Fantastic news wind will affect bullets

[gibonez 3633]

 

Ballistics affected by weather and he explains how bullets will be affected by wind.

 

This gives us hope for a more detained and complex sniping mechanic in dayz. One that isnt as simple as just pressing page up until you get the appropriate range and then firing.

 

 

Hopefully the end result is like that.

Edited March 28, 2014 by gibonez

[makomachine 263]

Quite a bit to like in that presentation - and this, along with many other things, shows the team is still focusing on a survivor game based in as much reality as possible.  (While remaining fun - their line to walk) 

 

I can already see the threads now 'complaining' about how 'inaccurate' my mosin is now post the patch.  Every step forward is going to leave someone unhappy with the result....

[DennisTheRussian 11]

FRIKEN UNDESCRIBABLELY AWESOME!

[Katana67 2907]

Will be fun, and further underscores the need for a more robust weapon selection, attachment selection, and supporting device selection.

[Geckofrog7 1168]

"OMG I SHAT U LIK 999999 TYMES Y U NO DEY HAXING LOOSAR!!!11!!1!!!!!"

:D

[Electi 149]

How about an pressure of an air? humidity?Read books about snipering

[Merrick362 (DayZ) 263]

How about an pressure of an air? humidity?Read books about snipering

At all but the most extreme ranges, air pressure and humidity would have almost no effect. Based on the current selection of weapons in game and the average engagement distances, wind, range and relative elevation would be the only relevant factors.

[OrLoK 16187]

 

Here's how the mosin is affected by wind at long ranges.

 

I just happened to be testing this in A3, so the effect will most likel;y be somewhat similar.

 

Rdgs

 

LoK

 

ps oops its not HD. apologies, ill fix that. hmmm, watch direct on youtube if HD doesnt show up to see the ballistics report at the bottom of the screen.

Edited March 29, 2014 by orlok

[Rkelt 46]

Nice! :D

[-Gews- 7443]

Two things:

1. I hope the wind drift is done in the correct fashion:

(otherwise I can potentially see certain bullets being given more or less wind drift for gameplay reasons, or by mistake, when that would make no sense from a physics standpoint)

2. There needs to be some way of estimating wind. This requires a new HUD item.

[Katana67 2907]

snip

 

Dear god, is that all the recoil the Mosin has? Mine kicks like a mule unsupported. That recoil was child's play. Cool video!

 

2. There needs to be some way of estimating wind. This requires a new HUD item.

 

I think Rocket spoke in the most recent presentation about having the wind be visible somehow. Not sure whether that's having trees move with the wind or maybe some sort of dust/debris that would get kicked up when it gets windy. I'd be in favor of that more than I would a HUD element.

 

But either way works, not sure what kind of HUD element they could put up. Maybe just a simple arrow indicating direction?

 

I like the idea, however, of having a lootable Kestrel wind meter as well. Would require batteries. I think they included a Kestrel in ACE IIRC.

Edited March 29, 2014 by Katana67

[gibonez 3633]

Two things:

1. I hope the wind drift is done in the correct fashion:

(otherwise I can potentially see certain bullets being given more or less wind drift for gameplay reasons, or by mistake, when that would make no sense from a physics standpoint)

2. There needs to be some way of estimating wind. This requires a new HUD item.

 

But different bullets are given more or less wind drift.

 

Heavier bullets with higher ballistic coefficients buck the wind easier than say lighter bullets.

 

This is the main reason why the .308 is preferred for long distance shooting when the 5.56 is just as able to reach those distances.

[gibonez 3633]

 

Here's how the mosin is affected by wind at long ranges.

 

I just happened to be testing this in A3, so the effect will most likel;y be somewhat similar.

 

Rdgs

 

LoK

 

ps oops its not HD. apologies, ill fix that. hmmm, watch direct on youtube if HD doesnt show up to see the ballistics report at the bottom of the screen.

 

That mosin looks terrific miles better than what is in stand alone.

 

The 2d scope actually has the correct zoom value good stuff.

[-Gews- 7443]

I think Rocket spoke in the most recent presentation about having the wind be visible somehow. Not sure whether that's having trees move with the wind or maybe some sort of dust/debris that would get kicked up when it gets windy. I'd be in favor of that more than I would a HUD element.

 

But either way works, not sure what kind of HUD element they could put up. Maybe just a simple arrow indicating direction?

Toggled arrow would be nice... hidden while not in use.

Presenting it using just the environment is a nice concept but it would require a lot of effort and I can't see it working all too well. But maybe I'm wrong.

[-Gews- 7443]

But different bullets are given more or less wind drift.

