Zoom

[Kleist]

Because being able to see any details of a person at 150m, in the open, is so un-authentic?

here is the problem.... people in RO2 know the killdistance. Without that knowlegde nobody would even care about it. Everybody know that we can see things much better than we can simulate it in any PC-games.

But if there would be no killdistance you would simple believe that you have make a real good shoot, because it was very hard to see the target - perfect!
In RO2 you would kill a enemy and you will look in the right corner of your screen and you will say: WTF only 150m! That

 

[Proud_God]

.. a real good shoot...

Sorry to derail the thread a bit, but I have to know. It keeps coming up. Is "a shoot" really a valid alternative for "a shot"?

 

[PhoenixDragon]

But if there would be no killdistance you would simple believe that you have make a real good shoot, because it was very hard to see the target - perfect!

You say that as if there is no other frame of reference to judge distance with. You can remove the kill-distance message, but we'll still know how far the shots are, and that they're way shorter-distance than they should be.

In RO2 you would kill a enemy and you will look in the right corner of your screen and you will say: WTF only 150m! That

 

[Kleist]

Less than the classic SMG? So... completely useless, and with a time limit. Why a time limit? Do your eyes get tired looking at someone 150m away? That's just arbitrary and unrealistic.

Whe you aim with IS and close one eye to be more concentrate for a better aim, you can

 

[PhoenixDragon]

Whe you aim with IS and close one eye to be more concentrate for a better aim, you can

 

[Proud_God]

Right now, every stationary person has the same maximum zoom level available to them. Only moving people lack the ability, and one of my suggestions was to decouple focus-zoom from sprint, so that even those moving people can use it. Ta-da, no more "unfair" problems.

Note that even when zoom is available while moving, stationary people gain more benefit from zoom than moving people. The imbalance becomes smaller, but does not disappear.

 

[PhoenixDragon]

Note that even when zoom is available while moving, stationary people gain more benefit from zoom than moving people. The imbalance becomes smaller, but does not disappear.

I'm curious how you figure that, other than the moving person obviously having to pay attention to where they're going (Which is a factor regardless of FoV).

 

[Proud_God]

I'm curious how you figure that, other than the moving person obviously having to pay attention to where they're going (Which is a factor regardless of FoV).

Lower fov is highly desorientating when you are moving. Even more so if you are trying to spot enemies in low fov while moving. Free look would help a bit though, but zoom will always favor the stationary guy more. Keep in mind I am not anti-zoom though, just raising awareness there are downsides to it.

 

[r5cya]

anyone else shut off the "sprint zoom" feature?

 

[Mekhazzio]

but zoom will always favor the stationary guy more.

I see zoom as helping people deal with static targets. If the zoom is low, then all the stationary guy needs to do is be at enough range that the only way you can spot people is by motion, and then they get uncontested shots. Nobody will be able to know he's there until he fires (assuming the muzzle flash replicates properly, which isn't always the case in RO2...) or until he moves as well. Zoom expands the range at which you can spot targets through silhouette/color recognition instead of just movement, so you can see the stationary guy from farther away.

It's kind of a moot argument, though, since there's an awful lot more things than just visuals that cause a prepared target to have an advantage.

 

[Proud_God]

anyone else shut off the "sprint zoom" feature?

From day 1.

Zoom expands the range at which you can spot targets through silhouette/color recognition instead of just movement, so you can see the stationary guy from farther away.

Fair point, but I still feel largely the same about my post above.

 

[PhoenixDragon]

Lower fov is highly desorientating when you are moving. Even more so if you are trying to spot enemies in low fov while moving.

Sure, but I don't think that's a big deal. If you're doing any serious amount of running, you probably should have looked to make sure the area was clear before running out there. Though I should also point out that ballistics is going to be a factor here; having zoom increasing engagement ranges means ballistics are going to matter even more. While I said that doubling zoom will double engagement ranges, it won't really double accuracy. Consider that right now, shooting a target running perpendicular to your line of fire at 200m is a lot more than twice as hard as hitting a similar target at only 100m. Not only do you have to be more precise, you have to be more precise while giving double the lead.

I think it would even out, most likely, especially with the attackers being able to spot and engage the stationary defenders at increased range, as well.

 

[bangalores]

Funny noone complains about the zoom in ArmA...

 

[Kleist]

anyone else shut off the "sprint zoom" feature?

Yes i disable the "sprint-zoom" so i have no shift-zoom for my MGs, and it works very good. Sometimes it

 

[ro_sauce]

it IS a server settings, you can disable weapon focus key.
many servers choose not to disable it.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

?

You said something funny and that was the resulting Ba dum bum Tchh drum roll

 

[akb]

Guys just face it I'm right and you're wrong Seriously though, no zoom and half 90% of players probably couldn't hit a single target over 50m. Now you guys see why some players beg for zoom not because it's realistic(because for gameplay sake it obviously isn't) but because they need it. I think we should all just have a 300% increase in zoom just to make the game easier. That might be more realistic. How does that sound to you Phoenix?

 

[PhoenixDragon]

How does that sound to you Phoenix?

It sounds like you're exaggerating things to ridiculous proportions in an effort to discredit opposing viewpoints. Generally, when people have to exaggerate such things to support their argument, much less mixing in implied insults in order to discredit an opponent, it's because the facts are not on their side.

It's already been pointed out several times that people in real-life can see details much further than we currently can in-game, even with zoom. If you want to try arguing realism, try starting with something that addresses that fact.

 

[TraXx]

no zoom, no kill-shot distance reporting, no kdr -- just point totals.

Or at least if you're going to add kdr, show what roles each teammate is in -- just like ROOST. If I see someone leading with 40+ kills more than everyone else and he is a commander calling in tons of arty or an MG camped up, it figures. It also allows you to see the guy with a large number of kills that is just using a bolt -- he's your man.

All the other stats reporting just exacerbates the human compulsion to set records for retardation.

 

[akb]

It sounds like you're exaggerating things to ridiculous proportions in an effort to discredit opposing viewpoints. Generally, when people have to exaggerate such things to support their argument, much less mixing in implied insults in order to discredit an opponent, it's because the facts are not on their side.

I'm sorry I was just screwing around with you with what I said last.

It's already been pointed out several times that people in real-life can see details much further than we currently can in-game, even with zoom. If you want to try arguing realism, try starting with something that addresses that fact.

Just re-read my opening statement to this whole thread and then don't question me again about that. My addressed it there and it's been addressed by others too. Game play is more important than zoom in this game especially since the "realistic amout of zoom isn't even achieved".

Traxx I couldn't agree more. This game desprately needs that. You can't even tell a good play anymore by just looking at the scoreboard. Combining all the points and forgetting the rest is a good idea but not with the current score system. The point scale is far to large and we wouldn't have a clue how many guys we actually kill. As far as showing the roles that others choose on your team well that's a +1