Lets talk POV and Iron Sights

[duncan_greystone]

Quite a few iron sights used in this game are utilized at an angle were it makes them awkward to use. This is especialy true with some pistols. Some guns have wonderful sights and "feel right" when you go to sight up. Others are just frustrating.

For instance I love lugers sights but do not understand why my trooper has the damn thing so close to his face that the blow back upon firing makes it so he cant see anything right infornt of him were he is aiming. I have personaly fired many a luger and it just "feels off". In my opinion the same goes for the SMLE sights your looking at to much rifle and not enough field of view.

Also when your sighted I like the sway realism but your guns front blade really shouldnt be droping below your rear sights so much. Its like your trooper isnt shouldering his rifle and the "balance point" for the rifle movement is more towards the middle of the gun rather than at the grip and shoulder (you can easily understand this if you own a rilfe with iron sights).

[Tiger Schulz]

Absolutely agree with you. I'm not sure if the Dev's had/used an opportunity to actually get aquainted with some of those weapons. I know that I would, if I want to provide a more or less realistic touch to a game of such nature. Lugers, SMLE's, K 98's etc. are still accessible in museums and amongst collector's. A friend of mine is using them on the shooting complex on a weekly basis, even a Broomhandle Mauser.

[duncan_greystone]

Can only hope that they take note. Whats also interesting is that because we have two eyes (well normaly anyway) your brain will let you "see past" your pistol even if it close to one of your eyes. My favorite games iron sight sights of all time were in hidden and dangerous 2 saber squadron (the guns even had muzzle velocity listed and their physics applied in game).

[Desiire]

The SMLE's sights are extremely frustrating to use because in an idle posture you can't see the front post. Do you really need the front post to see if you're going to hit your target in the GAME, I don't really know... but it's extremely frustrating all the same.

Out of all of the rifles, the SMLE is the hardest for me to use (with the gweher in close second) solely because you don't really have a sense of direction when you're shooting it. Sometimes you aim too high; other times you have no idea where you're shooting. All because you can't see that front post.

[Dangb( . Y . )m]

The sights make me drunk...totally wrong and no fun at all.

[duncan_greystone]

Its a fun and cool idea but still needs some ironing out. It works in other games just fine so I am hoping they find their balance between realism and practical from a games perspective.

[T00FAST]

I would agree with you - the sights just don't "feel right". I understand why they did it so hard to aim, but some things are rather frustrating then interestingly hardcore.

And about angle of view: they mostly just need to zoom out a bit. Doesn't apply to MGs, though.

My personal opinion is that they should decrease how "deep" (don't know if i used the right word, pardon my bad English) front post goes.
Though, if you are not trained to use a rifle, it is fairly hard to aim without "support". I mean, something to put your rifle on.
So, for the ones that only begin to fight, current sway is fine, but it should reduce as you progress.
And i think this is kind of implemented already...

[duncan_greystone]

Publicado originalmente por Striding Giant:

I would agree with you - the sights just don't "feel right". I understand why they did it so hard to aim, but some things are rather frustrating then interestingly hardcore.

And about angle of view: they mostly just need to zoom out a bit. Doesn't apply to MGs, though.

My personal opinion is that they should decrease how "deep" (don't know if i used the right word, pardon my bad English) front post goes.
Though, if you are not trained to use a rifle, it is fairly hard to aim without "support". I mean, something to put your rifle on.
So, for the ones that only begin to fight, current sway is fine, but it should reduce as you progress.
And i think this is kind of implemented already...

I have progressed through to the fourth setup in a few different soldier types and the sway never alters that I have noticed.

[T00FAST]

Publicado originalmente por duncan_greystone:

I have progressed through to the fourth setup in a few different soldier types and the sway never alters that I have noticed.

Oh... Maybe it's just me. But i strongly believe that there are weapon stats when you mouse over it. I need to check it next time i'm in game.

[duncan_greystone]

Some soldeir s have "traits" that make them better at crtain things. maybe thats what your refering to?

[T00FAST]

Not quite, what i meant is that stats window, that pops up up when you mouse over a weapon in the equipment menu, shows (or i think it shows) how you level up in use of that weapon.

[Bishop]

it shows the weapon level, kills and hit %. It's not the performance of the rifle but how you perform with the rifle.

