Sucky Snipers

[Secondbrooks]

Sure snipers, like infantry in general, isn't as accurate in some occations as it should. Men jogging/walking for long time and still one can't hit them.

There has been strong debates conserning this, just other way around, and to my eye things have got better and nobody else seems to whine about them either. As the thing is: Infantry isn't dying anymore as easily as it was. You could wipe enemies away just by pressing trigger and hosing tile they were in for minute of two, even if it was lying behind cover... Moving infantry squads got wiped out in seconds on regular basis. This wasn't really that cool, especially when it happens form several hundreds of meters away.

One thing which got tweaked was accuracy of fire, and i believe snipers should not have any special bonus granted in this, like in reality. Kind of example: Infantry trains to shoot accurately to several hundreds of meters, but yet they really start to hit targets at less than 100 meters range, sure they are able to hit targets at several hundreds of meters if target is idle, but usually reality of battlefield is different. In here we come to details which CMSF, or many other game, can't model. They have to reach for compromise.

Sniper making shot at sniper-case target (idly standing profile) isn't really the thing CMSF is about. In CMSF we discuss infantry behaviour which isnt' standing idly and being target for enemy. But opposite, being as hard target as possible.

[meade95]

All right testing indicates that they can spot a moving enemy HQ and Combatant group at roughly 1K yards. The M110 and M82 engaged for the Army, but the M40 armed Marines did not. Now I can understand the M82, the sucker is good out to 1.5K easy, but the Marines actually train and teach engagements out to 1K, the Army only 800. The Marines did not open fire until the groups got inside of 800 yds. First kill was scored on about the 6-7th shot of the M82.

The Marines and the M110 armed sniper didn't seem to do any damage at all until the enemy units got into engagement range of their spotters. Even then the M40 armed Marines did less damage then their M16A4 armed spotters due to the much lower rate of fire.

Things to look at for blue force snipers:

1) Spotting. The main task of a sniper is normally intelligence gathering, they should have the best spotting in the game if you don't account for technology. US snipers also tend to have all the fancy toys making them almost equal to recon vehicles in terms of TI, NV, etc. Short of solid concealment (ie boulders, a dug in hide, in a building), not much should remain unspotted.

2) Accuracy. An enemy formation moving at a normal pace in the open even at 400-500 yards is not going to be a terribly difficult shot for a sniper. Out at the extremes of 800-1K yards, I can understand first round misses. However after one or maybe two misses (if you've got a bad spotter and a lot of wind), your windage and elevation are going to be dialed in, and hits should be forth coming if the targets stay in the open. At 400 yards and closer a .308 is fairly close to point and shoot with good scope and BDC on it. If the enemy was going to ground and taking cover I can understand a decrease in accuracy, but if they're still walking along they should start dropping. Currently snipers seem to have the same base accuracy as other troops, and their rifles seem to be as inaccurate as the other weapons as well. A sniper isn't the squad DM who happens to be the best shot in the squad, he's the top rifle for the company who got sent to school. Far as rifle accuracy goes I believe USMC standard for the M40 and the M118LR ammo for it is less them 1 MOA or slightly less then 10" at 1000 yards. Definitely able to hit and at least wound at 1K yards if the shooter does his job.

3) Engagement ranges. These need to be adjusted to fit doctrine and training for their respective services. Not a major issue, but something that's obvious if you're aware of it.

4) Rate of fire. The whole reason behind the M110 being semi auto is that it has a much higher rate of fire then a bolt action rifle. Currently at long range the sniper will fire a round, go to the weapon down position then re-sight in and fire another round. The weapon should be up on target with little down time. The M-82 makes slightly more sense as it needs to be resettled between shots due to heavier recoil, but still it seems excessive. The M40 of course needs to have the action worked, but the current animation seems to take too long and goes into the weapon down position as well. Targets in the open are a riflemen's dream and are going to be engage as fast as practicable to cause as much damage as possible. Even in law enforcement where multiple engagements are very rare, you fire your round and work the action as fast as you can and get back on scope just in case you need to fire again. In the military this would seem to be doubly the case.

-Jenrick

Great analysis / overview.... .Really hope Battlefront takes a look at this and includes some of these adjustments / tweaks into the next 1.11 patch. That would be fantastic.

