Speed of ironsight
- Thread starter Filo90
- Start date
It's good as it is if you are standing still, but if you are moving it should be slightly faster than RO1, and if you are sprinting it should be even slower than RO1.
Upvote
0
One day it's the zoom, the next day it's the movement speed, the next day it's the number of autos and semis, today it's the speed of ADS.
Seriously guys? We're still on this?
ADS speed is fine. Shoving the sights of a gun up your nose doesn't take that long.
Seriously guys? We're still on this?
ADS speed is fine. Shoving the sights of a gun up your nose doesn't take that long.
Upvote
0
No "I don't care" option? I don't mind it like it is (not like it's CoD, despite what some might believe), wouldn't mind if it was a bit slower (would just encourage hip firing more in CQB, I'm okay with that). Ultimately I really think there are more important issues.
Upvote
0
Of course it's fairly quickly, but aligning the gun perfectly with the iron sight however isn't.
Upvote
0
But your gun -doesn't- line up perfectly with the ironsights. There is a second or two before you can pop off accurate long-range shots.
Go in-game and try it. You can pop off CQC shots very quickly, because you don't have to aim those, but for longer distance shots you have to wait a few seconds for your sights to settle before you can make them accurately.
Upvote
0
You got the pink Hello Kitty edition guns for little girls that are less accurate?
I never hold breath, its waste of time with weapons that are so accurate
and anought skill to use it.
Upvote
0
My take on the issue is that the Close Quarters Aiming needs to remain basically the same.
Lets face it, if someone is 5 feet in front of you you shouldn't have an issue putting a round through his center of mass from the hip, or even holding the gun over your head.
The only problem with the iron sights in the speed at which you line your front and rear sights up for long range shots. Because of how quickly this happens (They appear to always be perfectly aligned basically) it means we can take 100-200m shots very quickly,
For close shots inside buildings, it works fine. For long range shots, we need a short delay for things to 'settle' after moving quickly (including rapid about faces.) The time of this delay of course being effected by the speed you were moving/turning, etc, but generally be only a second or so.
Lets face it, if someone is 5 feet in front of you you shouldn't have an issue putting a round through his center of mass from the hip, or even holding the gun over your head.
The only problem with the iron sights in the speed at which you line your front and rear sights up for long range shots. Because of how quickly this happens (They appear to always be perfectly aligned basically) it means we can take 100-200m shots very quickly,
For close shots inside buildings, it works fine. For long range shots, we need a short delay for things to 'settle' after moving quickly (including rapid about faces.) The time of this delay of course being effected by the speed you were moving/turning, etc, but generally be only a second or so.
Upvote
0
Try to think of each of these as being made by individuals, who may have no connection to the other topics. Yes, there will always be different opinions, and as such, dissent on forums. This is probably a good thing.
Everywhere in the game I agree fully with this with one special (but severe) exception. The speed seems plausible & consistant with my real world experiences. But I want you to try this: Try choosing any combat weapon, SPRINT (standing) with it. Then suddenly, let go of the direction keys and press the iron sight button (still holding shift key). Weapon will fly up and align probably 5-8x faster than any other situation, taking place in perhaps 0.1 seconds. There is no way anyone in the world can go from sprinting (athlete style) over rough ground, holding a full sized rifle dangling down their right side, then grab it, shoulder it, and align the sights in 0.1 seconds. At least about a second.
Try this specifically. Try comparing it to all the other situations. I was not doing this technique myself since I'm not much of a run & gun player. I incorrectly assumed that the speed it happens must be at least as slow as the other situations I was used to. Defended it in the forums even...
Upvote
0
As far as I know, your soldier never lets go of his weapon, even when sprinting. The Soviets sprint holding their weapons with two hands, the Germans do it holding their weapons with one hand. You could snap the rifle up pretty quickly with two hands. One-handed would be much slower, but TWI didn't model this for obvious gameplay reasons.
Now, why did they model both factions with different spring/carry animations? Simple. The human eye is trained to recognize silhouette before anything else. By giving the Russians/Germans different silhouettes while sprinting, TWI has made it a lot easier to determine whether or not to shoot that guy who just sprinted out into the open.
They can't cripple the Germans, for obvious reasons, but they need to differentiate between the two. Immersion breaking? Yeah. Good for gameplay? Yeah.
