Jump to content
Kendo

Weapon Accuracy and good shooting technique

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Kendo said:

Hey @Skul

 

I get what you're saying mate, and I follow your logic.  I'll explain why I think its a bit more nuanced than that in a sec. 

 

For now, lets try and keep things civil here lads.  I welcome opinions, suggestions and theories, that's cool.  Its why I made this thread.  I'm over here in an armchair with a class of whisky and a pipe if people want to put down their pitchforks and come join me :)

 

As for your point Skul: Yes, it will increase the skillgap.  And, yes, this is good.  I'm not suggesting some kind of simulator level of complexity for the sole purpose of obfuscating the dynamics for new players, but you're correct in that veterans will have a naturally better handle on things, and they will do relatively better.

 

The reason its a little more interesting than that is that not every firefight is a 1v1 type situation.  As you say, you can run across roads, or try and take cover behind a wall etc.  If aiming becomes harder for everyone then these situations, while relatively easier for the veteran, are still by definition harder for those same players than they are now.  This will often lead to those veteran players missing shots on those people ducking behind cover etc that they probably wouldn't miss now.  

 

To be clear, in 1v1 situations at long range, you are absolutely correct.  But, for many other situations, like close quarters, the expected effect on gameplay of this mechanic would be limited.  I daresay beneficial, even, to those "noobs" that think they can run across a guarded street that, as things are now, would have them get torn to shreds.  Perhaps they make it across if aiming well takes longer for everyone?

 

What you have to remember is that there is a difference between number of kills and relative number of kills.  Take this graph, where bad players are in red, and good players in green.

 

F4rZHop.jpg

 

This is just pulled out my ass, but you can see "bad players" may suffer a 50% kill difference, and good players only 20%.  Furthermore, if we just assume my numbers are representative for the sake of argument, then good players go from being roughly 5 times better to about 8 times better.  Be that as it may, the total number of kills could still decrease.  That's roughly what the intention behind this is, anyway.  Realistically, who the hell knows what the effect will really be?  Its just to try and make the time to kill a little higher at range.  That's all.

 

So, in a way, you're both totally right.  Sorry for using a graph.  I'm a nerd.

Please for the sake of clarity could you summarize your actual point and solution in one simple sentence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too have noticed some discrepancies with aiming. I chose to rectify them myself, however.
wko200.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, RoBroCop said:

I too have noticed some discrepancies with aiming. I chose to rectify them myself, however.
wko200.png

 

Hahaha.  Proof that you don't need good sight alignment in close quarters situations xD 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you should read the forum rules again @Skul. Your aggressive tone and your assumptions towards me were completely unnecessary.

If you need more time to aim, at least the people with a slower reaction time are going to profit.

Right now its just how quick you can aim towards the head. The skill lies in reaction time and how good you can aim as fast as possible. No need for tactics.. That for me makes very terrible gameplay. If it doesnt for you, im fine with that, people like different things.

 

I prefer slower gameplay where the skill lies in your strategy and tactics rather than how twitchy you are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

okey dokey, we seem to be at Defcon 1 here lads -- let's not do anything stupid now.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually a good discussion, I'm all up for these kinds of mechanics making shooting and killing harder, adding more depth to gunplay and such. I'd argue that adding them, when done right, would 1. increase the skill ceiling and skill disparity between average and decent, good and great players. 2. At the same time when you make it harder to kill you'll lower the overall amount of kills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Kendo said:

This is just pulled out my ass, but you can see "bad players" may suffer a 50% kill difference, and good players only 20%.

Yes, I understand all of that. But people who get most kills are not just people who 'shoot best'. They're usually best thinkers, not shooters. It allows these best thinkers to die 1-3 times per round. And now it will be even lower. That's why I think if OWI will make more complicated shooting skill-based mechanics, number of kills of best players will only increase: they will start dying less and as a result they will kill more. Yes, they will not kill that one guy behind the border crouching and some other guy somewhere there, but they will not die in many other situations, instead, they're going to make more kills.

 

2 hours ago, Elirah said:

Maybe you should read the forum rules again @Skul. Your aggressive tone and your assumptions towards me were completely unnecessary.

No aggressive tone. You've only read it aggressively in your mind. I can't do anything about it.

 

2 hours ago, Elirah said:

If you need more time to aim, at least the people with a slower reaction time are going to profit.

Why would you make people with slow reaction profit? Let's then change football rules, so cripples which can't walk, can benefit somehow against best healthy football players in the world. Let's allow cripples without legs to play using their hands. Doesn't really make any sense to do this kind of things to balance cripples and best players.

