Accuracy needs to be reduced on ALL the weapons ingame

Gaizokubanou said:

At the wrong range, and hence it actually didn't simulate the WW2 infantry combat well. Why would you want to take another step backwards into RO1, when we can take a step forward by simply getting larger maps where the currently realistic accuracy will give you the battle you envisioned?

And ditching respawn or making respawn incredibly costly (60 seconds for example) would be another much much much more realistic way to combat the suicidal players. If we are talking about recreating realistic combat, unrealistic features should be mentioned only as a last resort when technology just can't support the design.

Click to expand...

Weapons aren't realistic. That's what everyone fails to see. The game engine removes the challenge of having to adjust your aim, which is what real people do. They don't just hold a rifle and voila, the rifle auto-adjusts itself so there is no sway. The rifle doesn't automatically compensate itself for recoil, you have to do it in real life. Sure, it's somewhat realistic in a sense, but it's realistic in the sense that you're pulling the trigger for a trained marksman, instead of pulling the trigger yourself. I don't want the game engine to auto-correct my rifle for me, I am more than capable of doing that myself. The PPSH41 has some ideal recoil in that it requires the user to do some sort of adjustment to control, just like a normal human would need to do in real life.

I seriously don't understand why some people want games dumbed down so that it automatically adjusts your rifle to all sorts of combat conditions.

I want there to be more sway when I'm not rested so I a.) have to decide whether it's a good idea to be out of cover b.) need to learn to how control my weapon so that I can become accurate.

RO1 sway was not done properly, it really goes all over the place and is hard to control. When I make my mod, I will consider the fact that realistic sway needs to be implemented, realistic enough that with some adjustments, you can correct for it, just like in real life. Same for recoil.

Right, my last post was long enough. Here's the actual US Marines Doctrine for fire support and suppression:

2-2. Every time a Soldier fires a weapon or requests indirect fire, he does so with the intent to kill or
destroy an enemy target. He may also affect an enemy target through nonlethal means such as smoke,
illumination, or nonlethal fires. Platoon and squad leaders are the first leaders in the chain of command who
are legally and morally responsible for the fires and effects produced by their subordinates.

DESTROY THE GREATEST THREAT FIRST
2-11. The platoon engages targets in direct relation to the danger they present. If two or more targets of equal threat present themselves, the platoon should engage the closest target first. The platoon marks the defense engagement area (EA) so it can determine when to engage various targets, then plans these ranges on sketches and range cards. For example, the platoon should mark the EA at the Javelin maximum
engagement distance (2,000 meters) to ensure gunners do not waste missiles.

AVOID TARGET OVERKILL
2-12. The Infantry platoon strives to avoid engaging a target with more than one weapon system at a time.
To avoid target overkill, the platoon can divide EAs into sectors or quadrants of fire to better distribute
direct fire among the platoon. The platoon can use many techniques to mark the EA. The platoon and
company should develop a TSOP that divides the EA with both infrared and thermal TRPs to enable good
distribution of fires within the EA. Squads and platoons should mark EAs with infrared devices for
engagements during limited visibility. Thermal sights on the command launch unit (CLU) of the Javelin
cannot detect infrared sources. Therefore, the EA must also be marked with thermal devices. The platoon
can burn a mixture of rocks, sand, and diesel fuel inside a fuel drum, ammunition can, or bucket shortly
before dusk to give off a heat source for most of the night.
2-13. The platoon leader may also designate rates of fire, by weapon system, to avoid target overkill.
Predetermining the rates of fire and length of firing time allows the platoon leader to plan for sufficient
ammunition needed for desired effect. The rates of fire are cyclic, rapid, and sustained.
2-14. In offensive operations, avoid overkill by

palco said:

About suppression effect, it's very realistic that pinned down soldiers can't properly return accurate fire or even fire back at all just like real life situation.

Click to expand...

You know what's even more realistic? Killing those riflemen with your MG when they pop out with their heads.

Seriously show me a video where you are using the MG competently and you see a rifleman whom you fire at, who then ducks behind a cover, and pops right back up to kill you.

