Joined
Last Online
Recent Posts
posted in Insurgency - Technical Feedback read more

I believe hitscan was chosen for short range engagements because it's faster, simpler, and easier to optimize for net code. I don't really know how all that works behind the scenes, other than it makes sense that hitscan is a lot less resource intensive than calculating bullet physics. Either way, I'd hate to see GR: Wildlands style super slow-mo bullets with dumb physics.

As for needing to compensate for bullet drop and travel time: realistically, you'd hardly notice. At the ranges we tend to engage at in Sandstorm bullet flight time will be a few milliseconds, and more often than not bullet impact would be above point of aim. Depending on the rifle and how it's zeroed you wouldn't start to see the bullet fall below point of aim until 100 to 300 yards.

posted in Insurgency - General Discussion read more

@gm29 said in Insurgency is missing a lot of necessary realism in the weapons handling and ballistics:

it is patently false to say that none of these are glaring issues that would have a significant impact on gameplay.

You and I clearly have very different backgrounds when it comes to firearms, and we also clearly have very different ideas about what "hugely," "glaring," and "significant" mean.

I'm absolutely aware, intellectually, that barrel heating and ammo loads have an effect on accuracy. I can't say I've never noticed them in practice, and I certainly have never taken either into consideration when firing. Doesn't matter if I'm shooting cold bore or the last round in a 100-round string of fire, if I'm shooting Lake City M-855 or Wolf .223: I can reliably point my gun at a 6" steel plate and hit it.

In my world, "minute of bad guy" is an acceptable measure of accuracy, and "the rifle is more accurate than you are" is a common truism. Most of the time in a fight, the focus is on landing rounds on center mass as quickly as possible, if you're shooting a 1" group at 50 yards you're absolutely shooting too slowly. Some even have the philosophy that shooting tight groups in a fight is something to avoid - if you hit a bad guy someplace and it doesn't stop them from trying to kill you, shooting them in the same place again isn't very likely to have a different effect, so spread it out. Either way, no one shooting an assault rifle at a target 20 yards away from a half-crouched and leaning position behind cover while being shot at is going to notice the POI drift from his barrel heating up, using 77 grain ammo instead of 62 grain, or many other factors you bring up.

To me, something that is not noticeable most of the time, is not a glaring error that has a significant effect on game play. It doesn't mean it's not an omission, and I'd really like to see many of your suggestions implemented in some way, but I don't think they should be a priority.

ammo can HUGELY change what a particular platform is capable of doing.

You think so? Please, show me an ER surgeon or combat medic that can look at a wound and tell me if it was made with M-855, M-855A1, or Mk.262. Or between .45 ACP, .40 S&W, or 9mm for that matter. They don't exist. Sure, there are differences between projectiles and loads, certainly, but they're not "HUGE."

There is a point that keeps having to be made in the combat and self defense world, because it keep coming up again and again: the person is more important than the gear. Really, when fighting with guns the actual shooting part is the easiest part.

posted in Insurgency - Off-Topic read more

Did some holiday updating. Got a new optic for the carbine I posted earlier, a Primary Arms 1-6x ACSS. I also decided to do a little painting on it:

0_1547851926363_IMG_20190118_163732.jpg

I also built a new "pistol" (10.5" 5.56mm) from scratch, and it inherited the Trijicon optic from the carbine. Just needs a sling.

0_1547851992763_IMG_20190108_190312.jpg

posted in Insurgency - Technical Feedback read more

I think the ballistic model kicks in after a set amount of bullet flight time, not a distance. So slower travelling projectiles will hit this limit at shorter range.

posted in Insurgency - General Discussion read more

@gm29 said in Insurgency is missing a lot of necessary realism in the weapons handling and ballistics:

Only someone who doesn't use or understand these weapons in real life

Whoa there, careful what kind of assumptions you're making. I've shot many thousands of rounds and done hundreds of hours of combat and self-defense training with rifles and handguns. I've done force-on-force training with airsoft and simmunitions. What I've not done is much long range or competition shooting, which may be where our experiences differ.