Now, why did they model both factions with different spring/carry animations? Simple. The human eye is trained to recognize silhouette before anything else. By giving the Russians/Germans different silhouettes while sprinting, TWI has made it a lot easier to determine whether or not to shoot that guy who just sprinted out into the open.
They can't cripple the Germans, for obvious reasons, but they need to differentiate between the two. Immersion breaking? Yeah. Good for gameplay? Yeah.
Upvote
0
A few things:
My personal beef about any forum discussion of accuracy, recoil, sway, etc... is the rampant use of the terms "100 meter shots" and "200 meter shots". Respectively, those distances are either halfway across Fallen Fighters square the long way, or all the way across the square diagonally. I'm not picking on your post at all--quite the contrary--I just want to emphasize the actual distances we're talking about.
Sure, you can make a hasty, badly-aimed shot after coming out of a full sprint and aiming at a target 100 meters away, but you won't connect with the target. In fact, while the sights do align quickly, even if you pause to take aim for several seconds, it's hard to get an accurate shot off at a target at that distance while standing and unsupported. Or maybe I'm just a terrible shot or something.
Secondly, the sights are not always perfectly aligned. Recoil from a recent shot results in the displacement of the front and rear sights, as does movement and sudden movements of the mouse. Are they a little too perfectly aligned for full total realism? No doubt. However, until FPS games are played with two mice, the feeling of aligning front and rear sights will never truly be approximated... I'd love it to, if someone can figure out how to use two mice and the keyboard at the same time.
For most weapons, though, I'd say that the speed of entering iron sights is about right. Yes, I realize that the German sprinting animation makes it improbable that that NCO could hoist his G41 to his shoulder so quickly, but since the Russians run with their weapons in both hands it's probably a necessary concession. For most weapons in RO2, I'd say the "speed to iron sights" is absolutely perfect. Pistols and SMGs are easy to maneuver, while AT rifles, MGs, rifles, and sniper rifles are not.
Red Orchestra 2 Beta Bolt action rifle pewpew - YouTube
This video presents a good case for the "It's fine" side of both the accuracy and time to iron sights discussions. Looking at that Soviet raise his rife, that time seems just about right to me. From a visual perspective, it's true that in some circumstances it looks faster than it should, but that's because the game has to assume that every time you raise your weapon it's to save you from a life or death situation, even if you're 100 meters away from the closest enemy. So sometimes when you're not in danger it looks like you're hyped up on caffeine, but at medium range it looks just fine. At any rate, I don't think the game currently distinguishes between going into iron sights right after a sprint when an enemy pops his head out of a window and when you're taking aim at 250 yards. Ostfront didn't either, for the record--and the sights were always perfectly aligned unless you were moving in that game.
Upvote
0
I think lining up the front post and the rear post should take a split-second or two longer, but as for hoisting the rifle/smg to your shoulder, I think it's about right. It's just funny to me that in-game a player can quickly put his weapon on his shoulder and the sites are lined up perfectly... site-picture is the hardest part of marksmanship and RO2 (and every other game) doesn't do this aspect justice!
Upvote
0
Why is the player character 5-10 times slower to shoulder & align his weapon when standing still? The sprinting player can shoulder & aim 5-10 times faster than the player that was standing (or crouching or whatever). Why this significant penalty for people who are not in the process of sprinting? That is what I am talking about. A HUUUGE discrepancy in speed that goes opposite to what is expected. Sprinting (with shift key) severely cuts down the time it takes to go to iron sights. Jogging/walking instead is a liability.
Anyone concered about this at all, try the following in-game by yourselves.
1. Sprint forward (W + Shift, or whatever you have).
2. Let go of the forward button, keep shift pressed, while simultaneously pressing your iron sight button. Do it a few times. If you time it wrong, the shouldering will be just 'normal' speed. But time it right, and it is light speed.
Compare it to:
1. Walk forward, or crouch walk forward. Or stand still. Or be behind cover. Whatever.
2. Press the iron sight button. Note the time it takes. Consistant and reasonable, no?
The sprint method on my computer, is so fast it barely registers on my eye - the gun is instantaneously placed in the middle, sights aligned. If I don't use the sprint key + movement, it is a fluid movement that is swift but reasonable.
Anyone concered about this at all, try the following in-game by yourselves.
1. Sprint forward (W + Shift, or whatever you have).
2. Let go of the forward button, keep shift pressed, while simultaneously pressing your iron sight button. Do it a few times. If you time it wrong, the shouldering will be just 'normal' speed. But time it right, and it is light speed.
