.50 Cal machine gun... the point?

[dblEdge]

Re: .50 Cal machine gun... the point?

IF you are moving forward at 50MPH then wouldnt the bullets be moving 50 MPH forward even if you are shooting to the side. I may be wrong but you may have to aim a little to the side of the enemy to kill him.

Think of it like you are in the back seat of the car going over 60MPH and then they stop suddenly. you fly forward a bit. imagine that same thign happening but while you are beign launched out of a cannon or something.

Now you mention it I do that when using the 50cal. In effect the crosshair is being dragged across the target so I make a hit but not necessarily a kill. Strange that it takes someone to say it for me to realise I even do it... :|:

[TrenchDigger]

Re: .50 Cal machine gun... the point?

turrets are only death traps if you don't duck. I have survived artillery blasts by crouching in a turret on a tank.

[BirdKiller]

Re: .50 Cal machine gun... the point?

IF you are moving forward at 50MPH then wouldnt the bullets be moving 50 MPH forward even if you are shooting to the side. I may be wrong but you may have to aim a little to the side of the enemy to kill him.

Think of it like you are in the back seat of the car going over 60MPH and then they stop suddenly. you fly forward a bit. imagine that same thign happening but while you are beign launched out of a cannon or something.

The reason you have to lead your aim to the left or right of the target is due to the fact that your bullets' vector is determined not only by the gun, but also speed and direction of the vehicle. In essence, four forces are exerting their influence on the bullet:

Gravity
Friction
Gun
Vehicle

The last two are not exactly forces obviously, but they are the source of two other forces.

Thus, if the car is moving at a constant speed of 50 MPH in one direction and you fire your gun to the left or right of the vehicle, those rounds will not only travel in the direction your gun was pointing, but will also travel about 50 MPH in the direction of the vehicle when the bullets were fired. In addition, the bullet will drop and slow down due to gravity and friction.

This is the reason the mounted guns on vehicles are so inaccurate when moving, then you have to add in the latency factor, and finally as if it aiming can't get any harder, in most cases the vehicles you're in does not move at a constant speed and direction.

[linx]

Re: .50 Cal machine gun... the point?

I find the 50. is too hard to shoot from the top of a moving vehicle because the turrets swivel so slowly that you can't keep it trained on one target.

[LahLahSr]

Re: .50 Cal machine gun... the point?

The physics involved are grade 7 stuff and should be known to everyone.

What these "physics" don't explain is why the bloody tracers then seem to be hitting all along and around the target - yet very rarely do any of them hit.

The true problem is not players' inability to compensate for the physica involved, it's the fact that tracers would suggest that you have your target pinpointed, yet do not seem to be hitting.

It's probably the hit-detection - not "lag". Given the guns' natural inclination to spread the bullets around anyway, lag would not save you because the bullets go all over the place around the target (according to the tracers anyway), so if you in reality is 1 foot away from what seems to be your position, you should still go down in a hail of bullets.

Something rotten in the state of BF2 indeed!

Cheers :-)