Accuracy comparison: DayZ vs ARMA 2

[degoe 20]

The only thing I want is realistic accuracy. Exactly the same as in RL. Im not a ballistics engineer/soldier so I dont know what it should be like so I trust in the bohemia developers to put the most realistic data (like in their military simulators) into Dayz as well.
Every kind of human incompetence in shooting should be represented by weapon sway.
I can only hope this will also be affected by grips, health, stamina etcetera.

[infiltrator 275]

Great thread, this is one of my biggest concerns at the moment.. shots are practically tied to lucking out, and I missed several perfectly measured (with dayzdb map) and calibrated my sights to match the range, shots missed for no obvious reason (scope was pristine). So.. yeah. They need to fix this ASAP.

[degoe 20]

Earplugs would be awesome. For instance you go deaf for a minute if you shoot your high powered rifle if while not wearing them.

Would be one more thing to keep people from sniping others with no reason.

Edited February 7, 2014 by degoe

[Etherimp 1323]

I say take 100 random people from the street, a random sampling including soccer moms and have them go shooting down the range... I think you'll find the spread worse that what your depicting here. Low accuracy, I say good... that will force encounters to be up close and personal.

 

 

I think you mean it will force encounters to be whoever sprays more bullets and lucks out with the RNG..

 

Yeah, that's sure to create a realistic feel to the game: Random bullet physics. 

Forget about realism.. Think about game-play.. What's more fun than a game where you just hold down a button and sometimes you get ruined loot off a corpse and other times you see a screen that says "You are dead".. You won't even need to aim, you just point in the general direction of your target and press the Mouse1 button. That type of game-play sounds a lot more rewarding.

[UnitedStatesOfAmerica 19]

I think the real issue here, is that these rifles aren't nearly accurate up to where they should be. The M4 stock is basically useless after 100+m. I want the gun im using to be accurate up to the range its set for. If im using a carbine, then i can understand accuracy issues upwards of 300+ meter. If im using a rifle, then I want it to be even more accurate 500+m until some dispersion kicks in and so on. 

[Loafy 46]

I hate all too accurate weapons.

 

Nothing wrong with a little dispersion here and there. After all I am not a distinguished marksman. And neither are 99% of survivors washed up on the beach. Arma 2 accuracy was through the roof. Enfield is harsh over-powered. first choice in pvp for me until i get something that shoots heavier rounds than 5.56

[gibonez 3633]

I hate all too accurate weapons.

 

Nothing wrong with a little dispersion here and there. After all I am not a distinguished marksman. And neither are 99% of survivors washed up on the beach. Arma 2 accuracy was through the roof. Enfield is harsh over-powered. first choice in pvp for me until i get something that shoots heavier rounds than 5.56

 

The guns should be exactly as accurate as they are in real life.

 

There are better ways to simulate the players not being expert marksmen. The random huge dispersion cone is not one of them.

 

Weapon sway, high recoil, sight misalignment are all better ways to do this.

 

Above all though the weapons should function exactly how their real life counterparts do. Reality has a way of balancing itself.

[Franchi (DayZ) 146]

I think the real issue here, is that these rifles aren't nearly accurate up to where they should be. The M4 stock is basically useless after 100+m. I want the gun im using to be accurate up to the range its set for. If im using a carbine, then i can understand accuracy issues upwards of 300+ meter. If im using a rifle, then I want it to be even more accurate 500+m until some dispersion kicks in and so on. 

It is surprisingly hard to hit a target at 500m, I have been shooting all my life, and I cannot do it reliably while standing up. If we took every single person from the dayz forums and handed them a 1/4MOA Remington 700 with a 32 power scope and asked them to hit a 6inch plate at 500m while standing AND gave them ten shots to do it less than one in a fifty could do it, I would wager that the majority could not do it prone with a bipod.

