Will bolt actions be perfectly accurate like RO:OST?

[theco]

Edit-I think the FOV threw me off a lot, and what seemed like long range shots in game were actually much closer.

First off I'd like to say that I am very excited about this game. I really enjoyed RO:OST from everything I've seen so far this game will be even better. It is especially nice to see a PC dedicated shooter in these days of games designed for Xbox.

Anyway, in RO:OST the mosin and the k98 were both perfectly accurate. You could see an enemy several hundred meters away, even if he was just a few pixels, and reliably shoot him dead. Wherever you put your sights, the bullet would travel there with no deviation.

This is the sort of accuracy that would be available in say, a custom Remington 700. I am sure many of you have shot a mosin or a k98 (or at least you should have) and know that this is far from true. The mosin has a long, gritty trigger pull and the action has poor contact with the stock. Coupled with military ammo and wartime barrels, and you end up with a rifle that isn't exactly a precision weapon. From a bench and with a good trigger pull, 5-6 inch groups at 100 yards are common.

HOS seems to be mostly urban combat, and this will not play much of a factor at such close ranges. There are a few areas I have seen with some longer ranges, however. I think it is pretty absurd to be able to reliably hit a man at 300 yards with a military bolt action rifle. In RO:OST it was pretty annoying to run across seemingly open ground only to be picked off by some guy with custom rifle shooting handloads. Will HOS have some sort of cone of fire for rifles?

 

[Felix Ostheim]

Anyway, in RO:OST the mosin and the k98 were both perfectly accurate. You could see an enemy several hundred meters away, even if he was just a few pixels, and reliably shoot him dead. Wherever you put your sights, the bullet would travel there with no deviation.

This is simply not true.

 

[Nikolai]

This is simply not true.

It's certainly not far from true. He forgot the bullet drop. Other than that, the rifles hit almost exactly where you aim. Shooting a pixel at 100m is no problem in game.

 

[theco]

It's certainly not far from true. He forgot the bullet drop. Other than that, the rifles hit almost exactly where you aim. Shooting a pixel at 100m is no problem in game.

Exactly. Only it's not so much the 100m shots that are an issue as it is the 300m shots.

 

[Felix Ostheim]

It's certainly not far from true. He forgot the bullet drop. Other than that, the rifles hit almost exactly where you aim. Shooting a pixel at 100m is no problem in game.

Just because it's 'no problem' doesn't make it unrealistic. Have you or the OP ever fired a K98 or Mosin at a target at 100 meters? Are you a good shot?

...

Wherever you put your sights, the bullet would travel there with no deviation.

...

I think it is pretty absurd to be able to reliably hit a man at 300 yards with a military bolt action rifle.

Wrong, the bullet never travels with 'no deviation'. Even without consideration for bullet drop and while resting your weapon, there is still some deviation. When's the last time you hit an enemy with a rifle from 300 yards in RO without the target standing still or without a considerable amount luck involved? This thread is one big exaggeration imo.

 

[Grobut]

This is simply not true.

Indeed, one quick glance at the code shows the rifles have a cone of fire, they are not dead accurate, and at long ranges i most certainly have missed well aimed shots.

That said, i belive theco is falling victim to the FOV=90 problem of Ost, namely that ranges in the game look much futher than they really are, what may look like a 200 meter shot in the game, is probably only 100 meters or less in reality, simple because the FOV of the game is not realistic, making it neigh impossible to accurately judge distance in the game, things allways seem much futher away than they really are.

That also creates a skewed perception of weapon accuracy, if you think you are pulling off tight groups at 100 meters, that seems very impressive.. but it's not 100 meters, it's probably only 50 meters, the FOV of the game is just throwing off your perception of range.

 

[theco]

Indeed, one quick glance at the code shows the rifles have a cone of fire, they are not dead accurate, and at long ranges i most certainly have missed well aimed shots.