I bet I'll never see it. Why? Because all these players that are killing you are ones that you never even noticed that were there. You are talking about all these awesome suppression you were doing, guess what? You weren't. Either your aim was so terrible or your battlefield awareness was poor that these "super sniper riflemen" got to around 70m of you unnoticed and just popped your head of for it.

catbarf said:

I don't think the guns themselves are unrealistically accurate, but the shooter's ability to aim is way beyond what's realistic. When you ADS, your view locks to perfectly line up with the sights. In real life, being off by just a millimeter will throw the shot off by a significant amount, and it's hard to line up perfectly on the sight in less than a second like you can in the game. And furthermore, it's physically impossible to focus on both the target and the weapon's sights simultaneously, making it harder to keep lined up on a moving target- and all of the above is understandably harder when taking return fire.

The guns may be as accurate as their real life counterparts, but when it comes to bolt-action rifles, the gun is more accurate than the sights or the shooter, and that's not represented in-game. For the shorter-ranged automatics it's not quite as true, although the recoil is unrealistically weak on even the MP40 and PPSh.

Click to expand...

+1
bothered with unrealistically all time accurate shooters under harsh battleground

Gaizokubanou said:

You know what's even more realistic? Killing those riflemen with your MG when they pop out with their heads.

Seriously show me a video where you are using the MG competently and you see a rifleman whom you fire at, who then ducks behind a cover, and pops right back up to kill you.

I bet I'll never see it. Why? Because all these players that are killing you are ones that you never even noticed that were there. You are talking about all these awesome suppression you were doing, guess what? You weren't. Either your aim was so terrible or your battlefield awareness was poor that these "super sniper riflemen" got to around 70m of you unnoticed and just popped your head of for it.

Click to expand...

yeah, about death by unawared other rifle men or snipers, I got no argument.
and we seem to engage unnecessary arugment out of misunderstanding.

I was complaining about overall inhumanly all time accurate rifle men, and added suppression effect wouldn't hurt the truth. (as I mentioned, increased heart rate would decrease accuracy of suppressed rifle men)

I wasn't talking about actually some player can pull it off and successfully killing the MG shooter. I was saying there should be more restrictive suppression penalty to pinned down soldiers as pinned down soldiers would have increased heart rate.

Gaizokubanou said:

You know what's even more realistic? Killing those riflemen with your MG when they pop out with their heads.

Seriously show me a video where you are using the MG competently and you see a rifleman whom you fire at, who then ducks behind a cover, and pops right back up to kill you.

I bet I'll never see it. Why? Because all these players that are killing you are ones that you never even noticed that were there. You are talking about all these awesome suppression you were doing, guess what? You weren't. Either your aim was so terrible or your battlefield awareness was poor that these "super sniper riflemen" got to around 70m of you unnoticed and just popped your head of for it.

Click to expand...

Which, by the way, is exactly how real life military units handle machine gun nests.

Get out of his arc of fire, close in, and then shoot the gunner, or grenade the nest. Hit him when he least expects it, minimize the danger to yourself and your squad, and attack with extreme force.

palco said:

+1
bothered with unrealistically all time accurate shooters under harsh battleground

Click to expand...

How in the name of all that is good and holy is it unrealistic to have shooters who are accurate out to a hundred yards armed with bolt action rifles, weapons that are so accurate they still dominate sniper units around the world to this day?

If they were hitting us at ranges out to 300+ yards, I'd see what you mean, but we're talking the length of a football field or less here. That is -not- a hard shot for anyone halfway decent with a rifle. Trust me, I know. I've been hunting in the middle of winter several times and I have killed deer from iron-sights at ~100 yards while frozen stiff, shaking like a leaf, sore from sitting in a stand all morning, and bleary eyed from sleep deprivation. Was it the easiest shot? No. Have I missed several shots like that? Sure. Do I hit with a fair degree of success? Yes.

So far, the game seems to behave the same way. You miss plenty of shots from 50-100m, but it's also not that hard to hit from that range either. Various factors come in to play, just like real life.

Josef Nader said:

If they were hitting us at ranges out to 300+ yards, I'd see what you mean, but we're talking the length of a football field or less here. That is -not- a hard shot for anyone halfway decent with a rifle. Trust me, I know. I've been hunting in the middle of winter several times and I have killed deer from iron-sights at ~100 yards while frozen stiff, shaking like a leaf, sore from sitting in a stand all morning, and bleary eyed from sleep deprivation. Was it the easiest shot? No. Have I missed several shots like that? Sure. Do I hit with a fair degree of success? Yes.

Click to expand...