[Battlefront.com]

We'll look into it in more depth. Generally speaking I agree with Secondbrooks, however Experience level should make a huge difference in terms of results compared to theoretical weapon performance. The better the Experience, the more the weapon should respond to its peak real world performance. Based on Jenrick's tests I'd say that isn't happening.

Remember that these are Snipers firing general production run M4s and M16s with standard ammo. Instead they are using precision made, tested, and equipped weapons which fire special ammo. Their sole purpose is to hit anything a well trained shooter aims it at. Therefore, there should be a some difference between the Snipers and the regular grunts even when the Experience level is identical. When Experience is much higher for the Snipers so should their accuracy when compared to less Experienced riflemen.

Steve

[jenrick]

One thing which got tweaked was accuracy of fire, and i believe snipers should not have any special bonus granted in this, like in reality. Kind of example: Infantry trains to shoot accurately to several hundreds of meters, but yet they really start to hit targets at less than 100 meters range, sure they are able to hit targets at several hundreds of meters if target is idle, but usually reality of battlefield is different. In here we come to details which CMSF, or many other game, can't model. They have to reach for compromise.

Sniper making shot at sniper-case target (idly standing profile) isn't really the thing CMSF is about. In CMSF we discuss infantry behaviour which isnt' standing idly and being target for enemy. But opposite, being as hard target as possible.

To an extent I agree with you that most infantry given a flat range and time can shoot fairly well. On the other hand the whole point of a sniper is that they can do so in what ever terrain and time constraint you put them in. I would agree that an infantry squad should probably do more damage to a static in the open target at 100yds then a sniper squad, as it's easy shooting. I also agree that infantry doesn't normally stand there and wait to get shot at anymore.

If you read Shooter which is based on Sgt. Jack Coughlin's time in Iraq as a sniper there's a lot of shooting he does that's against targets trying to be sneaky and take cover. However the thing a sniper has going for him, is that most of the time the enemy has no clue where the fire's coming from. Coughlin advocated and used a very pro-active in the open approach to sniping, where he was in the thick of the fighting, using his long range shooting abilities to eliminate threats from a distance and basically deny the enemy access to sectors of the battle space.

Historically troops when faced with a good sniper (Stalingrad for instance), will hunker down and are very hard to get to move about as no one wants to be shot. There is no feeling of area denial here in CMSF, you can move a whole infantry company one squad at a time through the covered area and only take a few casualties.

Coughlins idea was to put the sniper out in the open and let him deny space to the enemy, and give him cover from an infantry squad to let him do his work. The sniper element should be able to interdict and deny enemy movement out to 1K yards into the rear, and the infantry element keeps the folks close in at bay to let the sniper wreck havoc in the rear. How hard is it going to be to get an attack moving if you can't move you're units around without taking casulties in supposedly "safe" rear areas?

The wife's telling me we need to go run errands, so I'll finish my thoughts later.

-Jenrick

[Secondbrooks]

That is what i'm after. Sniper getting special bonuses and stuff in CMSF would result that they downright kill anything they see, just as Stryker (or some other warfightingthingy) did before BFC corrected this in earlier patches.

So basically thing which i'm against is this: if sniper would get infantry platoon to an open and given some 10-30 minutes, there would not be anyone alive anymore in that infantry platoon! While in reality infantry platoon would be pinned down for rest of day in that open with few casualities (if not having support or enough smoke toi cover it's withdraw).

Sure CMSF's snipers don't serve as blockers, but neither does tank, or bunker (well not without heavy enough firepower!). If scenario designer desides that AI uses that open field as their route, then they will do that. Even if there is minefield and barbed wire, they will try to get thru.

EDIT: I understand that snipers don't function in CMSF like they should in reality, i just think i see atleast partially of engine limitation of it or should we say hardware limitation. I really dont see reason to make snipers so special (=ability to see thru rocks and grass etc cover). Note: Overall infantry accuracy sucks in CMSF if you compare it to training standarts of reality... Sure if individual M16 has more success than M24 (both used by users at same experience level), then something is definedly wrong. But if M24 is more accurate than M16 then i see that things are not that bad.

[Secondbrooks]

Jenrick:

To an extent I agree with you that most infantry given a flat range and time can shoot fairly well. On the other hand the whole point of a sniper is that they can do so in what ever terrain and time constraint you put them in.

Yes i dont' underestimate snipers weapon's ability to transfer that bullet into target compared to normal infantry, but i really dont' see it as a main point.