That said, i belive theco is falling victim to the FOV=90 problem of Ost, namely that ranges in the game look much futher than they really are, what may look like a 200 meter shot in the game, is probably only 100 meters or less in reality, simple because the FOV of the game is not realistic, making it neigh impossible to accurately judge distance in the game, things allways seem much futher away than they really are.

That also creates a skewed perception of weapon accuracy, if you think you are pulling off tight groups at 100 meters, that seems very impressive.. but it's not 100 meters, it's probably only 50 meters, the FOV of the game is just throwing off your perception of range.

Perhaps this is the case. I just remember being able to pick off targets much small than my front sight post with ease. By the way, what is the cone of fire radius?

@Felix- I posted another reply but I don't know what happened to it. Anyway, I agree that 100m shots shouldn't be a problem. Like previously stated, perhaps it is the FOV that is throwing me off, but in RO I could make some very accurate shots at what seemed like very long distances. Is there a map with a shooting range that this can be tested on?

 

[Nikolai]

Just because it's 'no problem' doesn't make it unrealistic. Have you or the OP ever fired a K98 or Mosin at a target at 100 meters? Are you a good shot?

I have never fired a rifle and I'm probably not a good shot and I have never claimed that the rifle accuracy in RO is unrealistic. I just defended the OP when he claimed that the rifles are very accurate. Which they are. Whether that is realistic or not, I do not know, and since I do not know, I have not commented on that.

 

[Chekhov]

Well I own 5 Mosin Nagant models and 2 German k98's,k98 is very accurate - a good original condition model will be able to hit a standing man at 600 yards if your a good shot,An original (Non Refurbed) Mosin Nagant will also be able to hit a man sized target at 600 yards if your a good shot. I have found from owning refurbished Mosin rifles and original WWII untouched Mosin rifles a big difference,The originals have really good triggers and tend to be more accurate than the arsenal refurbs which were slopped together from various rifles. I would say though as long as there is a good shooter behind the trigger they could hit a standing man at 600 yards with either rifle. From what I recall the U.S. military expected their soldiers to be able to shoot standing men at 5/600 yards with the 1903 Springfield,I would guess German and Russian Army's expected similar......

There were times on Darkest hour using the K98 when I had an enemy perfectly in my sight say 700 yards away and I fired and missed. I think there was some bullet drop put into the bolt rifles in Osfront/Darkest Hour,Though I can not speak for the devolopers

 

[Capt.Cool]

I think its fine the rifles are 100% accurate. If they were not, they would be way too unbalanced to the smgs.

 

[Das Bose]

I think its fine the rifles are 100% accurate. If they were not, they would be way too unbalanced to the smgs.

I really hope there are no weapon values being altered for balance.

 

[Grobut]

Perhaps this is the case. I just remember being able to pick off targets much small than my front sight post with ease. By the way, what is the cone of fire radius?

@Felix- I posted another reply but I don't know what happened to it. Anyway, I agree that 100m shots shouldn't be a problem. Like previously stated, perhaps it is the FOV that is throwing me off, but in RO I could make some very accurate shots at what seemed like very long distances. Is there a map with a shooting range that this can be tested on?

A radius can't really be determined from the the code, the conefire is just determined by a numeric value, in this case 50, it doesen't state how many inches of deviation at what ranges that translates into.

And yes, the FOV scales everything you see on the screen too small, except your own weapon model, which is exempt from FOV, try this:

Launch an offline game of Ro:Ost with zero bots (this is just for testing), now find a nearby object, something about the size of a man, and look directly at it, then take a ruler and measure it's size on the screen (just measure it's height, that should be plenty).

Now turn your view so the object is on the very edge of your screen, either left or right side, doesen't matter, and measure it again.. and you will notice it has grown in size.. you are the same distance from it, so it shoulden't have, but it does!

This is because the normal FOV of the game is actually a distroted "fishbowl" view, you are zoomed out, the view is coded this way to allow you more periphial vision than the screen space would normally allow (periphial vision is very import for navigating a 3D environment, afterall), but the downside is that everything looks much father away than it really is, which makes it very hard to accurately judge distances.


