guns a bit too accurate

  • 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/

kartasik

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jun 1, 2006
64
0
0
I have often taken out a machinegunner at 60+ meters with a submachine gun (not usually all that accurate in real life) or even with a pistol! Generally in real war even rifle men had a hard time doing that, unless they were [SIZE=-1]Sergeant [/SIZE]York. The trouble is the color, while nice, is not true to life and the cartoon nature of the picture makes spotting a man hunkering down behind a rock or in a window too easy. Second the real field of fire is somewhat abbreviated since only a fixed amount of pixels exist in any scene - where as in a real visual scene you'd need more like several billion pixels to build a wide scene.

One way around this is to automatically reduce the aiming ability of small arms players beyond 25 meters. Not sure if this is done now, but the way I hit guys at great distances makes me think it is not. A scaled random factor should be introduced the further you aim. Because it is so easy to shoot snipers and machinegunners at great range it makes defensive points almost worthless, and makes a sniper little better than a submachinegunner. I know the tanks have some trajectory built in to their shells, but I haven't noticed all that much in hand guns. all I know is I can too easily kill snipers behind good defenses at long range. I used to do a lot of hunting and target shooting and in Red Orc I find I can hit small targets just too easily.

It would greatly improve the battle realism if this problem was fixed.

I should point out that in real shooting your gun's accuracy changes because of the build up of burnt powder, barrel heating, wind, and the fact that no two bullets are 100% identicle*. The further your target is the more these factors show effect.

*note: while some brands of modern civilian manufactured ammo is of good quality - in WWII both the Germans and Russians had many arms factories churning out ammo. A soldier would often have ammo made at several locations, where at times corners were being cut in production. Just like cars, quality would depend on what day of the week your ammo was made Monday or Thursday, and what shift and whether it was slave labor or free. The upshot is that ammo was less likely to be the same quality as high priced ammo used today.
 
Last edited:

kartasik

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jun 1, 2006
64
0
0
effect of real machinegunner - Beast of Omaha

effect of real machinegunner - Beast of Omaha

"He fired for nine hours, using up all the 12,000 machine-gun rounds. The sea turned red with the blood from the bodies. When he had no more bullets for the machine-gun, he started firing on the US soldiers with his rifle, firing off another 400 rifle rounds at the terrified GIs.


A leading German historical expert of the Second World War, Helmut Konrad Freiherr von Keusgen, believes Severloh may have accounted for 3,000 of the 4,200 American casualties on the day."

quoted from: http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=1166&id=643752004

no doubt this gunner had been shot at by hundreds of Americans during that time who were using rifles. In Red Orc such a feat would be utterly impossible! I can take out a machinegunner at range with just a pistol!
 

Bat Guano

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 14, 2006
203
0
0
I've done a lot of shooting with old bolt action military rifles, and I don't think the accuracy of the guns is a problem; it's that the shooter is too accurate from a prone or rested position. The "sway" or wobble when shooting from the standing or crouching position feels about right to me, but the I think the sights are just too steady when prone or rested. As it is now, the sights remain absolutely steady. There should still be a slight bit of wobble, but it should not get steadily worse as it does when you're shooting unsupported.

A big part of shooting accurately in real life is holding your rifle as steady as you can but understanding that you will never be able to keep it perfectly, absolutely still - unless you're shooting from a well prepared position like a benchrest or - and controlling your breathing and trigger pull so that the oscillations of your sights are as small and predictable as possible in the fractions of a second preceding the shot.

I think the weapons - the rifles at least - should not have their accuracy decreased, but adding a very slight bit of wobble to the sights when prone or rested (which would only be a factor when shooting at long range or at small targets like a head) would better reflect reality. Timing your shot with the wobble would be a skill that could be acquired - the bullet would still go where the sights were when the gun went off.

Most rifles of this era, using surplus military ammunition, can be relied upon to put all their shots (at least until the barrel starts to get really hot) within a 3-4 inch group at 100 yards from a steady, rested position. That means the bullet will hit within 1-5 to 2 inches of the aiming point at that range. Some will do better - I have a 8mm Mauser long rifle (Czech 98/22) made in the 1920s and showing signs of extensive use that will easily shoot 1.5 inch 5-shot groups at 100 yards with 1942 dated Turk ammo, and a 1901-dated Mosin M91 that shoots nearly as well with old Warsaw Pact surplus ammo - and some, like some wartime 91/30s with loose bores - don't shoot quite so well, although 3-4 inches is a pretty reliable expection. It takes quite a lot of shooting for accuracy to be significantly affected. Unless you're talking about old blackpowder arms, fouling isn't really going to be much of a factor.
 