 

2 hours ago, Elirah said:

Right now its just how quick you can aim towards the head.

Every situation is different. You can nullify it if you position yourself properly, so most of the time enemies will not be able to effectively shoot back at you. That's your tactics. How do you do it? Every situation is different, that's where you apply your strategy and tactics knowledge to be in a better position than enemy.

 

2 hours ago, Elirah said:

The skill lies in reaction time and how good you can aim as fast as possible. No need for tactics.. That for me makes very terrible gameplay. If it doesnt for you, im fine with that, people like different things.

Are you sure you playing Squad man? Squad is like a Starcraft 2 in terms of strategy and tactics. In wFOX we literally spend 10-30 man-hours on developing strategy and tactics for our every match.

 

2 hours ago, Elirah said:

I prefer slower gameplay where the skill lies in your strategy and tactics rather than how twitchy you are.

Then you're playing the wrong game. Then you need to play step-by-step strategy games, like Monopoly, for example. There's nothing wrong with Monopoly, it's just there are no step-by-step first person shooters yet.

2 hours ago, Elirah said:

The skill lies in reaction time and how good you can aim as fast as possible. No need for tactics..

Squad is already strategy- and tactics-based game more than anything else nowadays: Battlefield, Arma, CS, CoD, etc. It doesn't matter how twitchy you are if you are fighting against enemy FOB with 2000 points on it, when players in opponent team use ladders and sandbags to peek over the wall and grenade you all over the place. It doesn't matter how twitchy you are if opponent team is playing a proper-proper Squad and your team think they can just overshoot or prone-spam enemy team without FOBs, rallies, repair stations, ammo crates, etc.

 

2 hours ago, Elirah said:

No need for tactics.. That for me makes very terrible gameplay. If it doesnt for you, im fine with that, people like different things.

You  clearly do not understand Squad at all. I spend hours and hours on gametactic.org with my friends developing strategy and tactics for our upcoming matches.

 

It's just most people don't even understand what actually strategy and tactics mean.

Edited by Skul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Skul said:

Yes, I understand all of that. But people who get most kills are not just people who 'shoot best'. They're usually best thinkers, not shooters. It allows these best thinkers to die 1-3 times per round. And now it will be even lower. That's why I think if OWI will make more complicated shooting skill-based mechanics, number of kills of best players will only increase: they will start dying less and as a result they will kill more. Yes, they will not kill that one guy behind the border crouching and some other guy somewhere there, but they will not die in many other situations, instead, they're going to make more kills.

 

So I don't think that quite adds up in my head.  The way I see it, dying less does not necessarily equate to higher kills, other than in 1v1 situations (which is why I referenced that).  In fact, the pressures that the game applies (like running out of ammo/nades/LAT, having lower health and less visibility from surviving encounters, needing to wait and repair/rearm your vehicle more instead of grabbing a new one when spawning from main etc) make getting successive kills without deaths slower, if anything.  

 

Anyway, at this stage I think we're just debating semantics.  We pretty much agree on the broad strokes I reckon.  Who knows: maybe more kills, maybe less.  Maybe the change is so minimal that it barely affects overall kills at all.

 

If I may, I think you and Elirah actually agree on most things as well, its just a case of having different definitions for things like "skill" -- you might just be talking past each other.  I'm pretty sure you both want to eliminate the kind of BS snapshotting that's a bit of a hallmark of current firefights.  I'm also pretty sure you both want to keep Squad as the sophisticated tactical shooter that it is, and see that it deserves a shooting mechanic to match.  

 

As for the football analogy you made about benefiting people with slower reactions, I think you said it best:

1 hour ago, Skul said:

Every situation is different

Sometimes, I'm sure that less cunning players will get away without dying where they would most likely die now.  Then again, I'm also sure that sometimes we could see veteran players come out on top in situations that, right now, reward them with spam fire and dropshotting (but that's a different matter).  Sometimes pros benefit; sometimes newer players.

 

You say this kind of thing can be nullified, and I'm sure it can, but I think we'd all like to see strategy based around nullifying enemy strategy instead of based around nullifying enemy lazerbeams;  Strategy, even, based around how best and most efficiently handle your own weapon system when push comes to shove, rather than strategy based around how to reduce the chance of being instantly headshotted(/filled with 18 holes in a 1 inch group in the chest).  I know its a subtle distinction, but I think its there.

