[SUGGESTION] New accuracy system

[Yatta]

Im thinking about a new accuracy system, especially affecting burst weapons, with each new bullet being fired in a direction relative to the previously shot bullet (and including weapon spread and solider aiming skill of course).

I think it would make bursts look and effect more realist : Currently, in a full auto burst from a machinegun, done by a not so skilled standing soldier can have one bullet be shot at 45° on the left of the target, and the next one at 45° on the right. It is not physically possible for the soldier to rotate a heavy weapon 90° between two rapid fire bullets, out of recoil, even if he wanted it !

I think I could code that, if anyone's interested.

[Mattn]

we are awaiting patches

[jerikojerk]

You can think you're right if you never hold and fire a true machine gun or assault gun. In the reality, there is no way you can control a weapon in burst mode without a pod.

[Hertzila]

You can think you're right if you never hold and fire a true machine gun or assault gun. In the reality, there is no way you can control a weapon in burst mode without a pod.

Though I haven't gone to my service yet, I'm fairly sure it's physically impossible for a gun to jump 90 degrees between to shots. That's something like a meter for the gun's muzzle to travel with longer weapons.

Also, you can't control the weapon in burst mode? Wasn't it invented to make assault rifles more controllable while keeping the rapid fire as a possibility?

E: And BTW, why resurrect this thread? Though I would want to see the results of this, there seems to be nobody working on this anymore.

[Duke]

Imho +/- 45 degrees is a wild exaggaration.
IIRC it's more like +/- 10 degrees and that's damn close to realistic (for those who never wielded an automatic gun in burst mode).

Could anybody come up with more exact figures ?

[Duke]

Oh and the bullets will usually NOT form a line like they do in Hollywood

[bayo]

U talk about Wanted? :-)

[Hertzila]

Oh and the bullets will usually NOT form a line like they do in Hollywood

Don't tracers (aka. the only ammo type Hollywood uses) look like lines? I haven't seen one for myself (and possibly I never will, I don't think the FDF will give tracers to just any sergeant or radioman) but I'm under the impression that those really do look like lines.

[Thrashard96]

In Hollywood there isn't any recoil (kickback, which decreases accuracy)...

[Duke]

What I said about accuracy and lines applied to handheld weapons at longer range (>100m).

Mounted weapons (aircraft, anti-aircraft) do form lines. You need tracer ammo in mid-air because there is no other indication where your bullets hit.

I remember a practice shooting of 30 soldiers (long ago). The task was to fire a 4-shot burst from an assault rifle at a target of about 1 square meter some 150 m away. Standing, gun supported.
29 had just one shot (the first) on the target. I was the only one who managed to hit with 2 or 3 shots because I actively tried to compensate the recoil by pulling the gun in the opposite direction (I'm smart ).
With the same gun we placed 4 single aimed shots in a square of 5cm at 300m.
==> so NO, you can't control burst mode in ranged fire.

As for hollywood lines: no sane soldier would fire a line of 40 bullets from the lower left corner of the house to the upper right corner of the 2nd floor just to hit the guy in the window on the 1st floor with 2-3 bullets. But it looks nice

[Lew Yard]

Depends upon the weapon.  A G11-type rifle should be quite controllable in short bursts -- when you're firing 3 round bursts with a ~2200 rds/min cycle time, it's hard for the recoil to be a problem before the third round has already exited the barrel.

[Thrashard96]

nice

[Duke]

Depends upon the weapon.  A G11-type rifle should be quite controllable in short bursts -- when you're firing 3 round bursts with a ~2200 rds/min cycle time, it's hard for the recoil to be a problem before the third round has already exited the barrel.

Ok. The rifle I was talking about fired 600 rds/min (G3).

[Hertzila]

Ok. The rifle I was talking about fired 600 rds/min (G3).

Isn't that a battle rifle instead of assault rifle?

[BloodMagus]

To bump this thread, and rehash this stuff again.

Duke: Having not fired an automatic weapon myself, are you confirming there that the grouping showed no gradual trend upwards. I was expecting with a gun firing in a burst, that the recoil of each shot would raise the barrel a fraction each time?

What i think the OP was hinting at:

For any shot, call the a function to calculate the first shot based on soldier's skill, firing mode and the weapon's general accuracy. So in theory, whether you fired a snap shot, burst shot or full auto; the chance of hitting on the first round is equal. But an aimed shot would have a bonus modifier to improve accuracy.
Subsequent shots would then call another recursive function or loop, where by the placement of each additional shot is calculated by moving the original path up a random amount and to the side a random amount. The random amounts would again be scaled by the weapon's accuracy and user's skill. The result would be a gradual zig zag pattern going upwards. On that note, any accuracy reported to the user should always be the first shot. I believe a method like this was used counterstrike for gun accuracy.


EDIT: Having looked into the combat.c code, I noticed that the two spread values included for each weapon correspond to the yaw & pitch deviation calculations. It could be possible to modify that method, and recurse/loop the subsequent shots off the previous shots yaw & pitch. Not 100% confident how it affects other methods in that code. Furthermore, it would require some weapon rebalancing and potentially change the combat tactics (multiple shots no longer as effective at long range).