When I say that I don't think that something would have a significant impact on game play, I do not mean to imply that I don't know how they work or what the impact would be. If things like barrel heating, ammunition variation, and modified triggers were implemented the effect on accuracy most of the time would be, what, 1 MoA? Maybe 2 in total? That's 1/2 inch to 1 inch at most at 50 yards. For combat shooting, that's insignificant.

While implementing some of these features would be cool and make the game more realistic, we're talking about something that will most of the time change point of impact by barely a few pixels. Something that most players will not notice most of the time when compared to the game play is it is now is, in my opinion, not a "glaring error."

posted in Insurgency - Technical Feedback read more

Sandstorm uses a "hybrid" ballistic model, which is hitscan at close range, making bullet impact instant, and then uses some kind of ballistic calculating system at longer ranges.

In theory, it's a rather weird idea, but I think it was made to simplify fast paced gun fighting over the internet. In practice, I don't really notice anything wrong with it other than I don't have to hold high at close range - not that hardly any game does that anyway.

posted in Insurgency - General Discussion read more

Agreed, I'd like to see this too, especially for "enemy sighted."

posted in Insurgency - General Discussion read more

Some pretty interesting feedback. I'm not sure I'd really count any of it as a "glaring error" as they're all pretty minor in effect when it comes to actual gameplay.

Really, I feel like there's one point that applies to a lot of what you've posted: engagements in Sandstorm tend to be short in both duration and range. Many of the things you talk about simply won't matter in engagements with a few hundred rounds fired at under 50 yards.

@gm29 said in Insurgency is missing a lot of necessary realism in the weapons handling and ballistics:

  1. No heat management.

This would be neat to see, but I don't think it should be a priority. I don't think I've ever put enough rounds through a rifle in a Sandstorm match to warrant more than being glad my character is wearing gloves. Sure it can be an issue for a SAW gunner, but even then, unless someone is dumping entire mags in one go regularly, which I almost never see, it would not be a major problem.

  1. Overall equipment weight don't have enough of an impact on performance.

This has been tweaked a few times over the course of the beta. I'm not sure if I'd like to see an ARMA3 style stamina bar, but at the very least I think more weight should slow people down a bit more.

  1. Weapon weight and balance

I totally agree here and would like to see this added. I think significantly changing how weapons behave based on weapon weight and balance would be a much better way to tweak the weapons in game and balance the LMGs without making them have ridiculous levels of recoil.

  1. Body armor.

I'd love to see more specific hit boxes in the game to more properly model both character damage and body armor. Body armor and wounding are pretty complex subjects, so some level of abstraction is going to need to happen.

  1. Being forced to make compromises in weapon assembly

This could be interesting to see, but ultimately it is a game. Not only is balance a consideration, but so is the UI and user discovery. As it is people complain that it takes too long to select your equipment, adding more complexities to the system would likely make this worse.

  1. Night vision illuminators and pointers.

I've never seen a game that really tries to model NODs realistically. Pretty much everyone goes with the same compromises, which is what happened with the previous Insurgency games. I assume Sandstorm will do the same, but would be pleasantly surprised if they tried to make it a little more realistic.

In previous games the generic laser sight worked quite well with NVGs, so you can pretty much play as if you were running an IR laser.

  1. Not enough fidelity in ammo modeling.

I'm really not sure that there would be much difference in ammo variety within the the ranges we shoot at people in Sandstorm. Certainly any accuracy differences would never have a practical effect, and unless the damage model gets seriously overhauled I don't think it's worth it to look at how different ammo types might effect wounding either. A lot of differences in barrel length are already factored into weapon performance - the Mk.18 is noticeably less lethal than the M-16 for example.

  1. Suppressors do effect weapon performance in reality,

I'm honestly glad that in this game suppressors don't have a negative effect on ballistics like they do in most games. The realistic gains in accuracy and velocity again aren't enough to really notice within the range of a Sandstorm engagement. Recoil reduction could be nice, and could be implemented with an improvement to the way all attachments effect weapon weight and handling.

  1. Flash hiders and suppressors.

I'd love to see different muzzle flashes implemented depending on the muzzle device equipped. It would have an additional balancing effect, especially once we get night maps.

Compensators in real life though only make follow-up shots easier. Most direct the blast to the side, and the shooter barely feels it at all. There are lots of options, especially for 5.56mm, that don't direct any blast upward at all so they won't obscure your vision.

