aim/To Hit Ratio buggered?


#1

So, since I came back, I noticed a very unpleasant new bug or new feature.
6 to now 7 months ago, when I aimed at something with a rifle type weapon, I hit what I aimed at with a ratio of 90/100, approximately.
Lately then, this is reduced to 50/100, maybe even lower (note here, I engage machines from distance, I do not like up-close combat).
Bullet Spread is one thing, but when I am for instance a .50, say 300m away on a target, fire and miss?
While I have FULL marksman?
That shot had to be a nailed one, instead I see the bullet veer of to a different direction.
Hip-shoting a machine 10 meters away with the .50, resulting in 60+% miss?

I’m unsure to what is going on, last night I did a few rounds of CoD, and my aim is fairly good.
NOT PERFECT, for sure!
But pretty darn good nonetheless.

This proved me, that it was not me: not my eyesight, nor my probability calculation of the moving target’s position.
More, my anticipation of the enemies position compared to distance and his movement, is also fairly good.

That makes me conclude, something’s quite of with either the Marksman Skill Tree, the ammo ballistics, or both.
And if that is the case, I would like to see this fixed, since, as I always relied on sharp shooting, which is what the marksman tree stands for, is pretty darn important to me.

Now, has anyone else noticed this weapon/ammo/skill behavior?
If so, please tell below.
If not I must try to figure out what is the issue on my end of the game.

Thank you.


#2

Did you counter in the predefined zero?


#3

I know miss, I said" veering of in various directions… as if there’s one mean wind…


#4

I havent been playing GenZero much lately, but i do remember that switching games makes my hit ratio suffer for a while.
If ive been playing one game, i adapt my aim and behaviour to suit that specific game.
When i then move to another game, my adaptation is off, making me miss more often before i get used to the “another” game.

But the .50cal does hit spot on for me pretty much “all of the time”, or at least close enough that i accept the random miss as a RNG thing, every bullet does not follow the exact same trajectory, any imperfections in the system will have some measurable difference.
A improperly balanced (or dented) bullet, a water droplet or a fragment of soot/unburned particle inside the barrel from a previous shot and so on, will all affect the accuracy in the real world, so a RNG “cone of accuracy” feels very realistic.


#5

Erm, this is .50 under 500m…
Except for something massive ticking the bullet, it will not veer off, sir…

Ever fired a .50?


#6

While the effective range of .50 cal (Barrett M82A1) is 1800m in real life, but the thing is, that we can’t see machines past 400m in GZ, and all those real-life effective ranges must be scaled down, to fit in the game.

Ranges in GZ go more-or-less like so:
0m - 50m = very close range
50m - 100m = close range
100m - 200m = medium range
200m - 300m = long range
300m - 400m = very long range


#7

Wow…

OK, first of all, good miss, thank you.

But I do not quite agree with these type of uber-simplistic values, since, a .50 bullet would never ever act as a .32 bullet.
This SURELY should be addressed!

Again, good miss, thank you very much for this info!!!
Most kind of you. :slight_smile:


#8

Dear Devs:

Considering the above info, I would like to request needed changes.
The above set values for a SNIPER rifle undo everything a sniper stands for.
Let me point out: Longest sniper kill 2020: 3500 meters.

A sniper rifle is meant for LONG RANGE compared to the best hunting rifle, and to put it in a hyperbole: I saw guns shooting much farther.
300/400 should be, at worst, long range.
However, I would strongly suggest: Medium range for the Game!!!

Reason:
In reality, snipers work with spotters.
In some cases, they cannot even see their target.
This transfers ingame to: shooting well beyond the machine visual range of 408 meter.
Yes, I actually know this, since I saw a machine vanish at that specific range, when I was going for the Apoc Long Shot achievement.
Right on that moment it disappeared from vision… I killed it.
The note told me, I had made the kill.

So, please…
Fix the sniper to it’s actual use.
A sniper rifle acting as a pistol, just is plain wrong…

Thoughts?


#9

I would suggest the next for ingame:
Moller - 36’ish meters
Klaucke - 50 meters
.44 70 meters to 80 meters

Kpist - 120 meters
HP5 160 meters

A5 (automatgevare 5) ((Spelling?))(5.56mm) - 400m
A4 (Automatgevare 4) ((spelling?))(7.62mm) - 700m

89’er: 800-900m (semi-accurate)
89’er: 800-1200m (semi-accurate)

.245 200-400m (Would this be correct? This is from the top of my head, and I am no hunter)
.270 300-600m (Would this be correct? This is from the top of my head, and I am no hunter)
.50 Sniper Rifle - 1000m/1500m

Worst case scenario, these values can be halved.
But that would be the ultimate worst case.

As for damage over range:
50% of max range = 100% of max damage applied to target.
75% of max range = 60% of max damage damage applied to target.
90% of max range = 25% of max damage damage applied to target.

And these would be darn nice values for ingame, I THINK.