Main point of mine in this case is that snipers would start to see and kill their targets better than rest of the gang, if we compare to infantry unit with similar experience. Spotter scope, high quality optics, sniperrifles and such "equipment"-bonuses are not unfair, but pretty much anything other would/should be unfair help. Few examples again: target's cover would be taken away, they would start wearing pink outfits and neo-signs telling their location.

Anyways i'm already going too far in this already, as i really dont' know how engine works and how accuracy of fire in handled... Maybe i'm understanding while logic how these issues are handled under the hood wrongly.

[Battlefront.com]

Accuracy is not based on "range results" for either infantry weapons or the big stuff mounted on vehicles. We got into huge arguments with German tank crazies back in the CMx1 days over this very issue They would quote, chapter and verse, from some test range result and demand that we ensured that the same result happened ALL THE TIME within the game. Obviously that was the extreme end of the argument, with most people disagreeing to some extent. However, I was always surprised how many people just didn't understand that test range results AT BEST benchmark the high end of the accuracy range.

As I said before, something like a Veteran armed with a scoped rifle should be able to land more hits and suppress better than a Veteran armed with a short barreled "assault rifle". Just like a Veteran in a Tiger II should be able to hit better than a Veteran in a Sherman 75.

Snipers, as opposed to "sharpshooters" or "designated marksmen", are trained to do a few things and do them very, very well. Can a Sniper throw a grenade or use a M240 as well as another solider? Not likely. Can a Sniper do better with an AT-4 than the average grunt with an AT-4? Not likely either. But can a Sniper with a scoped sniper rifle do better at spotting and hitting targets at far ranges in combat conditions than an average rifleman? Damned right he should

Steve

[meade95]

Forget what I asked - Answered above by Steve - (Page 3).

[meade95]

We'll look into it in more depth. Generally speaking I agree with Secondbrooks, however Experience level should make a huge difference in terms of results compared to theoretical weapon performance. The better the Experience, the more the weapon should respond to its peak real world performance. Based on Jenrick's tests I'd say that isn't happening.

Remember that these are Snipers firing general production run M4s and M16s with standard ammo. Instead they are using precision made, tested, and equipped weapons which fire special ammo. Their sole purpose is to hit anything a well trained shooter aims it at. Therefore, there should be a some difference between the Snipers and the regular grunts even when the Experience level is identical. When Experience is much higher for the Snipers so should their accuracy when compared to less Experienced riflemen.

Steve

Excellent! Glad to hear you will be looking into this further - I certainly see a new for a slight tweak/adjustment in U.S. sniper capabilities / performance.....especially at elite level.

[Secondbrooks]

Accuracy is not based on "range results" for either infantry weapons or the big stuff mounted on vehicles. We got into huge arguments with German tank crazies back in the CMx1 days over this very issue They would quote, chapter and verse, from some test range result and demand that we ensured that the same result happened ALL THE TIME within the game. Obviously that was the extreme end of the argument, with most people disagreeing to some extent. However, I was always surprised how many people just didn't understand that test range results AT BEST benchmark the high end of the accuracy range.

As I said before, something like a Veteran armed with a scoped rifle should be able to land more hits and suppress better than a Veteran armed with a short barreled "assault rifle". Just like a Veteran in a Tiger II should be able to hit better than a Veteran in a Sherman 75.

Snipers, as opposed to "sharpshooters" or "designated marksmen", are trained to do a few things and do them very, very well. Can a Sniper throw a grenade or use a M240 as well as another solider? Not likely. Can a Sniper do better with an AT-4 than the average grunt with an AT-4? Not likely either. But can a Sniper with a scoped sniper rifle do better at spotting and hitting targets at far ranges in combat conditions than an average rifleman? Damned right he should

Steve

So... brilliant, juuust brilliant... However, err, i really don't understand that much from your writing (reason is me). Other that there have been guys absolutely loving Tiger :

-Can you speculate is there something wrong in sniper's or their gears performance now?

And if there is:

-Are we gonna get sniper class which is better in spotting and hitting target than current marksman class? Atleast you give that impression in you post.

And last but not least (or easiest):

-How much accuracy and spotting will go up. Can we expect something drastic? Like accuracy going up by 50%

[SXO]

Excellent work Jenricks, that basically went above and beyond to show that there is indeed some tweaking needed, and not just with accuracy, but even more importantly IMHO with spotting. I tend to use my sniper teams more for spotting than for actual sniping, and it actually hadn't dawned on me until you mentioned it that they never spot enemy infantry until they start firing.