Mogget

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 29, 2006
100
0
0
"He fired for nine hours, using up all the 12,000 machine-gun rounds. The sea turned red with the blood from the bodies. When he had no more bullets for the machine-gun, he started firing on the US soldiers with his rifle, firing off another 400 rifle rounds at the terrified GIs.


A leading German historical expert of the Second World War, Helmut Konrad Freiherr von Keusgen, believes Severloh may have accounted for 3,000 of the 4,200 American casualties on the day."

quoted from: http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=1166&id=643752004

no doubt this gunner had been shot at by hundreds of Americans during that time who were using rifles. In Red Orc such a feat would be utterly impossible! I can take out a machinegunner at range with just a pistol!
Well, he was in a hardened concrete bunker (Surely) and they were on a beach. Even so, yeah it's a good example.


I do agree with you to a certain extent... Some guns are too accurate, and MGs are not that scary. (A good marksman in this game knows he can usually pop out of a position and get a single rifle shot on a machine gunner, unless the gunner is pretty good. I know I've done it many times, and it annoys me when I am MGing)

However, like I usually say... RO is a game. You have to sacrifice some realistic features for gameplay issues. I think most of your ideas are those. (Though some are right imo) Things like alternating bullet quality is going a wee bit too far if you ask me. :)
 

jedinstven-o crni Wuk

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 3, 2006
937
0
0
germany
"He fired for nine hours, using up all the 12,000 machine-gun rounds. The sea turned red with the blood from the bodies. When he had no more bullets for the machine-gun, he started firing on the US soldiers with his rifle, firing off another 400 rifle rounds at the terrified GIs.


A leading German historical expert of the Second World War, Helmut Konrad Freiherr von Keusgen, believes Severloh may have accounted for 3,000 of the 4,200 American casualties on the day."

quoted from: http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=1166&id=643752004

no doubt this gunner had been shot at by hundreds of Americans during that time who were using rifles. In Red Orc such a feat would be utterly impossible! I can take out a machinegunner at range with just a pistol!

i would not take that as source ...

cause

1. he had a MG, it was designed for to "wave" down men that just straight attack your position.

2. He was in a very well dug position (in german called "Wiederstandsnest"). ["Severloh was safe in an almost impregnable concrete bunker"]

3. the soldiers attacked in groups from the landings craft with near NO cover between them and the mgs.

4. most of the soldiers have been tired, worn out, anxious, sick from the driving ... AND under fire, so not a good situation to fire back even for advananced marksmen i would say

The game is not perfect, but way better then before. Still things that can be improved, sure. But at least the mgs do work. OF course not realistic, but well ... at some point, and some things cant be modeled.
 

kartasik

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jun 1, 2006
64
0
0
People are ignoring the facts

People are ignoring the facts

I killed mg men IN THE HARDENED BUNKERS OVER LOOKING THE BEACH IN BEACH ASSAULT MAP WHILE USING AN SMG - from the sand dunes. Read that again. I have shot them through windows in the Stalingrad map while I was behind the burnt out tank (you should know where that is and that it is about 75 meters from the windows in question) again I was using an SMG.

If you guys are correct then the THOUSANDS of US GIs trapped on Omaha beach with M1 semi-auto rifles should have nailed the German mentioned in the article. THEY DID NOT.

So - yes, RO would play more realisatic if this kind of shooting was revamped toward realism. It would make Mgs more deadly, and closer to their real value.

http://www.redorchestragame.com/forum/member.php?u=2487 Yes wobble would help, but the real problem is the number of pixels in view. It is likely RO is like other games and uses a pixel map to determine aiming. But in real life the world is a billion times more complicated and a tiny bullet has a thousands more places to miss in any viewed shot. I don't even have to aim carefully to hit a head in the forward trench when I am in the rear bunkers in Beach Assault. That is easily 150 meters or about 450 feet! So only a randomizer at distance will solve the issue. As it is the game plays like we are all top notch shots.
 
Last edited:

AKA

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jun 1, 2006
80
0
0
The problem is the game cannot replicate peoples every movement. As anyone who has fired a gun knows, its nothing like using a mouse.

