A few tweaks that need to be made

[Crispy1209]

I've noticed a few tweaks that need to be made to CM:SF. First, visibility/observation needs to be improved, especially for the US. It doesn't seem as bad for defenders, but when I'm attacking, quite often there are enemy Soldiers that manage to hide from me out in the open in a road or flat paved area even when I have a sniper team (who have had a significant amount of Target Detection training) above them.

Also Soldiers, especially for the US side, need to be more accurate at longer ranges. I understand if they've been running around and are exhausted, but perfectly rested troops should be able to hit a target AT LEAST out to 300m with an M4, and certainly farther especially if they are firing several shots. I can't speak for the Syrian side, but judging by the fact that they generally don't have optics and going by what I've seen from other Middle Eastern militaries who have a bigger budget and better training than they do, I am about 99% sure that they are not as proficient in marksmanship as the US. The sniper teams are downright ridiculous, my sniper team in one mission was perfectly rested and could not hit targets 600m away. Most of our sniper teams can hit targets at about a km away with the first shot consistently. A lot depends on the sniper team, but that's about what they're expected to be able to do, many can hit targets even farther out.

[dan/california]

This is purely my own opinion, but I think snipers have tweaked a little for game balance reasons. In real life if one or two people get their brains spattered all over the backside of the room or fighting position everyone else gets VERY careful about sticking their heads out, up, or pretty much anywhere that isn't obviously safe. This does result in effectively suppressing enemy units, but aside from the lowest quality insurgent types the other side adapts rather rapidly, although the adaptation certainly reduces combat effectiveness overall. The lesson after all is rather severe. The AI and spotting routines have difficulty with this subtlety. This is not a criticism, there are limits to how many lines of code can be written and even more importantly, tested.

But if snipers had "real life" accuracy against targets that aren't being "real life" careful, a lot of scenarios would be over in ten minutes.

[Crispy1209]

Well in buildings, I understand them being more difficult to hit, but I was firing at a gunner standing on top of a technical 600m away waiting to hit my guys when they came around a corner, and my sniper team fired upwards of 10-15 shots before I finally just told them to stop. The enemy also doesn't usually KNOW there are snipers present until their buddy gets schwacked. Usually our snipers don't fire THAT much anyway, one of their main uses is observation. So if they can't observe enemies 300m away lying around in the open and can't hit important targets of opportunity farther than 400m away, then they are pretty much useless. You don't get sniper support all the much in the game anyway, so when you do get it, they should be pretty useful. I'm not expecting them to be Gods of War that can kill everything in sight, but when they are in a good vantage point, they should be able to see guys out in the open who are right under their noses, and if I want them to take out a key target they should be able to hit a man-sized target standing on top of a truck at 600m.

[Boche]

hitting targets at ranges of 300 meteres isnt as easy as you think, not that i have any experience shooting a weapon (at least not yet ) but if you think of the physics of it...

a 5.56 bullet is quite small, add that to the distance, the time it takes to get there,wind,gravity and bullet drop, the movement of the enemy target, their cover...it takes many more bullets than you would think. I am quite happy with accuracy in the game, altough i find myself cursing the syrian airborne for been too acurate at times! jaja

As to snipers, again content with their accuracy

[dan/california]

5.56mm class weapons are not the primary subject of the conversation so far. Virtually all true sniper weapons are 7.62mm or bigger, much bigger in some cases. An absolute minimum effective range 600-700 meters. Double plus that for 8.6mm Lapua or .50 cal. there are several endless discussion on the pluses and minuses, and effective range of 5.56 on the board in various places. This , however is the zillionth thread on snipers.

Crispy, in the situation in your last post what was the experience and leadership modifier of the sniper in question? It matters, a LOT.

[c3k]

Actually, hitting man-size silhouettes at 300 meters using iron sights isn't that hard. I'm talking unknown range, open ground, not firing range. If you miss, which you shouldn't with a properly adjusted sight, you correct based on the dirt puff. Now, toss in the fact that they are moving, and trying to kill you, and firing back at you, and you've got about a gallon of adrenalin in your bloodstream, and you cannot just sit there and sight and fire, and you don't know which of the 200 puffs of dirt over, under, left, and right of your enemy may be yours, and you're hearing guys yelling about "the flank!!!" and things are going "BOOM!"... well, you get the picture.

Target shooting and combat shooting (for real, not weekend make-believe) are different. If you're not sure, check the minimum marksmanship requirements for our soldiers/marines, then check the number of rounds expended so far. Subtract out whatever you'd like as "suppression fire". I think the number of "aimed at an enemy in my sights" rounds are far, far greater than the number of enemy casualties.

That does not necessarily mean I think snipers haven't been nerfed. (Too many negatives? Okay: I think snipers in CMSF are nerfed.)

Fun game.

Ken

[stoex]

c3k, I just gotta say this right now: completely aside from actual contextual value, your posts on this forum are almost always entertaining and tend to make me smile. Keep it up please!

And NO, I'm not in love with you. Just saying

P.S.: For the record: I also think snipers in CMSF are nerfed.

[Chops]

And for the record, I have also observed that snipers are fuhkocked in CMSF.

[akd]

Actually, at times it seems their accuracy is a hindrance. In one of the NATO module Dutch single missions, I observed a Dutch sniper at the same elevation (or possibly one story lower) as a Syria GL crew on a walled-rooftop about 300-400m away repeatedly take shots and miss, not because the shots were off, but because they appeared to be aimed dead center mass on the Syria soldier, so instead of hitting the exposed head and shoulders, the shots repeatedly impacted the wall just below the target's head. Probably observed 10-15 wasted shots before someone else (I think) shot the Syrian, probably with a "miss" that deviated high from the point of aim.