Great to hear Battlefront will be looking into this. Obviously I'm not expecting my snipers to mow down entire platoons on their own, and I do realize as some have stated that some abtraction comes into play in the form of cover that can't be seen and such, but a serious improvement is needed if they are to be representative of the real thing.

As an aside, some good accounts of sniping in a similar environment (Iraq ofcourse, Fallujah in particular) can be found in No True Glory by Bing West. Not a plug for the book, just thought it would be a good gauge to read about what they could do in the given environment.

[c3k]

Agreed. Nice job finding and relating this. Now that you've brought it to light, I remember many, many instances when my sniper team, in overwatch, never sees enemy activity until after the enemy fires. Then the sniper misses.

Thanks,

Ken

[Secondbrooks]

Btw. Crack level snipers do spot hiding infantry up to 400 meters long distance during first minute, atleast when snipers are at top of 8 story building. For both Army and Marines. When they don't hide themselves (were you Jenrick giving hide order to snipers? that kills ability to spot pretty well). I take gigar and return to my test. However i do believe that i will see another kind results when it comes to accuracy and stuff. However that takes hour or so.

On thing more. As i think i've tested game's rule set quite a bit (i dont' say i know it all).

I've noticed that alot of mission conditions do effect forexample shooting accuracy. One my test with machineguns resulted two kinds results.

In another there were civilian popultaion on map and light wind and sun shining at eyes of machine gunner crew. MG's effectivity of fire was bad, and Syrian militia unit was capable to take out MG positions by "human wave" tactic

In another test run i turned these settings to different. No civilians, no wind and sun was shining behind crew's back and what do you know, casualities to attacking hordes of Syrian militia were in another scale. Their assault hunkered down.

I dont' know which of those settings (sun, wind, civilians) did actually have any effect. But difference was clear.

[SXO]

Good observation. I hadn't realized that condition would/could affect things. Perhaps it would be prudent to investigate spotting ability with these conditions. :confused:

[jenrick]

Meade95,SX0, ck3: Thanks, I was the night shift QA lead/supervisor for Acclaim Entrainment back before they went bankrupt a couple of years ago. When I actually decided to let my inner tester loose it's good to know I've still got it

Secondbrooks: Hmm I can send anyone who wants it my test scenario. My crack snipers are deployed on top of an 8 story building with no orders. Red force is deployed with no orders on a flat level plain. No spotting occurred in the first minute. I issued move orders to red after that just to see what would happen. I haven't bothered to rerun it and wait to see how long it takes to get some spotting happening.

Back to the snipers roll in game:

As I stated earlier currently a sniper does not serve as a means of area denial, mainly due to their limited ability to inflict casualties currently. I also have to agree with Secondbrooks that a HMG or a tank doesn't either as the AI is just dang stubborn. One thing I haven't looked at that I think I might is the suppression effect of snipers, HMG's, and other heavy weapons.

I would posit that an unspotted sniper causing casualties should have a very large suppression effect on a unit. A spotted sniper on the other hand is just another man with a rifle trying to kill you, rather then the hidden angel of death. This would let snipers in game have a much more dramatic effect on the enemy in terms of pinning them, and causing them to spend a lot of time trying to find the sniper. Additionally good leaders and C2, should make it possible to keep moving and get out of the kill zone rather then retreating or just stopping in place under cover like a lot of unexperienced units have done throughout history.

-Jenrick

[Secondbrooks]

M110 are indeed killers at long ranges. But at 500-600 meters M40 started to get 25-50% hitting percent to targets using quick move, problem with them is slow rate of fire. They fired about 2-3 shots in minute. This backs some amount of real world data i've got from snipers i've talked to. 7.62NATO's ballistic accuracy (trajectory etc) really in their mind starts to be at it's edge at 500-600 meters. After that we talk about very-very careful esitimations with no room for mistakes.

One my test run which consisted Marine sniper squad (M40s) and Army Sniper squad (M110) resulted that before Syrian company could got into 500 meters line (took 4 minutes form them) they had got 20 men down already. Usually it seemed to be M110 which made the kill, but there seemed to be M24 taking down few.