 

The problems in dayz are that keeping the sights on target is easy and there is never any wind to gauge. This means that if the guns were as accurate as they truly are we would all be as good as Oscar Swahn.

 

Now I am all for making the guns as accurate as they are, but when that happens keeping the sights on target needs to be much harder.

[gibonez 3633]

It is surprisingly hard to hit a target at 500m, I have been shooting all my life, and I cannot do it reliably while standing up. If we took every single person from the dayz forums and handed them a 1/4MOA Remington 700 with a 32 power scope and asked them to hit a 6inch plate at 500m while standing AND gave them ten shots to do it less than one in a fifty could do it, I would wager that the majority could not do it prone with a bipod.

 

The problems in dayz are that keeping the sights on target is easy and there is never any wind to gauge. This means that if the guns were as accurate as they truly are we would all be as good as Oscar Swahn.

 

Now I am all for making the guns as accurate as they are, but when that happens keeping the sights on target needs to be much harder.

 

 

Exactly we need higher weapon sway but accurate weapons and realistic ballistics in place.

 

Different stances should make different distance shots viable. Crouch and prone should provide a stable platform for intermediate distance shots meanwhile standing for short range work.

 

Part of the problem is there is currently no way to rest your weapon on objects unlike ACE mod.

 

ACE mod weapon resting on objects + Bipod stablization + increased gun accuracy + realistic weapon sway = perfect gunplay.

Edited February 8, 2014 by gibonez

[infiltrator 275]

By the way, what was the dispersion of the sks? Akin to the mosin?

[-Gews- 7443]

Akin to the mosin?

 

Twice that.

[dimitri3p0 99]

Gews, thank you so much for posting this info, hopefully it's addressed and changed soon.

[gibonez 3633]

Twice that.

 

So I take it weapons are as inaccurate as ever even after the patch :/

[Celt (DayZ) 30]

I think another big problem is that they're trying to balance the Mosin with the M4.

 

One is a surplus rifle from the World War era, and the other is a high-grade military weapon. The Mosin shouldn't be equal; it's not a precise sniper rifle, just an ordinary battle rifle. It may pack more punch per bullet, but it can't compete with the M4's rate of fire and utility.

 

The main problem is that the M4 was almost as common as the Mosin for the first month or so of the SA. The M4 should be a rare, useful military weapon, not a hopelessly nerfed close-quarters-only weapon.

[gibonez 3633]

I think another big problem is that they're trying to balance the Mosin with the M4.

 

One is a surplus rifle from the World War era, and the other is a high-grade military weapon. The Mosin shouldn't be equal; it's not a precise sniper rifle, just an ordinary battle rifle. It may pack more punch per bullet, but it can't compete with the M4's rate of fire and utility.

 

The main problem is that the M4 was almost as common as the Mosin for the first month or so of the SA. The M4 should be a rare, useful military weapon, not a hopelessly nerfed close-quarters-only weapon.

 

 

The mosin nagant is an absolutely vital weapon in the game but the way they handled it is horrific.

 

Mosin nagant should not

 

- Be compatible with high end tactical optics

- Be compatible with rail mounted bipods such as harris and atlas.

- Magically become more accurate when a bipod is deployed

- be more accurate when a simple flash hider is attached.

- Shoot as accurately as it does now especially with old surplus ammo.

 

Vast majority of mosins in the game should be iron sighted with a few pu optics.

 

The idea that a zombie survivor would have all the tools or the know how to attach a modern day optic on a mosin is crazy. Attaching a short relief optic on a mosin nagant requires alot of machining and gunsmithing.

 

Optics should only be mountable on the real life compatible weapons.

[Valadain 270]

As a person who has shot all of the weapons being discussed on multiple occasions, I will spare everyone my spewing of gun information and simply say "Gews is right". On all points.

 

I'll only add here, that if I pick up a rifle for the first time ever, grab a handful of military surplus ammo, then fire at a target, putting the sight on the same point every time, what I'll get is a decent grouping somewhere other than where I'm aiming.