 

Consider being able to leave a marksman or LMG gunner in a great spot for an ambush/overwatch, for example, without fear that "its all for naught because he's going to get slotted instantly anyway".  That kind of thing, you know?  The mechanics right now close more doors than they open.

 

I think this is the beauty of it, to be honest -- it really opens up the game to explore what makes it unique on the FPS scene: the strategy.  Something I'm sure we'd all like the game to prioritise as it matures.  A shooting mechanic to match the rest of the game and provide yet another interesting way through which teams can exert their superiority and planning.  I think, phrased like that, he might not actually be too far off your position?

 

Either that or I'm a complete spoon and just don't catch your drift at all.  

 

Edit: I also have to point out, yet again, that the changes I suggest are, like, really, really, really minimal.  This isn't going to make Squad the no.1 most played FPS in the world, nor will it completely change the gameplay or mess anything up.  Just a tincy-wincy tweak is all.

Edited by Kendo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Kendo said:

If I may, I think you and Elirah actually agree on most things as well, its just a case of having different definitions for things like "skill" -- you might just be talking past each other.  I'm pretty sure you both want to eliminate the kind of BS snapshotting that's a bit of a hallmark of current firefights.  I'm also pretty sure you both want to keep Squad as the sophisticated tactical shooter that it is, and see that it deserves a shooting mechanic to match.  

 

I think you might be right. Thats why the discussion between Skul and me is pointless.

However, the football analogy just doesnt match in my pov.

For me its turning checkers into chess. If that analogy makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back in the day we were just glad to have Counterstrike, Delta Force, Quake & Unreal. Nobody on what few forums that existed nerded out in circular logic arguments about the correlation between the UI of pixelated FPS simulations vs. the viseral real world. You guys should simply be thankful how far the games have advanced and simply play more. Better yet, make your own FPS if you think you can do it better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Zylfrax791 said:

Back in the day we were just glad to have Counterstrike, Delta Force, Quake & Unreal. Nobody on what few forums that existed nerded out in circular logic arguments about the correlation between the UI of pixelated FPS simulations vs. the viseral real world. You guys should simply be thankful how far the games have advanced and simply play more. Better yet, make your own FPS if you think you can do it better.

+1 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing to get upset about mate, its just a post with a suggestion.  Some people seem to like the idea; others not.  That's cool.  The thread is just a discussion exploring the idea, not a personal attack on you :) .  Its clear you don't like the idea, and I'm not forcing you to. Sorry if you felt that way.  

 

Its an Alpha after all, and we're all here to help the game progress if we can.  I think that's all people were attempting to do. 

 

I think back in the day it was also easier to have an honest discussion about something too :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kendo: I like your idea. It seems simple enough to implement and would encourage a thoughtful gameplay over a twitch-like one. We have enough FPS games of the latter sort as it is. I don't think we need to content ourselves with the status quo, as some people on here suggest. Let's try to have Squad improve on the current, simple gunplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be a nice idea, and I like Kendo's proposed mechanic.
However, as discussed above, it will make the game even harder and more frustrating for new players. Shooting in Squad is quite challenging as-is (Squad is hands down the hardest game to be an effective rifleman in IMO, and I've been playing semi-realistic FPS for ages). And no, I do not think that devs should make the game harder and harder to master so that only hardcore nolifers can play it.
 

So I guess my 2c is that the proposed changes would be nice, but should be kept to a minimum (0.3s "sight sway" after each shot, etc), so as not to make shooting a complete... crapshoot for anyone new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 for kendo's idea, it'll give reflector sights more value to boot.

Edited by DiesALot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have the developers ever given an indication if they are open to damage drop off for some weapons at long range?

 

Like some PR veterans, I miss the long range firefights that could develop and last for a long period of time. The cone of fire mechanic was clumsy for sure, but I did like how it would make you consider before opening fire. Sometimes it was worthwhile to hold fire on someone you can see because of the general inaccuracy of the rifles. This really made the rifleman infantry's role that of capture and hold GROUND. That said it was of course frustrating at times to have bullets come out of your gun that sometimes created a cartoon style outline of the enemy you had it sighted on without actually hitting anything. Currently I feel Squad is too far in the opposite direction. In Squad I feel like any engagement close or far ends very swiftly due to the high accuracy of the weapons. Long range pixel sniping where both one or the other side is killed off rapidly just doesn't feel as good to me. It also limits any real use or advantage of the squad machine guns.