Also, open ground is seldom truly open unless it is composed of a truly "flat" grid type (e.g. pavement). Even plain dirt is assumed to have undulations and random bits of cover. Plus, if the enemy is defending (v. attack or assault, I believe), they will have dug shallow, one-man foxholes that offer pretty good cover if they don't change pos.

[MikeyD]

Hitting targets at 300m with an M4? Paper targets maybe.

[dan/california]

Can we start another thread to rehash the 5.56mm/M4 debate? It and real or imaginary sniper issues are comepletely different questions.

[Erwin]

There have been so many discussions of the relative uselessness of snipers since CMSF came out. It's just one of a million issues with the game that makes CMSF a game, and not a DoD simulation. DoD spends literally tens of millions to develop "realistic" games. They are not as much fun as CMSF, so thank goodness CMSF is a fun GAME.

C'mon guys, this issue has been discussed to death several times already. In summary: "Snipers suck in CMSF."

[dan/california]

No one said you had to read it. It may be a little silly but the endless back and forth on this board has helped the evolution of the game more than just a wee bit. Those of us with a bit too much time on our hands are at least trying to influence things for the game AFTER Normandy, since all major features of Normandy are reported to be finalized, supposedly.

They can release a bone or three to prove that at any time, and then we can pointlessly argue and speculate about that instead.

[silverstars]

I think I would be happy if the Snipers ROF became 3X as slow, but at least 2x as accurate.

In fact, I wouldn't mind if it took 5-15 MINUTES for a sniper to get off a shot; so long as he HIT THE DAMN TARGET.

(watching my Crack sniper armed with a .50 BMG Barrett plink off 5-6 shots a minute at a targtet 200m away and not hitting anything is a tad frustrating.)

[Lanzfeld]

Well said Silverstars. I like those numbers.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

I would like it if snipers could have a 'setup' a la the MG of whatever length is deemed needed. Once done, BIG bonus to spotting and accuracy. Before they set up I'd be happy if they perform as infantrymen with big rifles.

[Praetori]

Also Soldiers, especially for the US side, need to be more accurate at longer ranges. I understand if they've been running around and are exhausted, but perfectly rested troops should be able to hit a target AT LEAST out to 300m with an M4, and certainly farther especially if they are firing several shots.

Hitting a moving human target at 300m with a 5.56 AR isn't that easy. It's one thing on the range and a totally different matter elsewhere.

There's lots of dust being kicked up (not only by the shooter) and actually observing splashes at 300m in a combat situation again won't be as straight forward as on the range. There's a reason why most MGs have tracers.

[c3k]

Is the difficulty of hitting a moving target modelled? One moving towards/away from the firer is FAR easier to hit than one moving crosswise. (Relying on BF.C's record would strongly imply that this is the case, however I'm curious if there's any empirical evidence to back up this "feeling".)

Snipers are, to my _opinion_, far too inaccurate. Another issue is the frequency with which their security team opens fire. (Yes, I've crafted a thread on that...Here: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=89900

)

silverstars hits on one of the frustrations. Perhaps the sniper had the wrong zoom setting on his scope? Joking aside, there are so many variables, posting some more detailed information regarding this anecdote could help. Again, I support the notion that snipers are not as accurate in the game as they should be.

On the flip side, why does it seem that SVD equipped enemy sharpshooters always nail my guys?

Ken

[Lanzfeld]

Since we are talking about tweaks here...

Are you guys finding that when an enemy section is killed and your guys do NOT see it happen the enemy ICON vanishes anyway? So now you KNOW that there is no more "alive" members of that section/ICON? Get me?

[stoex]

Lanzfeld,

The 'visible unit' floating icon does vanish, as well it should if the unit that was visible is killed. However, quite often if not most of the time, friendly units who cannot see the enemy unit in question keep a 'question mark' icon in their last known (or assumed) position - until C2 comes around to tell them the unit is dead, or they go there themselves and see the dead unit. Even friendlies who CAN see the enemy unit going down will sometimes keep a '?' icon in that position if they don't know whether there are any men left in the enemy unit. Try it out by pausing and selecting several of your units when this happens to check out the differences.

[Lanzfeld]

Thanks Stoex,

I was not quite sure of what I was seeing. Will check it out.

[Lanzfeld]

Again...since we are tweaking here....

1. I want to control if my BMP-1's use the AT missle OR the HE gun. I select area fire and they shoot 1 shell then 1 AT missle and spend 60 seconds or so reloading the AT missle and not shooting anything! I just wanted to hit the area with 3 or 4 HE rounds!

2. PLEASE can we make the rubble from collapsed buildings emit smoke for 5 minutes or so AFTER they fall? I like the size of the cloud but the duration is too short IMHO.

Thanks

[Erwin]

I agree, I dont understand the logic or when HE or a missile is used when targeting (say) a building). And control over the number of rounds fired too. Seems insane to have heated discussions over some very trivial issue of RL vs CMSF when there are glaring issues like that in existence.

CMSF is a very enjoyable game, not a great simulation, so I don't worry about the above (much). It's much harder to create a fun game than an accurate (means boring to me) sim imo. But am amazed that some of the other threads make one think CMSF is supposed to be an accurate DoD sim.

[akd]

BF recently introduced a new feature of orders interrupting crew-served weapon reloading. The same extended to vehicle-crew external weapon reloading would solve part of the AFV problem (crew insisting on staying exposed to reload external weapons, despite orders to button-up).

[Waaarg]

CMSF is a very enjoyable game, not a great simulation, so I don't worry about the above (much). It's much harder to create a fun game than an accurate (means boring to me) sim imo. But am amazed that some of the other threads make one think CMSF is supposed to be an accurate DoD sim.

I have seen you post something like this before. IL2 is still a game and a simulator. It can happen.