 

Heavier bullets with higher ballistic coefficients buck the wind easier than say lighter bullets.

 

This is the main reason why the .308 is preferred for long distance shooting when the 5.56 is just as able to reach those distances.

 

You misunderstood.

Wind drift is physics. They should put the basic mechanics into the engine itself, the physics should not change based on what bullet is being fired, the calculations remain the same.

Example: they don't give each bullet a different gravitational constant. They put -9.80665 m/s into the engine and it remains the same for all bullets.

Wind drift is proportional to lag time. So for a 4 m/s wind at 90 degrees 500 meters:

drift = vwind (t500 - t500v)

5.56x45mm: 4 m/s (0.785 - 0.538) = 0.876 m drift

7.62x39mm: 4 m/s (0.958 - 0.668) = 1.160 m drift

7.62x54mm: 4 m/s (0.737 - 0.581) = 0.624 m drift

Like I said before, assigning drift numbers to each bullet is like giving each bullets its own acceleration due to gravity: it could work okay if they spend the time calculating the right numbers, like in ACE... but it also presents the opportunity for mistakes, inconsistencies, physical impossibilities, lack of realism, etc. We could end up with wind drift proportional to time of flight (ahh!).

[gibonez 3633]

Toggled arrow would be nice... hidden while not in use.

Presenting it using just the environment is a nice concept but it would require a lot of effort and I can't see it working all too well. But maybe I'm wrong.

 

Yea a simple hud icon that goes away is in my opinion the best option there is no need to over complicate things that work fine already.

 

Take the new compass for instance it is so much better in the mod there is no need to physically hold the compass in your hand this just adds clunkyness.

[gibonez 3633]

 

You misunderstood.

Wind drift is physics. They should put the basic mechanics into the engine itself, the physics should not change based on what bullet is being fired, the calculations remain the same.

Example: they don't give each bullet a different gravitational constant. They put -9.80665 m/s into the engine and it remains the same for all bullets.

Wind drift is proportional to lag time. So for a 4 m/s wind at 90 degrees 500 meters:

drift = vwind (t500 - t500v)

5.56x45mm: 4 m/s (0.785 - 0.538) = 0.876 m drift

7.62x39mm: 4 m/s (0.958 - 0.668) = 1.160 m drift

7.62x54mm: 4 m/s (0.737 - 0.581) = 0.624 m drift

Like I said before, assigning drift numbers to each bullet is like giving each bullets its own acceleration due to gravity: it could work okay if they spend the time calculating the right numbers, like in ACE... but it also presents the opportunity for mistakes, inconsistencies, physical impossibilities, lack of realism, etc. We could end up with wind drift proportional to time of flight (ahh!).

 

 

You misunderstood.

Wind drift is physics. They should put the basic mechanics into the engine itself, the physics should not change based on what bullet is being fired, the calculations remain the same.

Example: they don't give each bullet a different gravitational constant. They put -9.80665 m/s into the engine and it remains the same for all bullets.

Wind drift is proportional to lag time. So for a 4 m/s wind at 90 degrees 500 meters:

drift = vwind (t500 - t500v)

5.56x45mm: 4 m/s (0.785 - 0.538) = 0.876 m drift

7.62x39mm: 4 m/s (0.958 - 0.668) = 1.160 m drift

7.62x54mm: 4 m/s (0.737 - 0.581) = 0.624 m drift

Like I said before, assigning drift numbers to each bullet is like giving each bullets its own acceleration due to gravity: it could work okay if they spend the time calculating the right numbers, like in ACE... but it also presents the opportunity for mistakes, inconsistencies, physical impossibilities, lack of realism, etc. We could end up with wind drift proportional to time of flight (ahh!).

 

I understand now.

[OrLoK 16187]

Hello there

 

I do think that some of you guys do worry a little to much about how the game will perform weaponwise when its done.

 

I think many elements are in game because

 

a) to prove the work pipeline functions and to get major functions in game

 

b. to occupy us bleating masses who "must haz SA noaw pl0x"

 

c)something else

 

But these elements are not fully tweaked or finalised.

 

Knowing R the little I do and having the occasional chat with him I know he is quite the perfectionist and uber passionate about what he's trying to do in all areas of the game. He actually beats himself up over the game a little to much IMHO but then again he's carrying a lot more responsibility than me.

 

The point being, I *do* think we will have a weapon system that's more detailed and accurate than Arma in many ways and whilst its good to keep a beady eye on weapon dispersion etc to be constructive in ones criticism rather than harbingers of doom.

 

Its good to be wary, but positive thoughtful feedback will get the devs attention far more than "OMG M4 SUXX" type rantings.