 

So we don't want to drop actual accuracy or increase sway to some crazy amount, but at the same time I think the game should make sniping 4 pixels with a standard rifle (no zoom optics) more difficult. I think the answer is to have damage drop off for non marksman rifles at long range.

Edited by Beans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/30/2017 at 8:12 AM, Zylfrax791 said:

"Unhelpful" is writing several multiple paragraph essays of vague adjective laden pontifications complete with illustrations about a non existent problem qualified by the fact that an old guy can get decent kills and a young clan guy named Scarface can get 70+ kills. 

 

First off, in your writings you're missing your thesis statement and then secondly you don't finish with a solution/conclusion.

 

So yeah, if you were really into all the high level logic specific to the whole dynamic of the FPS model and all of it's inherent processes related to target acquisition you'd instead be reprogramming the blueprint inside the SDK. Instead you're expecting someone else to do it.

You do this so much dude. You find a post and latch on to it spouting how you think it's pointless because the game is fine the way it is. You think the shooting mechanics are good the way they are? Great. That's your opinion, but that doesn't mean the rest of the payer base shares those thoughts.

 

I'm not saying you shouldn't speak up if you don't like someone's ideas, but the way you do it, basically shaming various posters for voicing their ideas. You act like your "2000 hours" makes you more entitled to say what's good for squad and what isn't, when that simply just isn't the case. 

 

You need to find the line between voicing your own opinion and putting down others because of theirs; saying the op is unhelpful is subject to your own belief because I thought it was very helpful in expanding ways to make the game more enjoyable for me personally. Sure There's a possibility the aiming and alignment mechanics will stay the same, but that's no reason to stop brainstorming and being public with your ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jellyswim said:

You need to find the line between voicing your own opinion and putting down others because of theirs; saying the op is unhelpful is subject to your own belief because I thought it was very helpful in expanding ways to make the game more enjoyable for me personally. Sure There's a possibility the aiming and alignment mechanics will stay the same, but that's no reason to stop brainstorming and being public with your ideas.

Concurred. It's not about what we say, it's often about how we say it :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Beans said:

Have the developers ever given an indication if they are open to damage drop off for some weapons at long range?

 

Like some PR veterans, I miss the long range firefights that could develop and last for a long period of time. The cone of fire mechanic was clumsy for sure, but I did like how it would make you consider before opening fire. Sometimes it was worthwhile to hold fire on someone you can see because of the general inaccuracy of the rifles. This really made the rifleman infantry's role that of capture and hold GROUND. That said it was of course frustrating at times to have bullets come out of your gun that sometimes created a cartoon style outline of the enemy you had it sighted on without actually hitting anything. Currently I feel Squad is too far in the opposite direction. In Squad I feel like any engagement close or far ends very swiftly due to the high accuracy of the weapons. Long range pixel sniping where both one or the other side is killed off rapidly just doesn't feel as good to me. It also limits any real use or advantage of the squad machine guns.

 

So we don't want to drop actual accuracy or increase sway to some crazy amount, but at the same time I think the game should make sniping 4 pixels with a standard rifle (no zoom optics) more difficult. I think the answer is to have damage drop off for non marksman rifles at long range.

I agree with the general idea but I don't think increasing damage dropoff would do much, all the close to medium fights would still be over before you blink. We need more new features like the one OP proposes first instead of increasing randomness or tweaking arbitrary values.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Beans said:

Have the developers ever given an indication if they are open to damage drop off for some weapons at long range?

Believe it or not, there already is damage dropoff at range.  The ballistic of the weapons are unlikely to stay the same, so we'll see how it matures, but it is already in the game.

 

Trouble is, needing 3 bullets to kill instead of 2 doesn't really matter if the shooter can put them all on target in rapid fire so easily.  You buy, what, an extra 0.2 seconds of life?  I feel like that's a dark path to go down and we may well end up with Gears of War / Halo bullet sponges in order to protract the fight time that way.  It may be one piece of the puzzle, but I don't think its the way to go first and foremost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all swell and great people are into the game this much and have rudimentary knowledge of ballistics and firearm handling but the reality is this is a game and only so much can be recreated, especially since we as players only have a keyboard and mouse.

 

I'd say it only needs a little tweaking at present state to be perfect in balance between realism and fun. Don't want unrealistic accuracy where making pop shots at hundreds of meters is super easy but also wouldn't want unrealistic spread that makes no sense.

 

Ill leave it up to the devs to find the best way to do it for the game. Going on and on and on about weapon handling in real life is.... Kind of pointless at this point.

Edited by Converge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×