[MezzerliptikJay]

in fairness they are world war one weapons and iron sights probally were not that easy to see/use in real life either imo

[T00FAST]

Yeah, thank you bishop. Sorry, my mistake.

To MezzerliptikJay: i am good if it is hard to aim, that is why i love this game. It's just that some angles are merely frustrating. I loved how they made aiming in RO2, but rifles there are a bit too stable. RO2's aiming point of view+Verdun's sway (fixed in the way i mentioned before) = my perfect aiming idea.

[Desiire]

Publicado originalmente por MezzerliptikJay:

in fairness they are world war one weapons and iron sights probally were not that easy to see/use in real life either imo

Wooden rifles, and especially long-lengthed weapons of the era are heavy. They always have been. The weapon sway is pretty justified I think since I know from my own experience even in a rested position they're a pain in the butt to shoot with. A target the size of your thumb becomes next to impossible to hit sometimes unless you're in a completely supported position

In the realm of videogames that doesn't amount to much. A lot of people complain about weapon sway in game but if it was to be accurately presented then there'd be even more sway than there is now (think about it; you're fatigued most of the time due to sprinting from one location to the other and that alone would wear you out) but it's perfectly fine the way it is.

IMO people are just upset because they're used to the RO2/Insurgency/Call of Duty style of aiming where the iron sights are 100% locked on to the center of the screen no matter what you do. I absolutely love Verdun's aiming since it's the only game I've played that even does it remotely realistically. The biggest drawback, like I said before, is how horribly misaligned the sights are a lot of the time. That alone just makes aiming too disadvantaged with some weapons.

[duncan_greystone]

Publicado originalmente por Digiit:

Publicado originalmente por MezzerliptikJay:

in fairness they are world war one weapons and iron sights probally were not that easy to see/use in real life either imo

Wooden rifles, and especially long-lengthed weapons of the era are heavy. They always have been. The weapon sway is pretty justified I think since I know from my own experience even in a rested position they're a pain in the butt to shoot with. A target the size of your thumb becomes next to impossible to hit sometimes unless you're in a completely supported position

In the realm of videogames that doesn't amount to much. A lot of people complain about weapon sway in game but if it was to be accurately presented then there'd be even more sway than there is now (think about it; you're fatigued most of the time due to sprinting from one location to the other and that alone would wear you out) but it's perfectly fine the way it is.

IMO people are just upset because they're used to the RO2/Insurgency/Call of Duty style of aiming where the iron sights are 100% locked on to the center of the screen no matter what you do. I absolutely love Verdun's aiming since it's the only game I've played that even does it remotely realistically. The biggest drawback, like I said before, is how horribly misaligned the sights are a lot of the time. That alone just makes aiming too disadvantaged with some weapons.

Ya I feel you Its not the sway its the fact that the rifle butt moves up while the barrel goes down while your "shouldering". If your not shouldering thats fine but if you have ever shouldered a rifle then you would know that that doesnt really happen (standing resting or walking its called a fixed point and something anyone with 10 minutes learns is a fact and not a skill). Weither or not you hit what your aiming at isnt the point thats the learning curve in games or in real life, but the point is that its not a good feature to have in a game were visibility and accuracy are a hallmark feature. Again sway is fine and i dont mind if your barrel "dips" but if your butt is moving then your not "shouldering". Your front blade should not ever drop further than its tip in the rear sight or you just broke your shoulder or your arm or your rifle feel apart (or its made of rubber haha funny mental image). Go grab your rifle and swing it around while shouldering it and sight down the barrel. If you dont have one get a broom stick its the same principle the point in your shoulder doesnt move.

As a side note I DO NOT play call of duty multiplayer or anything like that (its not fun for me at all, and the only thing about verdun that reminds of that genre of game is the instant spawn and die aspect that can happen). Last game I played in that genre was 2142 and that was just hilarious and actualy had objectives that required/favored team work instead of raw twitch gaming and "map knowledge". On a side note I think that the campagins in call of duty are campy but fun. I didnt mind playing those on occasion.

Also im a damn fine shot in games and in real life so I appreciate the effort the verdun team has put in to making this game more skilled base/realistic but the above discussed "flaw" really gets me.