Weapon accuracy editing

[HardlyLivin]

I'm enjoying playing around with the weapons in game but my one real gripe is the three zip code sized spread from one shot to the next. All of these mounted weapons should be able to score precise hits at 1000m with ease. Yet with the current accuracy, 1000m shots are practically only good in volley fire. Does anyone know where in the .xml I can find the spread value if it exists?

[Booze_Rooster]

Shooting most weapons over a kilometer will require accuracy through volume.

[HardlyLivin]

Originally posted by Booze_Rooster:

Shooting most weapons over a kilometer will require accuracy through volume.

1k isn't hard for even ww2 tech. Both German and American tanks of the war were able to accurately hit other tanks beyond 1500 meters. Even the modern M1 Abrams tank is capable of hitting targets accurately at 3k. Hell.... a well built modern infantry rifle like the AR-15 or battle rifle like the AR-10 are both more than capable of hitting a 40" gong at 1k with the right bullet. The issue I'm having is that these guns in game won't even reliably hit the broad side of the AI destroyer at 1k, let alone an AI tank at that distance.

I get why they did it the way they did but I'd like to edit the accuracy values simply to please myself.

[Booze_Rooster]

Which weapons in game are you speaking of needing more accuracy.

If I remember correctly from my Army days the effective point range of a 7.62 M240B from a bipod was 800m and 800m with ball ammo still required several bursts. Point target range for an M4 was 600m, 700m for the M16.

You start talking a klick in range you’re shooting an entire MGRS grid square away. You’re not making accurate point fire with any portable weapon at that range, barring a sniper rifle, a comfortable shooting position, a sand sock, a telltale and hopefully a good spotter.

Longest shot I ever pulled off was 1,650m from a stabilized .50 CROWS mount on the roof of the truck and i used the laser rangefinder for elevation correction. Took a good few bursts to walk onto the…ahem, target until he was down.

I agree on larger caliber weapons you mentioned earlier. IiRC the Panther’s 75 could make fairly repeatable hits out to something crazy like 3K.

My argument is flawed as I was thinking more along the lines of the light and heavy auto cannons in the game which are an odd scale, undefined caliber and therefore open to interpretation what weapon system they represent

[Gustavo]

... christ, well back to the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ topic;

I think the accuracy/spread is hard-coded. It isn't random.
There's been people who've mapped out each autocannon's exact spread, and designed a microcontroller that counter-acts the spread for each shot.

It's been a while but i think the people here may know: (stormworks realism group)
There was another SW "engineering" channel but i can't find it unfortunately.
https://discord.gg/TPwxXxxc

[Ra-Ra-Rasputin]

Originally posted by HardlyLivin:

1k isn't hard for even ww2 tech. Both German and American tanks of the war were able to accurately hit other tanks beyond 1500 meters.

Not... consistently at all. Especially american smoothbore tanks with funny premature combustion issues. The M4 series is notoriously woefully bad mechanically, and only is highlighted in games because they don't showcase the plethora of issues with the system. That's not to mention the ass-backwards optics used in them, with no way to measure wind, temperature or humidity.
You'd be lucky to hit a barn-sized target at 600m with an M4 or M5's shells.

Originally posted by HardlyLivin:

Even the modern M1 Abrams tank is capable of hitting targets accurately at 3k. Hell.... a well built modern infantry rifle like the AR-15 or battle rifle like the AR-10 are both more than capable of hitting a 40" gong at 1k with the right bullet. The issue I'm having is that these guns in game won't even reliably hit the broad side of the AI destroyer at 1k, let alone an AI tank at that distance.

I get why they did it the way they did but I'd like to edit the accuracy values simply to please myself.

The modern M1 relatively reliably can hit a building at 3km. It can't hope to hit a mobile target at that range unless a serial lottery winner is taking the shot.

The maximum viable range of AR-15 is 250m with AR-10's significantly larger caliber being able to carry the round to about 500m. They're still both absolute trash rifles though, they're just popular because it's almost at the point of being a fashion item. An AK or AKM derivative is always a better choice, not to mention of the plethora of other options.

I don't know about you, but i can make the artillery cannnon deliver a round 12km away with 6m deviation between 7 rounds, the inaccuracy seems like a systems issue, not a game issue. A gun is only as good as the machine mind behind it.

[Booze_Rooster]

Originally posted by Ra-Ra-Rasputin:

The maximum viable range of AR-15 is 250m with AR-10's significantly larger caliber being able to carry the round to about 500m. They're still both absolute trash rifles though, they're just popular because it's almost at the point of being a fashion item. An AK or AKM derivative is always a better choice, not to mention of the plethora of other options.

I beg to differ.

The front sight post of an M4/M16/AR-15 width is that of an average human torso at 300 meters. an M855 bullet leaving a 1:7 rifled 14.5" military length M4 barrel will only pass through the line of the iron sight picture at the point of aim at 25m rising and 300m descending. Parabolic arc of travel due to rifling and gravity.

In order to qualify for a weapon system in the military, you have to complete a qualification shoot.

For the M4/M16 you have 40 rounds for 40 targets ranging from 25m-300m. 38-40 hits will earn you the Expert qualification badge. The trick to this for a bad shooter is to save the shots on the tricky 175m and 250m target and wait for the 300m "Ivans" to appear as they are one of the easier targets to hit. Point of aim, point of impact.

That's just standard shooting. You will be sent to known distance ranges and shoot out to 500m to get the basics down.

