true.
Repeating yourself doesn't make it any more true.

You're one of the few that thinks it's weirdly accurate, and that's only because you spend too much time playing FPSs that make shooting unrealistically inaccurate.

Shut up please. I hate buzzwords.

I hear this justification used EVERY TIME as the basis to introduce mechanics into a game where they serve no purpose or meaning other than to please a tiny cadre of milsim nerds.
I'm glad I'm not alone in here.

:eek:

I am scared that people can be that stupid.
Can you please back this up as opposed to just calling me a stupid twat?
 

palco

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 17, 2011
123
72
0
Repeating yourself doesn't make it any more true.

If he understood my point quick enough, I didn't have to use this dumb tricks.

It's like talking to dumb junior his.

Now I can understand how some teachers would have felt while teaching.
Teaching slow students on not that complex subject.

oh dear god.
 
Last edited:

Josef Nader

FNG / Fresh Meat
Aug 31, 2011
1,713
1,165
0
Just add weapon sway. It means the gun still fires straight but it's down to player skill to aim the bugger and keep it on target. We can't really change the recoil because that is supposedly accurate to the guns specification.

Adding sway means adding human factor. It's too easy right now to sprint for 20 seconds see someone on the corner of your screen and in 0.2 seconds wack his face with your peanut butter jelly time shooter rifle.
So you'd rather have it sprinting for 20 seconds, round a corner into an enemy, and try a wild hipshot with a bolt action rifle?

Right, because that's -totally- more realistic than simply aiming down the sights.
 

Josef Nader

FNG / Fresh Meat
Aug 31, 2011
1,713
1,165
0
Repeating yourself doesn't make it any more true.

If he catched my point quick enough, I didn't have to use this dumb tricks.

It's like talking to dumb junior his.

That's one of the hard thing about being a teacher.
Teaching slow students on not that complex subject.

oh dear god.
Dear sweet Celestia, would you back up your goddamn statements. So far, the only argument you've posed is that "other games have done it, so it must be right." I've explained to you why this is wrong, but you refuse to hear it. Instead, you just spam your uninformed opinion with the hopes of drowning me under the sheer volume of bull**** you're throwing at me.