At any point: a sniper rifle like the 50cal should be dead-on at 300m, without a single exception.
Well… that is… unless one is beyond drunk and unable to aim. heheheheh

Thoughts?


#10

Maybe you should talk to one of the devs Bjorn I think his name is. He created the ballistic system for the game. If I got the name wrong someone correct me, I tried searching for the get to know the devs thread.


#11

@MarkNcheese42
Sir, I can do this, I guess.
However, do you agree with both posts I made above?

See, sure, IT HAS TO BE DONE, PERIOD… I would say.
BUT… I ALSO respect the wishes and opinions of other people, sir.
I really disliked the introduction of Plundra or bicycles, I explained them why, yet, here it is.
I said from the get go, Exp weapons too OP, already not-existing balance screwed up further, but it has not been altered.
And I leave it there.
Sure, I sometimes point at them to make examples, as I do right here, but I do not say: Bad, undo.
Sadly sometimes I put things badly causing confusion, sadly, also with that, however…
I do not ask to remove it.
Only, because some people actually really wanted this, and I can respect that.
Hell, I just had made a post about an idea where a Hunter would ride a bicycle.
And I even actually use Plundra, even if it is to store weapons that I will give away freely to people that want it, on the PC platform.

So, dang, THIS MUST BE IMPLEMENTED!!!.. but only if the majority would agree.
I can be difficult, OH yes.
But, I am also, at least, I hope so, sir, not impossible… :slight_smile:

SO!
The question is…
What would you feel, good sir, about this idea and it’s motivation as per the two above posts written by me?
Do you love it?
Do you hate it?
Is it good, but…? (maybe alter some valuables, or rectify the hunter rifle part, …)

Thank you very much, sir…


#12

This is already in the game. Though, there is no reliable way to test it but i’ve seen with my 5* and 6* AG4, that firing at FNIX tank component (e.g knee joint or electrical box above it) does play a huge role if i’m firing it at ~20m or at ~100m. Being closer gets the component destroyed with far less ammo than being further away. (And here i don’t factor in shots missed, especially on longer ranges. I only kept an eye on the shots landed.).


#13

Ah, well, I figured to add this to the previous part, miss.

Thank you for the information.

What do you think or feel about the range ideas?


#14

Well, current system works fine with max 400m machine draw-in distance. But to increase machine draw-in distance, lets say to 800m or 1000m (where sniper rifles would make sense), there would be a lot of reworks needed to be done, not just sliding the draw-in distance slider further out.

For one, predefined zero must be redone for all current weapons (except melee) to compensate for the increased machine draw-in distance.
For two, the range damage calculator must be redone as well. Again, for all ranged weapons.
Third issue would be machine size scaling at longer distances. E.g tank at 800m may look the same size, or even smaller than runner at 400m and try to hit it, not to mention aiming for components.
Of course, another ballpark of issues comes with hardware load. While PCs can handle it, it’s the consoles who most likely won’t.

I see a lot of work just to give sniper rifles more reasonable range in-game.

Far easier would be just double the shown range values. E.g you put down a waypoint and rather it reading 360m, it reads 720m.


#15

Oh, miss, no, I did not mean machines should be visible at 1.5 kilometers.
It was about ammo range per weapon/caliber.

Would you, in the state that GZ is, this meaning that machines will still “evaporate” at 408meters, while using the above mentioned range system.
I am aware that draw distance increase, would penalize some machines, be they console or PC.
And I don’t want people to be punished over this.

Now, if you do not agree with these:
Moller - 36’ish meters
Klaucke - 50 meters
.44 70 meters to 80 meters

Kpist - 120 meters
HP5 160 meters

A5 (automatgevare 5) ((Spelling?))(5.56mm) - 400m
A4 (Automatgevare 4) ((spelling?))(7.62mm) - 700m

89’er: 800-900m (semi-accurate)
89’er: 800-1200m (semi-accurate)

.245 200-400m (Would this be correct? This is from the top of my head, and I am no hunter)
.270 300-600m (Would this be correct? This is from the top of my head, and I am no hunter)
.50 Sniper Rifle - 1000m/1500m

or not?
Would you maybe agree with half the values?
Or even 1/3rd the values?

Do you agree with the statement: “At any point: a sniper rifle like the 50cal should be dead-on at 300m, without a single exception.”?
With this I mean, that compared to other weapons, the sniper has “one or two additional operating ranges”, making this basically: …
Very close range
Close range
Medium range
Long range
Very long range
Exceptional range
And maybe even Hyper Range
…considering: Barret M82, 1989, Effective range: almost 2 kilometers,…
… where the REMINGTON 7400 with .270 has a range of 500 meters.(wow, I was dang close with my estimation, seems)
I’m asking for input here, miss.
If in the case of the .270 the Very Long Range is 500m (in reality), then indeed, in comparison, the M82 would indeed have the additional Exceptional and maybe even hyper range.