 

The point? Consistency. Yes, the bullet may not hit where I'm aiming, but it will hit where it is going to hit, acurrately. It isn't going to fire once off to the left, once off to the right, then above or below unless I've somehow grabbed a handful of "random" ammo or my scope is loose. The same gun, regardless of condition, firing the same ammo, regardless of quality, is going to give you consistent shots. You can compensate for this with skill. You can't compensate for random.

[gibonez 3633]

So does the new patch that "corrects"  bullet ballistics fix the extremely unrealistic and un authentic weapon behavior and characteristics ?

[xRann 126]

I think they were just using http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/157148-correcting-sa-ballistics/?hl=ballistics

Ballistics only, at least from the sounds of the patch log. Accuracy is going to take some screaming and shit, with the way attachments are going...

[Celt (DayZ) 30]

Well, it's a step forward. I just hope they flesh out the system a bit more.

[gibonez 3633]

I think they were just using http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/157148-correcting-sa-ballistics/?hl=ballistics

Ballistics only, at least from the sounds of the patch log. Accuracy is going to take some screaming and shit, with the way attachments are going...

 

Yea the attachment system is complete crap.

 

So poorly thought out.

 

No only are the attachments uncorrectly compatible with the wrong weapons, they seem to take a more general use approach but they incorrectly affect the way a weapon handles.

 

Instead of only affecting the handling of a weapon the attachments incorrectly affect accuracy.

[Celt (DayZ) 30]

I feel like they got really excited about having the attachment system fleshed out, so figured they needed to have a ton of attachments to showcase it. The only real difference with the stocks and handguards was cosmetic, though, so I guess they made them into magic accuracy generators.

 

Honestly I wouldn't care about what handguard or stock I had on my rifle if it didn't have such a huge gameplay effect. Makes more sense to just have stuff like flashlights and different sights, but since they already have the parts in...

 

If a Magpul stock changed accuracy so much, then why the hell would the military outfit their troops with the awful standard parts?

[gibonez 3633]

I feel like they got really excited about having the attachment system fleshed out, so figured they needed to have a ton of attachments to showcase it. The only real difference with the stocks and handguards was cosmetic, though, so I guess they made them into magic accuracy generators.

 

Honestly I wouldn't care about what handguard or stock I had on my rifle if it didn't have such a huge gameplay effect. Makes more sense to just have stuff like flashlights and different sights, but since they already have the parts in...

 

If a Magpul stock changed accuracy so much, then why the hell would the military outfit their troops with the awful standard parts?

 

 

The stocks and handguards could have handling effects too but more importantly could have affected weight and fatigue on the player.

 

Some mappul handguards also have storage for batteries.

 

Buttstocks should have affected things such as time to iron sight and weapon sway.

 

Accuracy is just silly.

[Bororm 1156]

I feel like they fucked up the dispersion/accuracy on the magnum with this last patch, anyone else notice the same?  It feels almost as bad as the fnx was now.

I mean maybe it was always this bad, but it felt a lot more accurate before.

 

The distance

Grouping

 

And closer

Distance

 

Grouping

Edited February 14, 2014 by Bororm

[infiltrator 275]

The stocks and handguards could have handling effects too but more importantly could have affected weight and fatigue on the player.

 

Some mappul handguards also have storage for batteries.

 

Buttstocks should have affected things such as time to iron sight and weapon sway.

 

Accuracy is just silly.

 

I agree buttstocks should affect sway not dispersion.. every weapon should have an innate dispersion BUT that dispersion should be much, MUCH lower than what we got now. Instead give us sway and breath control attachments that affect that not dispersion. Sway can be compensated for with skill/timing, dispersion is just coin flipping.

[finalstraw 193]

The dispersion doesn't bother me, especially considering the context with these civilian survivors. The weapons shouldn't be laser accurate.

 

I don't have a problem hitting my targets.