I used to scoff at suppressors on SAWs and shotguns in previous Insurgency games. Both are becoming a reality though. Modern military suppressors like the SureFire SOCOM line are pretty durable, and while they may not be able to survive multiple successive mag dumps, that's also not something that often happens in Sandstorm. For the amount of shooting most SAWs do in game, a suppressor is totally believable.

  1. Malfunctions.

I'd like to see these added too, it'd add some realism and allow some other balancing options for things like drum mags which tend to have a higher failure rate. It wouldn't happen very often though; most AR family rifles see 2,000+ rounds between malfunctions, that's a lot of game play without a single malfunction. I've seen some of the competitive guys complain about it being a random event that could dramatically effect the outcome of a match. I don't play competitive, but I see the point. Maybe it could just be disabled in that mode.

  1. Vertical grips don't always benefit the handling of a gun.

Grips are a pretty personal thing, and it's hard to come up with any kind of scientific rule about how they effect weapon handling. I put vertical grips on all of my 16" ARs as I find them the most comfortable. AFGs hurt my wrist with extended usage and I hate them. I've got a BCM KAG on my 10.5" AR. Everyone is different.

  1. More optics options.

I want to be able to flip my magnifiers and I want to be able to switch the 1X/4X switch on the Specter. Sadly it seems this is a game play decision and I don't think it'll change.

you have to factor in trigger quality when determining how different guns will handle.

In real life: sure, trigger break and reset play a large role in shooting, especially at range. But, no gun accessory is going to change the way my mouse clicks. Any accuracy advantage to running an upgraded trigger isn't going to make a difference in the sub 50 yard shooting that makes up most of Sandstorm.

posted in Insurgency - Technical Feedback read more

@action83 said in Weapon & Handling Errors:

The AK rifles' firemode switch animation works the opposite it should. The lever should be pushed down when switching to single fire and up when switching to full-auto.

Good catch! I had not noticed this one. The AK's fire selector works differently than most western guns and goes safe-auto-semi.

@sgt-kanyo said in Weapon & Handling Errors:

Another bug is that you can't put an extra shell into shotguns.
For example let's assume you have a 7+1 tube capacity shotgun. You loud your 7 rounds, you cock the shotgun, now you have 1 in the chamber and only 6 in the tube, therefor you should be able to load one more.

The M-870 works correctly in the game. It has 7+1 capacity, you breach load a single shell, then load 7 more into the tube. The TOZ also has a correct animation of breach loading followed by tube loading, but loads to 6+1. Wikipedia says the TOZ-194 has a 7 round tube magazine, so this looks like an error, but I don't know enough about this shotgun in real life to comment on possible variants in mag size.

Though I did notice just now that your character doesn't pump after firing the last shell. Why is that? Does he magically know it was the last one and decide to leave the fired shell in the chamber? Why not eject it and keep the breach open until loading?

Not really sure if the M24 can do the same, but I guess it should be able to.

Sorta, but not easily. Unless using the model with a detachable magazine, there's no way to load the magazine without opening the bolt. You'd need to fully load the magazine, then breach load a round, and close the bolt while holding down the top round on the magazine. You usually have to really ram the bolt home while doing this too, as it doesn't line the casing up to slide easily past the extractor.

posted in Insurgency - General Discussion read more

@mashiara said in Items to improve:

This is not R6 Siege, everything would have to be completely redesigned from game balance and map design perspective even if just parts of walls were suddenly breakable.

Yah, Siege has probobly spent more development resources making breakable environments balanced than NWI has to spend on the entirety of Sandstorm. Ubisoft keeps making changes and updates to tweak the balance of maps, even ones that have been used for pro e-sports competition for years. And Siege maps are a fraction of the size of Sandstorm maps. It's just not practical to implement in this type of game, unfortunately, unless it was implemented in co-op only or something.

@iceage said in Items to improve:

  • Some bushes you can't get into or go through

Makes sense, bushes are alarmingly resistant to people walking through them in the real world. Hell, people used to grow large bushes as defensive walls. I've encountered bushes plenty of times I couldn't crawl or move through even without tactical gear and a rifle.


Looks like your connection to Focus Home Interactive - Official Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.