I hope to get thoughts and ideas from all forum users, not just you, of course, but as you reacted to my post, unfortunately, you became my prime target in this matter.

I’m a bad person, I know, miss… :wink:
My apologies.

But I hope you will respond, nonetheless…? :wink:

Thank you very much.


#16

So, you presented possible effective ranges, at which point onwards, the presented weapon is essentially useless? E.g no matter what you do, you can’t use Klaucke past 50m? :thinking:

Considering in-game implementation of sniper rifles, no, i don’t agree with it.

Removing all spread, even when aiming through scope, doesn’t make the game feel realistic. Sure, it may give peace of mind that every shot you make, lands exactly at the dead center of your crosshair, even at longer distances but then you won’t be firing bullets with mass, velocity and gravity playing all a role but instead a laser.


#17

Well, this is based on realism.
A pistol is no rifle, miss.
It would bring new ways to think and act, as you cannot any longer kill a machine 200 meters away with a handgun.
So, yes, indeed, good miss. :slight_smile:
That would be the intention of my suggestion.
To make it feel more real.

I will react here to the literal part I quoted, good miss, if I may.
I’ve fired all 1990’s to 1999’s military weapons available to Belgium.
I can tell you, this is as realistic as it could get.
I was not joking, when I said, the m82 Barret .50 has an effective combat range of 2000 meters almost!
Compare this then to the .270, which can shoot 300 accurately without bullet spread or even bullet disintegration (as I noticed in GZ), and you see where I come from.

BUT!!!
When we speak about GZ… then yes, the situation is different, I fully agree there.
From what I see, you disagree that is you have full Marksman, a blue+ quality weapon and scope, a 300m/350m hit should not be possible for like 80%+ hitchance, do I understand this correctly?
Since, I had a 86+ hitrate on a 1200meter target with the Barret.
In REAL life.
That of course has to be said.
It IS different from GZ…
But no matter how, there’s the weapon’s nature, which is extreme range accuracy, in real life.
Should we ignore this, miss?
Or did I misinterpreted it?

Do note: speaking of Marksman skill tree completely free and the Marksman Skill active…

(Edit, I am actually asking clarification, miss, I am not contradicting you.)


#18

You talk about weapon ranges but how to implement them? E.g what should happen in-game, that e.g Klaucke doesn’t kill anything past 50m? Does the fired bullets just disappear at 50m mark? Is the bullet drop so severe that when fired horizontally, bullets drop to the ground at 50m mark? Or does the velocity drop so much, that when you hit e.g Runner at 51m mark, you only hear a “Ding” and there is 0 damage to the machine? Or perhaps something else?

What i’m saying is, that in-game, having Marksman specialization + .50 cal, firing at rages of 300+m, while aiming dead-on on e.g Runner’s fuel tank, you may get one or two misses due to the bullet dispersion.

Getting 100% dead-on hits at that kind of range doesn’t feel realistic in terms of gameplay.

And when comparing .50 cal to .270 and .243 at the same range, the accuracy is same. However, there is a difference as well. With .50 cal, you’ll get more velocity and higher impact force (aka more damage per shot). That can’t be seen when shooting Runner’s fuel tank but when you shoot at Tank’s knee joint or similar, higher HP component, you’d be using less ammo with .50 cal than with .243 or .270 s-rifles to destroy that component.


#19

Or neglectable, but yes, a more realistic approach.
Bullets do not, as far as I understand, just vanish in real life, they should therefore not in GZ, miss.
Therefore your idea would be most suitable.
A few meters further they should just drop out of the sky, in GZ?

Thoughs?

As for the sniper:
300 meters in GZ compared to the nigh 2km effectiveness would be mid range for the .50.
300-375m could be long range, 375-400+m very long range.
But this would bring the sniper’s sole purpose back: extreme long engagement, compared to other weapons.

Interesting you bring this op, considering, in reality… the weapon does nigh 2KM, where the .270 hits about 500m.
If we bring that to the GZ reality…
My estimation is STILL extremely underpowered?
If properly scaled down, the .50 would still be extremely lethal and accurate well beyond 1400m, compared to the .270 in GZ?

Brings me to the question… just what reality do we speak of…
I’m a bit lost here, miss… in all truth? :frowning:


#20

In-game reality, which is defined by the devs as they see fit and which doesn’t have to apply to any laws of the nature.

Bullet dispersion, bullet drop and predefined zero are small touches to the game to make it feel more realistic. However, GZ isn’t real-life simulator, where shooting in it has to match the real life standards. If it were, there would be a lot more variables when it comes to shooting weapons, e.g: humidity, ambient temperature, wind, misfire, scope calibration, bullet manufacturing defects, weapon jamming, weapon overheating, barrel wear etc.

For entertainment purposes (which GZ is), it is better to include some of them, rather than throwing all those variables at the player (for the sake of real-life simulator) and making a simple task of firing your weapon and hitting something overly complex for the player.