Were you standing, did you manage to shoulder/aim/fire in a second or less, and do so having just sprinted a hundred yards, against a human-sized target in cover busy shooting back?

I have no problem with someone lying prone, spending ten seconds to sight in and align, bracing the gun, and then getting a hit at 200yds. What bugs me is how the game completely automates the process of aiming to point and click, with machine-like precision in aim. The way the game works right now, everyone acts as a sniper to a degree. You spot someone, sight in on them, and one-shot-one-kill. It takes very little time to do so, and is made trivial by the ease by which the player can aim, avoid sway, and control recoil. I have yet to see a typical account of WW2 infantry combat in which both sides took cover and slowly, methodically popped off shots at each other with 75+% accuracy.

Josef Nader said:

How in the name of all that is good and holy is it unrealistic to have shooters who are accurate out to a hundred yards armed with bolt action rifles, weapons that are so accurate they still dominate sniper units around the world to this day?

If they were hitting us at ranges out to 300+ yards, I'd see what you mean, but we're talking the length of a football field or less here. That is -not- a hard shot for anyone halfway decent with a rifle. Trust me, I know. I've been hunting in the middle of winter several times and I have killed deer from iron-sights at ~100 yards while frozen stiff, shaking like a leaf, sore from sitting in a stand all morning, and bleary eyed from sleep deprivation. Was it the easiest shot? No. Have I missed several shots like that? Sure. Do I hit with a fair degree of success? Yes.

So far, the game seems to behave the same way. You miss plenty of shots from 50-100m, but it's also not that hard to hit from that range either. Various factors come in to play, just like real life.

Click to expand...

I am not complaining about +300m accuracy of rifle men.

I am saying current RO2 firing system seems relatively easy compared to real life firing situation, and other common realistic FPS as America's army 3, ARMA2.

Please play america's army 3 basic weapon qualification training which quite accurately simulated actual firing weapon.

I am saying current 100meter shooting is too easy thus unrealistic, rifle men's firing system should be made harder by implementing 1,2, just like america's army3, RO1 did with stamina+ hold breath system which RO2 removed.

1. holding the breath in ADS increased accuracy cos breath control in real life fire does.

2. holding the breath in ADS can last for a short time within the stamina bar's limit.


Also, you don't sound like a person who actually fired a real weapon in real range, please visit local firing range, to actually feel what breath control does to accuracy of rifle and weapon handling.

I am saying these while in mendatory military service, I fired basic squad weapon as m16a2, m249, m240, so please don't say things are realistic or not before you have actual weapon experience.

catbarf said:

Were you standing, did you manage to shoulder/aim/fire in a second or less, and do so having just sprinted a hundred yards, against a human-sized target in cover busy shooting back?

Click to expand...

People use this goddamn argument all the time. I have -never- seen it in-game. Ever. Usually because if someone stops and tries to aim while I'm shooting at them, I bloody KILL THEM. They're easy to spot when they're sprinting, all I have to do is lead right and *BAM*, one more dead enemy. I'm in cover, he's not. He's dead. If he has time to line up a shot and kill me, then I DESERVED TO BLOODY DIE.

catbarf said:

The way the game works right now, everyone acts as a sniper to a degree. You spot someone, sight in on them, and one-shot-one-kill. It takes very little time to do so, and is made trivial by the ease by which the player can aim, avoid sway, and control recoil. I have yet to see a typical account of WW2 infantry combat in which both sides took cover and slowly, methodically popped off shots at each other with 75+% accuracy.

Click to expand...

Because they're using SNIPER WEAPONS. BOLT ACTION RIFLES ARE NOT VOLUME OF FIRE WEAPONS. THEY ARE SLOW TO RELOAD, SO TO BE EFFECTIVE YOU HAVE TO MAKE EVERY SHOT COUNT. IF I MISSED A DEER WITH MY FIRST SHOT, CHANCES ARE HE'S GOING TO ESCAPE.

Also, typical WWII infantry combat = slow and methodical? Since when? Since when in the history of human conflict has war been slow and methodical?

Please, guys. Do your damn homework. This is just getting silly.

palco said:

Please play america's army 3 basic weapon qualification training which quite accurately simulated actual firing weapon.

Click to expand...

Or, I could go into my back yard and shoot my Browning and tell you exactly how bolt rifles handle in real life.

Please stop telling me to play video games to get a "Realistic" idea of how to do something I've been doing since I was able to hold a .22.