Also try this, again in an offline game: Look at any object off in the distance, and make a guess at how far away it might be.

Now open the console and type in "fov 75" without the quotation marks and hit enter, then try judging the distance again..

A FOV of 75 is much clouser to what the human eye actually sees, and you will notice the object appears much clouser now.

But if you try running around a little like this, you also notice that a FOV of 75 denies you so much periphial vision, it gets pretty hard to play like that, especially in clouse quarters, you'll feel like you have tunnel vision (which you do, because the screen is not large enough to give you all the periphial vision you would have in real life).

 

[Knighted]

I really hope there are no weapon values being altered for balance.

It's comments like this that make me think this community is delusional. Every game, every weapon, everything has to have values assigned to it. About half of them are interpretations at best.

Why doesnt the developer just push the REALISM button.... You guys are a riot.

 

[Pvt.Skoko]

The old ww2 rifles the OP shot probably had bad, overused barrels. I'm always hearing from people to not buy a WW2 rifle unless you're sure the barrel is untouched or refurbed

 

[Felix Ostheim]

It's comments like this that make me think this community is delusional. Every game, every weapon, everything has to have values assigned to it. About half of them are interpretations at best.

Why doesnt the developer just push the REALISM button.... You guys are a riot.

Oh yes everything has to have values assigned to them, might as well just make them up randomly right? Let's just do things Knighted's way and make the weapons for each side exactly the same. After all there's no difference between a K98 and MN besides looks.

 

[RedGuardist]

It's comments like this that make me think this community is delusional. Every game, every weapon, everything has to have values assigned to it. About half of them are interpretations at best.

Why doesnt the developer just push the REALISM button.... You guys are a riot.

And your comments in general make me think that you are on the wrong forum and that you are consentrating your attention to a game that will not please you afterall. If what you read here eats you so much, you do know that reading this forum is not compulsory?

 

[Machete234]

Anyway, in RO:OST the mosin and the k98 were both perfectly accurate. You could see an enemy several hundred meters away, even if he was just a few pixels, and reliably shoot him dead. Wherever you put your sights, the bullet would travel there with no deviation.

No!
I think for moving targets you had to aim ahead, so you had to guess where is the target in 0.5s ore more depending on the distance.
Once you figured this out hits on long distances were not that hard.

Also I think those rifles were designed for distances of a few hundred meters.
The bolt action rifles where not for modern warfare but for WW1 style warfare with trenches etc.

So I think it could be possible to hit on a range of 100-300meters.

Well I own 5 Mosin Nagant models and 2 German k98's,k98 is very accurate - a good original condition model will be able to hit a standing man at 600 yards if your a good shot,An original (Non Refurbed) Mosin Nagant will also be able to hit a man sized target at 600 yards if your a good shot.

600yards are 548m so it is realistic to hit on these distances
Sry for writing big cant change it lol

 

[hockeywarrior]

I think the accuracy of bolt actions in RO1 was perfect. The devs tweaked it just the right amount so that the deviation was only noticeable at long to extreme ranges, just as it is in real life.

I'm really really excited for adjustable sites in RO2. I'm sure this will add a whole other dynamic to long distance firefights, for those that develop the skills to use them.

 

[Hypno Toad]

The things were not pinpoint accurate, I've actually got a video I've recently compiled wherin Im shooting at a person whos 1-2 pixels wide, and it easily takes 2-3 dead-perfect shots before the round actually hits him. The accuracy was fine in ROOST, I for one, hope it stays the same.

 

[Knighted]

Oh yes everything has to have values assigned to them, might as well just make them up randomly right? Let's just do things Knighted's way and make the weapons for each side exactly the same. After all there's no difference between a K98 and MN besides looks.

I want the weapons to be exactly the same? Damn guy, you really need to learn how to read. I'd be disgusted if all the guns were the same. I'm talking about strengths and weaknesses, and balance. Lol...