 

This isnt aimed at anyone in particular just generally at those who are weapon fans.

 

Lastly, never forget that even the rifles in Arma had very suspect ballistics and handling so never expect pure science reality, but expect it to be a cut above how most games handle firearms.

 

I have faith in the devs.

 

Rgds

 

LoK

Edited March 29, 2014 by orlok

[mgc 92]

OMG M4 accuracy is atrocious.

I love the idea of wind affecting trajectories, but can we pretty please get some more accuracy to begin with? This on top of the other is just to much imo.

[St. Jimmy 1631]

This is the thing I was very exicted about. Now time to get rid of (really tweak the values) the weird bullet spreading B)

Edited March 29, 2014 by St. Jimmy

[Bubbled Luff 27]

Would be nice if when they have worked on the sound some more, you could 'hear the wind' ie blowing into the relevant ear depending on where it is coming from. With stereo or surround headsets this would be a great feature.

Also be good to be able to toss a handful of dust up to gauge wind direction and strength.

[gibonez 3633]

Hello there

 

I do think that some of you guys do worry a little to much about how the game will perform weaponwise when its done.

 

I think many elements are in game because

 

a) to prove the work pipeline functions and to get major functions in game

 

b. to occupy us bleating masses who "must haz SA noaw pl0x"

 

c)something else

 

But these elements are not fully tweaked or finalised.

 

Knowing R the little I do and having the occasional chat with him I know he is quite the perfectionist and uber passionate about what he's trying to do in all areas of the game. He actually beats himself up over the game a little to much IMHO but then again he's carrying a lot more responsibility than me.

 

The point being, I *do* think we will have a weapon system that's more detailed and accurate than Arma in many ways and whilst its good to keep a beady eye on weapon dispersion etc to be constructive in ones criticism rather than harbingers of doom.

 

Its good to be wary, but positive thoughtful feedback will get the devs attention far more than "OMG M4 SUXX" type rantings.

 

This isnt aimed at anyone in particular just generally at those who are weapon fans.

 

Lastly, never forget that even the rifles in Arma had very suspect ballistics and handling so never expect pure science reality, but expect it to be a cut above how most games handle firearms.

 

I have faith in the devs.

 

Rgds

 

LoK

 

Absolutely these changes help restore my faith in the game and the devs.

 

This is especially true since I don't see the game being a success with me unless it has convincing and satisfying gunplay and for the game to have that it needs to have super realistic bullet trajectories and ballistics.

 

Adding wind helps that, what they should do next is something that would not only help save them time and make the game more satisfying is to do away with the current bullet zeroing mechanic completely.

 

Instead of having to set the elevation adjustments for each gun at each range the devs would save time and make a better more realistic game if they merely set this function to the optics themselves.

 

When they incorporate a scope in the game the elevation adjustments should be done in mrads, or moa depending on the optic.

 

So adding a new scope to the game would be as simple as modeling it , giving it a reticle and zoom then looking up the real world data of the scope and allowing it to adjust the elevation adjustment by the manufacturers specifications.

 

The weapon would then be zeroed at 100m so at 0 mils or moa of elevation it will impact at 100m.

 

Then say they add the Vortex viper scope into the game all they have to do is go to the specs of the scope and set the maximum number of elevation for the optic.

 

For this particular optic the maximum elevation adjustment is 64 moa so it can be adjusted 64 inches at 100m.

 

Now depending on the weapon its used on and the ballistics for that particular weapon and its bullet drop different ranges will be different moa since each bullet and gun has their own muzzle velocity and bullet drop.

 

Then it would be up to the community to fire the weapons and test them developing their own dope charts for the weapons.

[Duenan 226]

In real life snipers typically work in teams with a spotter.

[gibonez 3633]

In real life snipers typically work in teams with a spotter.

 

That is because they are a military asset and a spotter can go a long way towards protecting that asset.

 

Shooting long range is not very hard it merely requires some math, good notes, and really good optics.

[ptk (DayZ) 178]

In real life snipers typically work in teams with a spotter.

What about historically? It's fairly obvious that sniper teams are the accepted norm nowadays within dominant military forces, but what about vietnamese snipers in vietnam or russian snipers in ww2? I can't drum up anything factual atm because work blows today lol, but I'm sure that even though working in pairs is nice and fair, you need only one to get it done!

As a DMR when deployed to iraq, we worked with four in a group to maintain our objective (to deter and eliminate ied threats along main supply routes) over a sustained period of time. We only used m14's though lol, no fun stuff...

Edited March 29, 2014 by ptk