As someone said who i dont remember, it should feel like you lost because you did badly, not because the game is set against you.

If you made guns as accurate as most people are accurate with guns, then you would have to make so many things out of the players control, as you cannot regulate your breathing and every muscle in your arm with a keyboard in mouse.

In short, wait for neural interfaces if you want a fully realistic experience.
 

Quenaelin

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 3, 2006
242
0
0
Finland
All these things are easily fixed. Add more wobbling to aiming when prone and add breathing control. You could hold your breath for a while with second mouse button when aiming.
 

BeserkWraithlor

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 3, 2006
461
0
0
Arizona
I killed mg men IN THE HARDENED BUNKERS OVER LOOKING THE BEACH IN BEACH ASSAULT MAP WHILE USING AN SMG - from the sand dunes. Read that again. I have shot them through windows in the Stalingrad map while I was behind the burnt out tank (you should know where that is and that it is about 75 meters from the windows in question) again I was using an SMG.

I shot a Sniper +100 meters away. WITH A PPSH! Thats right, that little russian Smg can take out snipers hundreds of meters away.

This has to be fixed. There is no way you can easily hit a person +100 meters away with an SMG.
 

Denwad

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
333
0
0
32
Eglin AFB
this is hilarious

one second everyone whines about the guns ( SMGs seem to be the main focus in this debate ) being not accurate enough

and now you're whining about them being too accurate?

think about it for a few minutes, how often do these occurances actually occur? are you sure about the ranges?

sure you may think killing a sniper at 100m is an amazing shot ( when in actuality, he probably wasn't even 100m away ) how many times is the situation reversed?

basing your suggestions on things that make you angry once, is a bad idea

{EDIT}

the game will never be as WW2 was, it will never be as bloody as that war was. However WW2 was never fought 24/7 over the same objective with the same respawning people, over and over again.
 

BeserkWraithlor

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 3, 2006
461
0
0
Arizona
To be honest with you, my aim is horrible with SMG, I can't hit a barn 20 meters away, so you are wondering how I sniped a guy with an SMG +100 meters away. RECOIL BUG! Thats what happened. It transforms SMGs in machineguns.
 

[CiA]Stiletto

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 22, 2005
845
1
0
I have to wonder, of the people sitting here complaining about guns being too accurate, how many of you have ever actually fired one?

I would like for the SMGs to better reflect the odd behavior of open-bolt fire, but then it would get to be really framerate dependent, because for the fraction of a second between sear release and firing pin impact, all that stuff going forward drives the receiver rearward, causing recoil (sort of) to start before the gun actually fires. But this is probably too arcane for most random players to get/know about, and the current recoil modeling makes extended bursts a little harder to control than they really need to be. *shrug*

Checks and balances. Meantime, I think this thread is silly.
 

SheepDip

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
3,626
495
0
39
The Elitist Prick Club
You're going to have to accept the fact that on beach assaults the soldiers on the beach were really under it.

Large amounts of MG and mortar fire shot them down indiscriminately, most of their weaponry wasn't ready to use. To be quite honest, no one is going to have the composure to stand there and take pot shots at a pillbox whilst this was happening.

This is not the same as a 1 MG vs 1 Rifleman situation. To be honest it IS annoying when MG's are constantly being shot by riflemen, but if your position is good enough, you'll find yourself practically untouchable (unless someone uses the lean exploit to get you)

And also, SMG's are accurate to around 50m, but there effective range is higher than that, odds are if you have the weapon rested on something and you fire off enough rounds at a target one of them is bound to hit.
 

elak

FNG / Fresh Meat
Feb 13, 2006
113
5
0
You're going to have to accept the fact that on beach assaults the soldiers on the beach were really under it.

Large amounts of MG and mortar fire shot them down indiscriminately, most of their weaponry wasn't ready to use. To be quite honest, no one is going to have the composure to stand there and take pot shots at a pillbox whilst this was happening.

This is not the same as a 1 MG vs 1 Rifleman situation. To be honest it IS annoying when MG's are constantly being shot by riflemen, but if your position is good enough, you'll find yourself practically untouchable (unless someone uses the lean exploit to get you)

And also, SMG's are accurate to around 50m, but there effective range is higher than that, odds are if you have the weapon rested on something and you fire off enough rounds at a target one of them is bound to hit.