Also, typical WWII infantry combat = slow and methodical? Since when? Since when in the history of human conflict has war been slow and methodical?

Please, guys. Do your damn homework. This is just getting silly.[/QUOTE]


I have no actual combat experience but served in real life nonetheless.

ARMA series quite accurately simulate the combat in somewhat minor way, even the modern infantry combat is very slow.

and when you read some of historical writings on WW2 stalingrad, pace of combat was extremely slow cos of heavy resistance from russian side.

I suggest you to read some books on WW2 history (not novel or movie) written by real war veterans, and also recommend actaully firing weapon and if possible buy some real life military gears to know how it's heavy and tiring to move around fast with military gears.

Josef Nader said:

Or, I could go into my back yard and shoot my Browning and tell you exactly how bolt rifles handle in real life.

Please stop telling me to play video games to get a "Realistic" idea of how to do something I've been doing since I was able to hold a .22.

Click to expand...

It is very hard thing to actually prove what you said on internet, as there's no properly certified, trustworthy way to approve your saying.

Also you missed some points about breathing control and how slow actual combat pace is so you seem like you don't have actual military service experience.

I have no actual combat experience but served in real life nonetheless.

ARMA series quite accurately simulate the combat in somewhat minor way, even the modern infantry combat is very slow.

and when you read some of historical writings on WW2 stalingrad, pace of combat was extremely slow cos of heavy resistance from russian side.

I suggest you to read some books on WW2 history (not novel or movie) written by real war veterans, and also recommend actaully firing weapon and if possible buy some real life military gears to know how it's heavy and tiring thing to move fast with military gears.

Click to expand...

Goddamn you people.

I fire rifles and shotguns on a fairly regular basis. I trap shoot just about every other weekend. I practice with my rifle once in a blue moon, at least until hunting season rolls around. I used to date a girl who's dad was a big time gun collector, and through her I managed to fire a huge variety of historical firearms including but not limited to a K98, an M1 Garand, an M14 carbine, a P38 pistol, and a Luger pistol. I watched him fire an authentic, belt-fed Browning 1919 machine gun to celebrate the 4th of July.



Me and my Mossberg 500 12 ga. Dressed up all post apocalyptic for Halloween one year and I used the Mossberg to complete the look so we could take a cool picture (no pun intended).



Shooting an M11 sub machine gun at my ex-girlfriend's 4th of July party. This was the last gun we shot, and nobody thought to pull out a camera before this, so I didn't get any other pictures.

My rifle and shotgun are at home now, as I'm back at college and can't shoot as much as I did over the summer, or I'd post timestamped pics to get you guys to shut your stupid traps.

Honestly folks. Stop telling me how guns work. I'm no gun nut. I was in awe of my ex's dad, who filled his own brass, chrono'd his own guns, kept detailed ballistics data on all of his weapons, and amassed a huge collection (~90 guns, all told) of firearms, both historical and modern, and who spent his free time at gun shows and exhibitions. I learned as much as I could from him, but it only showed me how little I really know about firearms.

Now will you stupid chuckleheads please stop acting like you know what you're talking about, because you don't.

palco said:

Also you missed some points about breathing control and how slow actual combat pace is so you seem like you don't have actual military service experience.

Click to expand...

I don't, but my dad is a West Point graduate, and he let me have all of his old stuff when I was little so I could dress up cool and play war games in the woods with my friends. I got all of his field manuals, and I used to talk to him about tactics I could use to play paintball and **** all the time. He wasn't overly keen on telling me all the minute details, but he did give me some good fundamentals that I use to this day. Between that, real life psudo-military games, and mountains of research, I think I have a grasp on the basics of infantry combat.

And yes, I know -exactly- how much modern combat gear weighs. Like I said, I paintball pretty regularly doing multi-day events on my friend's farms. I bring all my own stuff. We set up camp, and then go out and war game from dawn to dusk, stopping once in a blue moon to fill our canteens. I know exactly what it's like to run around with 30 lbs of gear on your back, a belt full of gear, and a tactical vest covered in gear.

Please stop telling me how this **** works in real life.

Alright, I too served in army for 2 years and that was mendatory service for every male adult in my country.

What I want to ask is did you fire targets of 100m, 200m, 300m range with rifle?
If you did then you might know it's not so easy as RO2 game to actualy stable your sway in standing position, and not controling your breathing affect your accuracy more than RO2 simulate.

RO2's rifle is too accurate even without breath control while moving or with standing unsupported firing position.


Also, I am very sorry to tell you but with all the internet BSs around everywhere in the web, I can't trust all of your words as it's stated on web thread.

Sorry but, I believe you can understand that mere words or pictures on the web is not sufficient enough proof of anything for anything.

Also, your choices of pictures, avartar doesn't quite match the figure of a guy in the picture, according to my lifetime instinct, may be too juvenile, and mismatch.

Josef Nader said:

Because they're using SNIPER WEAPONS. BOLT ACTION RIFLES ARE NOT VOLUME OF FIRE WEAPONS. THEY ARE SLOW TO RELOAD, SO TO BE EFFECTIVE YOU HAVE TO MAKE EVERY SHOT COUNT. IF I MISSED A DEER WITH MY FIRST SHOT, CHANCES ARE HE'S GOING TO ESCAPE

Click to expand...

The British would disagree.

You seem to have the past and present mixed up. This is the case today, but back in the early to mid 1900s, bolt actions were not considered sniper weapons. They were just infantry rifles then, and your average, non-hunter, infantryman wouldn't spend a minute or two to try to get a super accurate shot off, that's just not how they were trained.

Germany is another a prime example of this. Their rifleman were well trained in how to shoot a life-sized target, but not as well as their squad's machine gunner. Killing people wasn't the rifleman's job, that was the MG's job.

palco said:

Alright, I too served in army for 2 years and that was mendatory service for every male adult in my country.

What I want to ask is did you fire targets of 100m, 200m, 300m range with rifle?

Click to expand...

Yes. As I said, I could hit a target with regularity at 100m standing, and out to 300+ meters prone.

palco said:

If you did then you might know it's not so easy as RO2 game to actualy stable your sway in standing position, and not controling your breathing affect your accuracy more than RO2 simulate.

RO2's rifle is too accurate even without breath control while moving or with standing unsupported firing position.

Click to expand...

It is not. You're misjudging the distances in the game. RO2 does simulate breath control, if you'd pay attention, as there is a reasonable amount of sway on the weapon that makes shots beyond 150m very challenging. Shots within 100m are -not- that hard.

As for the pictures, I don't know where you think I got two pictures of the same guy holding different weapons, hoss, unless I'm some creepy stalker. I guess I can pull my goggles and ushanka on, as those made it to college with me, and take a picture if it'll satisfy you.

Unorthadox said:

The British would disagree.

You seem to have the past and present mixed up. This is the case today, but back in the early to mid 1900s, bolt actions were not considered sniper weapons. They were just infantry rifles then, and your average, non-hunter, infantryman wouldn't spend a minute or two to try to get a super accurate shot off, that's just not how they were trained.

Germany is another a prime example of this. Their rifleman were well trained in how to shoot a life-sized target, but not as well as their squad's machine gunner. Killing people wasn't the rifleman's job, that was the MG's job.

Click to expand...

Oh absolutely. I fully understand. Just because these weapons are capable of sniper-grade shots doesn't mean that everyone was a sniper.

But it's worth noting that "marksmen" used the standard infantry rifle with a scope mounted on top. In combat situations speed is king, and there was no need to take a minute to line up your sights to pop off a 50 yard killshot. That's what I'm trying to say. All these "realism" guys want all this sway so it takes a few seconds to line up a kill shot, but they're ignoring the fact that inside of 50 meters, it doesn't take superhuman robot aim to shove the butt of a rifle up your nose and squeeze off a lethal shot.

Suppression Effects

Suppression Effects

Nader, what are your ideas on making the suppression effects more potent and having them last longer.

Josef Nader said:

Oh absolutely. I fully understand. Just because these weapons are capable of sniper-grade shots doesn't mean that everyone was a sniper.

But it's worth noting that "marksmen" used the standard infantry rifle with a scope mounted on top. In combat situations speed is king, and there was no need to take a minute to line up your sights to pop off a 50 yard killshot. That's what I'm trying to say. All these "realism" guys want all this sway so it takes a few seconds to line up a kill shot, but they're ignoring the fact that inside of 50 meters, it doesn't take superhuman robot aim to shove the butt of a rifle up your nose and squeeze off a lethal shot.

Click to expand...

I see what you're saying now. I was a bit worried at first...