Compare it to:
1. Walk forward, or crouch walk forward. Or stand still. Or be behind cover. Whatever.
2. Press the iron sight button. Note the time it takes. Consistant and reasonable, no?
The sprint method on my computer, is so fast it barely registers on my eye - the gun is instantaneously placed in the middle, sights aligned. If I don't use the sprint key + movement, it is a fluid movement that is swift but reasonable.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Actually I don't think there would be any big difference in the speed from keeping weapon down to ADS between holding it in both hands vs. holding the weapon in one hand.
When you hold the weapon with two hands you will be holding it side to side and will thus have to swing the weapon to the side to line up to get it to your shoulder and line up the sights.
When holding with one hand the weapon is already pointing in the right direction, but you also have to grab it with your second hand and stabilize against the shoulder and then line up the sights.
All in all I don't think there's much difference in speed between the two methods.
I do however think there's a big difference in speed between how fast one could do it in reality compared to the near instant speed in the game.
Yes, and they also modelled them so because it's most representative how a soldier actually does sprint with his weapon, you can't run very fast keeping your weapon on your shoulder.
Upvote
0
is it a prohibited talking about a game feature? I'm not whining about something, I just opened a poll about an argument i want to talk about
Upvote
0
is it a prohibited talking about a game feature? I'm not whining about something, I just opened a poll about an argument i want to talk about
No, but you'd think folks could keep the conversation about it to one or two threads. I'm having to keep 15 tabs open just to keep up.
Upvote
0
A few things:
My personal beef about any forum discussion of accuracy, recoil, sway, etc... is the rampant use of the terms "100 meter shots" and "200 meter shots". Respectively, those distances are either halfway across Fallen Fighters square the long way, or all the way across the square diagonally. I'm not picking on your post at all--quite the contrary--I just want to emphasize the actual distances we're talking about.
Sure, you can make a hasty, badly-aimed shot after coming out of a full sprint and aiming at a target 100 meters away, but you won't connect with the target. In fact, while the sights do align quickly, even if you pause to take aim for several seconds, it's hard to get an accurate shot off at a target at that distance while standing and unsupported. Or maybe I'm just a terrible shot or something.
Secondly, the sights are not always perfectly aligned. Recoil from a recent shot results in the displacement of the front and rear sights, as does movement and sudden movements of the mouse. Are they a little too perfectly aligned for full total realism? No doubt. However, until FPS games are played with two mice, the feeling of aligning front and rear sights will never truly be approximated... I'd love it to, if someone can figure out how to use two mice and the keyboard at the same time.
I'll start with the second point, and after going back to play with this in mind I do see how often they are 'out of line', however it rarely seems to effect my shots. Sights should still go out of alignment more than they do currently, and take longer if you're doing something very fast, such as coming to a stop after sprinting, or snapping left/right/about face. Smooth motions should keep the sights aligned.
And the first point is simple. This is Stalingrad, The vast majority of our shots should be doable without sights, and just aiming down the barrel. And at least a quarter are likely going to be close enough that we could have a decent change of hitting with our eyes closed and judging them based on sound alone.
Yes, the 100m shots are fairly rare, and they should be hard to pull off snap shots at those ranges. The 50m shots should be a little tricky, but completely possible to pull off half the time. The 10m shots should be basically impossible to miss unless you're doing something really funky. (Like sprinting full tilt away from them, then spinning around and going prone all in the same action.)
Upvote
0
The ironsight speed right now kills the freeaim system. What is the point of having a freeaim system when you can go into ironsights so fast you'll never have to use it? Fast ironsights can be a server side option to keep the twitch shooter fans satisfied.
Upvote
0
Hmmm... I disagree. Killed three German assault troopers yesterday with hipshots in the Propaganda House. One after another, they charged up the stairs to the second floor, spotted me, and went into iron sights, making them basically stationary targets. I, on the other hand, weaved back and forth, firing from the hip, killing all three in succession.
Hipshots give you surprisingly good accuracy at close range without sacrificing mobility. Before the patch, I was running around Zab's House with a drum-mag PPSh at my hip, spraying down every Mkb user because they were all trying to go into iron sights while I strafed around them firing at 900 rounds per minute. Hip shooting is definitely still useful.
And I might say that even in Ostfront, close quarters combat was still very much twitch-based. As long as you weren't inexperienced and didn't let the crazy SMG recoil get the better of you, whoever shot first generally won.
Upvote
0