Accuracy to big ???

[ActiveMatx]

Re: Accuracy to big ???

Everyone read this please. Then read it again.

Clap Clap Clap Clap..... YES!

[Sir. Shpox]

Re: Accuracy to big ???

the deviation is very good , there isn't to much of it, weapons in BF2 are very acurate , the problem is you guys who can't aim , trust me ,
also, never never say you get killed to much because your weapon isn't acurate enough, because everybody has the same weapons .

Why is it I can kill enemy at far distance without no problem at all with the assault/carbines/snipers and you guys can't ? and many people can do this to, it's just some people who can't kill and wan't is very easy .

You are in the wrong game, go play unreal tournament or something

Aimbot :p

[lastborncircle]

Re: Accuracy to big ???

ive shot the M16 many times in so far my short AF career. in game its alot easier, the recoild on an M16 is alot more than in real life.
its easy to run and shoot in the game and with burst its bloody tricky to get all 3 shots to hit the target.
after the first burst you have to re aim and fire again, its not instant like in bf2

[Ghilleman]

Re: Accuracy to big ???

PErsonnally, i find the accuracy (other than the PKM) to be fine. I dont think theres anything wrong.

[govedob]

Re: Accuracy to big ???

I checked out every weapon on the game, and almost every single one has accuracy so high that u must lay down to shoot somebody. Also, another dumb thing about the game is, i put half of my clip in his ass, and hes running away like nothing happened. I think that the health and accuracy should be lowered !!! You?

Which weapon did you shoot with? Even with the least powerful weapons, it should take you 8 shots to kill armored, and 6 to kill unarmored person, definitely not half a clip, assuming you know how to shoot, which doesn't look like.

[WolfAlmighty]

Re: Accuracy to big ???

Two things I can add to this discussion:

1) The deviation system existed in BF1942 and BF:V but it wasn't as pronounced, especially when zoomed. Instead it was handled by visible recoil, which Paas eluded to in his most recent post. When you fired your AK-47 or BAR-1918 full auto in zoomed mode it made the screen shake like a dog crapping razor blades, but for the most part your bullets would still go to where the crosshair was pointed. In BF2 firing a gun full auto in zoomed (ironsights) mode barely moves the screen at all and instead the inaccuracy is left strictly to the deviation, leading a lot of people to wonder why their bullets aren't hitting the target when they're aimed right at them.

2) Like variable mentioned above, the hit detection in this game is dodgy (and add in a bit of lag and it becomes downright frustrating). I've come up behind someone who was standing still, dropped four bursts of M16 into his back at about 2 feet away and he SURVIVED it. The soldier was practically covering my whole screen so unless the bullets were coming out the backside of the gun or coming out of the barrel and flying straight up in the air they should have all hit the target (and 6 M16 bullets is enough to drop a full-health soldier even with armour in BF2, and I fired 12). Then there's, of course, the knifings that go awry, and I don't believe the knife has any random deviation associated with it, yet some people stick their knife into the back of a prone sniper and only manage to kick up dust. Ergo, shoddy hit detection.

Those two things are what makes BF2's infantry combat frustrating IMO, and to be honest the last one bothers me far more than the first. But I certainly wouldn't complain if they made the recoil visible, at least while using the ironsights, to show the inaccuracy rather than leaving entirely up to a random deviation factor. At least that way people would understand why they're missing instead of things like, "I had that little red dot on him the whole time and only one bullet hit! WTF!!!" which is frustrating to people who don't understand the random deviation system like the more 'hardcore' BF2 players do. I can see why the deviation was put in there, especially when it comes to making BF2 more newb friendly, but I just dislike the way they decided to represent it.

~Wolfgang

[WWJN]

Re: Accuracy to big ???

Ya I thind it should because i have a suped up gun and a person jucst has a regular gun and they can kill me sooo easily because I'm killing other people so they are ping ping and im dead.

[MrBenis]

Re: Accuracy to big ???

G36C is a ******** weapon. TOO accurate. Other than that, I'm satisfied with the other guns, and although getting killed by the sissy l85a1 annoys me, I can accept that because its a :O:O:O bullpup RIFLE with a SCOPE! NOT SOME PANSY CUT DOWN WEEDTRIMMER THAT CAN SHOOT FLEAS OFF A DOGS BACK WHILE THE GUNNER IS BLINDFOLDED AND CRIPPLED AND DEAF AND FALLING OVER AFTER JUMPING OUT OF A 747 THATS EXPLODING AND HES MAKING LOVE TO JAMES BOND!

I refuse! I refuse to acknowledge that the G36C is balanced! Its unrealistic and the G36E is the same.

[Tveakk]

Re: Accuracy to big ???

Which weapon did you shoot with? Even with the least powerful weapons, it should take you 8 shots to kill armored, and 6 to kill unarmored person, definitely not half a clip, assuming you know how to shoot, which doesn't look like.

Lol buddy it was surcasm (dont know how to spell it tho) im not meaning half a clip. And still 8 bullets to kill a person r u crazy ? it should take 1 or 2 in chest, maybe 8 in legs or arms but still game has problems and thats final