The standard zero on a TA31 ACOG is a 25m/300m point of aim/point of impact, while the tip of the chevron everybody uses in video games is the tip of the parabolic arc and is used for shooting between 100 and 175. The stadia lines graduate up to 600m and allow fairly accurate shooting out that far from a braced position. Beyond that you're into area fire with 5.56 and the best you can do is suppress the target.

That said and done, you can shoot far beyond 250m with M855 ball from an M4- I speak from experience.

As for the AR family design, its far from trash. A lot of negative reputation comes from early production rifles being sent to Southeast Asia without proper cleaning kits, chrome lined bores or gas chambers and being issued to troops who were under the impression that it didn't need cleaning as a result.

It is prone to jamming and fouling, as is almost any other rifle. Easily mitigated by proper cleaning (most people don't clean under the extractor, even in the service and gunk builds up preventing solid secondary extraction) and proper magazines. Issued magazines in the military and most easily obtained magazines are a lousy design stemming back decades without correction. The follower can jam inside the magazine box as the spring weakens causing the follower to tilt. You can easily obtain non-tilt followers and helical spring magazines, which most guys in the service end up purchasing for their own use.

The last issue is the use of "CLP" which is the equivalent of using cosmolene as motor oil. Its more of a preservative than a lubricant. Its issued to keep rifles clean and shiny on the racks for decades worth of use, but under heavy use it just stinks and steams. Combined with the extra fouling produced by blank cartridges heavily used in training, it creates a mess inside the rifle.

I always carried Rem Oil and insisted the guys in my team used it as well. Always brought extra cans of the stuff to the field with me for my guys to use. I really don't ever recall a malfunction in any of the rifles related to a cheap or lousy design. I loved them and trusted them with my life. I really don't think they deserve the hate- which is trendier than a fully tricked out and customized, Magpul-festooned AR-15 with more bolt-ons than a Jeep Wrangler at the mall.

[HardlyLivin]

Originally posted by Quack:

... christ, well back to the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ topic;

I think the accuracy/spread is hard-coded. It isn't random.
There's been people who've mapped out each autocannon's exact spread, and designed a microcontroller that counter-acts the spread for each shot.

It's been a while but i think the people here may know: (stormworks realism group)
There was another SW "engineering" channel but i can't find it unfortunately.
https://discord.gg/TPwxXxxc

Thank you. I was concerned it may have been a hard coded thing but it is what it is I guess.
I'll check out what they're saying on that discord link though. That micro controller might be exactly what I'm looking for.

[HardlyLivin]

So this is going to be a reply to both Booze_Rooster and Rasputin.

I'm going to start with saying that I agree with Rooster when it comes to the AR pattern rifles. It drives me nuts when people say they are terrible weapons when that is far from true. As Rooster had already pointed out, the AR platform had many problems starting in Vietnam with some problems sticking around to probably 2007 ish would be my guess. And as he also pointed out, the guns suffered from poor quality of manufacturing during Vietnam, poorly designed magazines, and a complete lack of any proper cleaning kit, not to mention the type of powder charge was changed last minute to one the gun wasn't designed to run with inducing further malfunctions. Following Vietnam the quality issues with the rifle itself were worked out but the magazines still didn't have an anti tilt follower.

As far as accuracy goes. There is a difference between an effective range and what the accuracy of the gun will actually do. An effective range rating is more of a recommendation based on the average shooters skill and the assumed limitations of the weapon based on the average shooter. I've never been in the military but I've personally shot my rifle at 300 meters with irons and the hardest thing about it was seeing through the mirage of the Florida heat. M193 ball still hits to point of aim at 300m with a 50m zero. In fact there are quite a few videos on YT that show scoped AR's hitting torso sized plates at much greater ranges, even 1000m.

Lets fast forward to today with a modern example albeit another anecdotal one, but you'll just have to take my word for it. In fact Rooster will probably agree with me on this due to his own potential post military experiences. Back in 2018 I bought a Smith & Wesson MP-15, and since put a little over 2,000 rounds through it with multiple brands of magazine, all of which are well made with anti tilt followers, and multiple brands of ammo. The gun to date has not had a single malfunction let alone the slightest hiccup. Any well made ar-15 pattern rifle in 5.56 or 223 will run very reliably, even when improperly maintained. A Youtube Channel by the name of "Military arms channel" did a long term test of the ar-15's reliability by shooting thousands of rounds through the gun with no lubrication or cleaning. I think his last video of the test had the gun at over 4,000 rounds with only a single feed issue which ended up being a worn magazine. I will say that there is more maintenance involved with the AR platform over the AK. For example AR's should have their gas rings replaced every few thousand rounds unlike AK's which don't even have them in the first place. However it's not enough of a difference to make a difference in a competition, or at the range, or even in battle.


But going back to cannons. Some time ago I read a study conducted by the British on the accuracy of different tank guns during the war. They tested both the sherman's 75mm and 76mm guns on the side of a mock panther turret at 1k and found that the 75mm had a little over a 60% first shot hit while the 76mm had around an 80% hit ratio. Which tells me both guns could easily hit a tank sized target at 1k. And I don't even think the 75 was designed to do that. And sure, It's quite possible that an Abrams would have a low hit probability at 3k on a moving target but I don't think that represents the guns accuracy as a whole. That's a situational issue as 3k is really far for a moving target. And I didn't know they had combustion issues, I guess more reason to ditch the German gun and design our own.

Now back to the game. Yes it's true that a good design will allow you to shoot more accurately. However the cone of fire of the in game mounted weapons is still unreasonably huge at 1k. I can see missing by a few feet at that distance but we are talking about the broadside of the AI missile destroyers (when it's not moving) which are almost the full length of the large ship build box. And that's firing at them with a few different creations including some workshop creations. For example https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2813556563