Well that i enough from my behalf. I infact am bit supprised how accurate they really are. I expected much less... But: I have to admit my test is very limited. And besides Syrians were advancing in thight cluster f*ck, so maybe few bullets missing their real target landed by luck into another targets.

Jenrick: Odd. Our test seems to be same from their set-up... However i gave them target arces to cover the open (which does boost spotting rating). And my Syrians were militia men, who had olive suit. Maybe that is another factor favoring my case.

Also: Check that you have civilian population at none, no wind, and make sun shine behind snipers back (if possible). That is how i got my results.

[Battlefront.com]

Wind does make a big difference at extreme ranges. I always forget about that factor

Charles just made some tweaks to spotting which we're putting through the wringer right now. The change was to make the chance of spotting based on Experience a bit more pronounced for the higher end of the scale. That combined with the Sniper's equipment advantage should make a difference at further ranges (very early testing has confirmed this to be true).

Thanks for the feedback!

Steve

[jenrick]

Secondbrooks: Okay changing civilian density from sparse to none gave me the same spotting behavior you were seeing. Good spotting out to about 400-500 yds.

Far as the M40 vs. M110 I'd say they should be about the same in accuracy in practical terms. With no wind I'd say shooting on and advancing target out to 6-700 yards shouldn't be to hard. Set your BDC line up on the belly button and pull the trigger. Even if you're off a click or two you're going to get good hits. Now I do agree that toss in wind and it suddenly gets more complicated. I'd say both should be getting good hits after maybe 1 missed round. From there I agree that the M110 has the edge in ROF.

I find that 5.56 at the 600 yard line does require very good wind doping skills if the winds blowing past 5-8 MPH. 7.62 is much more forgiving of average wind doping skills so long as the winds isn't constantly changing. I've never had the chance to shoot 7.62 past 600 yds, but I'm hoping to be able to go to a 1000yd range this year. For about 300 yds on in, unless you're trying for surgical head shots, there's almost no need to fiddle with knobs for either 5.56 or 7.62 to make hits.

The main reason I've been playing with snipers is for a series of missions (possibly a campaign if I can get this all figured out), based loosely on Fallujah. Prior to the assault US forces used snipers as their primary interdiction method, definitely need them working up to snuff to simulate that.

[Secondbrooks]

Argh! i remebered wrong that 500-600 meters, it's about 500-800 meters dependant of conditions. After that things are supposed to get hard. However i'm not sniper wizard myself, just saying what others are saying.

[meade95]

Wind does make a big difference at extreme ranges. I always forget about that factor

Charles just made some tweaks to spotting which we're putting through the wringer right now. The change was to make the chance of spotting based on Experience a bit more pronounced for the higher end of the scale. That combined with the Sniper's equipment advantage should make a difference at further ranges (very early testing has confirmed this to be true).

Thanks for the feedback!

Steve

Excellent!

[Flanker15]

After sucky snipers are fixed can we look at sucky MGs?

[Tuomio]

How about the antimaterial capabilities of 50.cal sniper team? Havent been able to disable a single vehicle in this game by using the barrett teams, altough i have tried numerous times. The bullets just ping off the armour which should not be the case unless shooting at high angle.

[MikeyD]

BFC just put up some new v1.11 screenshots. It may mean something that a lot of the posted shots are of snipers. I'm just making an observation:rolleyes:

[jenrick]

secondbrooks: Ah that makes much more sense. As a 7.62 rounds gets out past 800m depending on air density, temperature, etc. it can start to get dangerously close to transonic, and all your accuracy just went out the window. On a good day though 7.62 will go out to 1K without too much trouble (a 12' tall arc from rifle to target though).

The M82 should be quiet useable against the BRD's BRM's and uncon vehicles. I'll set up a test and see how it does against them. Nothing like "remote detonating" a VIED

-Jenrick

[Apocal]

I would posit that an unspotted sniper causing casualties should have a very large suppression effect on a unit. A spotted sniper on the other hand is just another man with a rifle trying to kill you, rather then the hidden angel of death. This would let snipers in game have a much more dramatic effect on the enemy in terms of pinning them, and causing them to spend a lot of time trying to find the sniper. Additionally good leaders and C2, should make it possible to keep moving and get out of the kill zone rather then retreating or just stopping in place under cover like a lot of unexperienced units have done throughout history.

-Jenrick

Do you really think a unit would even notice a sniper picking them compared to all the metal flying at them from mortars, grenades, rockets and machine guns?