What he said.
 

jedinstven-o crni Wuk

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 3, 2006
937
0
0
germany
To be honest with you, my aim is horrible with SMG, I can't hit a barn 20 meters away, so you are wondering how I sniped a guy with an SMG +100 meters away. RECOIL BUG! Thats what happened. It transforms SMGs in machineguns.

eh ? sorry if i dont get you ... but if you managed to kill them, cause of a "known" bug, then i dont see why its the problem of the other weapoins. I usualy agree when someone says that the mgs are to easy to kill ... but i get killed by people with MPs on distance very very rarely, and usualy i NEVER have any fear from them as sniper/mg guner, but im sure it "can" happen that you get hit by a bullet if they spray in your direction i mean com on, they are still working guns ... particularly, when they have the luck to get a bug, but as said, for that you cant blame the weapons, just hope that it will be solved in the future.

and yes i have read your post, i just compared the "omaha beach" situation, with a "usual" other war situation. As said, its somewhat different if i have a smal Foxhole where my MG is deployed on mud, or if i use a trypod in a fixed concrete bunker where is no cover for your enemy. Just from realism. Mgs have been some of the most feared weapons, but they are no atom-bomb.
 

Nifel

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 5, 2006
304
0
0
43
Norway
this is hilarious

one second everyone whines about the guns ( SMGs seem to be the main focus in this debate ) being not accurate enough

and now you're whining about them being too accurate?

think about it for a few minutes, how often do these occurances actually occur? are you sure about the ranges?

sure you may think killing a sniper at 100m is an amazing shot ( when in actuality, he probably wasn't even 100m away ) how many times is the situation reversed?

basing your suggestions on things that make you angry once, is a bad idea

{EDIT}

the game will never be as WW2 was, it will never be as bloody as that war was. However WW2 was never fought 24/7 over the same objective with the same respawning people, over and over again.
What he said.

Ranges are often less than you think in RO.

Aaaaand... killing a guy from 75+ metres isn't a big deal unless you can replicate the shot. With a PPSh that has an effective range of 100+ metres in auto mode, mind. And hit with your first burst at least 3 times out of 10? If you can do that, then let us know.
 

Quenaelin

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 3, 2006
242
0
0
Finland
I shot a Sniper +100 meters away. WITH A PPSH! Thats right, that little russian Smg can take out snipers hundreds of meters away.

This has to be fixed. There is no way you can easily hit a person +100 meters away with an SMG.

Have you fired real PPSh or similar weapon? This was only lucky shot, becouse even with recoil bug you get huge spread, but with recoil bug game feels more realistic when recoil bug is active, you actually get to feel some accuracy where from PPSh was famous. You may not know it, but real PPSh-41 was actually quite accurate and without huge recoil unlike in RO. PPSh-41 was quite recoilless weapon, more recoilless than many other SMGs and with good accuracy. Effective range is 200m. Even german soldiers preferred this weapon and used captured PPSh's when ever they could get one, germans also designed own converted 32 round MP40 clips for them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PPSh-41

I think all is needed is more wobble from breathing and some way to control it.
 

Nifel

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 5, 2006
304
0
0
43
Norway
Have you fired real PPSh or similar weapon? This was only lucky shot, becouse even with recoil bug you get huge spread, but with recoil bug game feels more realistic when recoil bug is active, you actually get to feel some accuracy where from PPSh was famous. You may not know it, but real PPSh-41 was actually quite accurate and without huge recoil unlike in RO. PPSh-41 was quite recoilless weapon, more recoilless than many other SMGs and with good accuracy. Effective range is 200m. Even german soldiers preferred this weapon and used captured PPSh's when ever they could get one, germans also designed own converted 32 round MP40 clips for them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PPSh-41

I think all is needed is more wobble from breathing and some way to control it.
What Quenalin said.

The PPSh had a max effective range of 200 metres, albeit that was in semi-auto mode. In full auto it was 100 metres. What does this show? It was accurate. Why was it accurate? Because the 7.62mm bullets where more pointed and longer than a regular 9mm pistol bullet. Same ammo the TT-33 pistol uses.

Good accuracy, though less stopping power than a 9mm round due to its smaller diameter and its shape which goes through clothes, skin and muscle more easily and as such doesn't to as much tissue damage. The round is even penetrating level IIIA-body armour, which normally stops 9mm FMJ rounds fired from an SMG and .44 magnum rounds.
 
Last edited: