need glasses for the sharpshooters ....

[siffo998]

"

There may be an issue with accuracy against tank commanders, I have not seen enough to comment one way or another. If I leave my tanks unbuttoned within a couple of hundred yards of the enemy the commanders seem to get shot on a regular basis, but whether from snipers or general infantry I couldn't say.

i tested the same situation back some time ago with snipers and mg42 (HMG). the HMG killed the tank commander in most cases within a minute while the snipers hit not a single time in nearly multiple tests a 1:00. so i think the normal infantry can kill tcs because of the spray of the bursts but the sniper aims very carefully and fires at center mass of the tank and therefore never hits the tc.

[siffo998]

so after nobody started a test with 1.01 for themself i raised my tired body up from writing my exam work and ran some test:

8 lanes each separated from the other...

german snipers 50-100m away from an sherman m4a3 76mm

shermans with cover arcs so that they wont fire back.

i expected similar results as in my thread posted above (no tc hit after around 40 tests one minute each, all tcs stayed unbuttoned), but then:

after 5 seconds or less most sherman crews where completely buttoned up and started fire at the snipers. 4 of the tcs where hit by the snipers within 5 seconds (first hit). so i stopped the test because obviously bfc has fixed this sniper center-mass problem with 1.01 patch. case closed...

[JG11Preusse]

so after nobody started a test with 1.01 for themself i raised my tired body up from writing my exam work and ran some test:

8 lanes each separated from the other...

german snipers 50-100m away from an sherman m4a3 76mm

shermans with cover arcs so that they wont fire back.

i expected similar results as in my thread posted above (no tc hit after around 40 tests one minute each, all tcs stayed unbuttoned), but then:

after 5 seconds or less most sherman crews where completely buttoned up and started fire at the snipers. 4 of the tcs where hit by the snipers within 5 seconds (first hit). so i stopped the test because obviously bfc has fixed this sniper center-mass problem with 1.01 patch. case closed...

hope you are right, my testes today and yesterday are all with 1.01 patch

[Magpie_Oz]

@magpie oz

trained snipers have a special job. the target is to stay unseen and aim at a long or longer distance. thats what they are for and usually hidden soldiers will be able to aim accurate, not only at the shooting range

Rubbish. You are talking about killing someone.

[Magpie_Oz]

... my testes today ...

I understand that English is not your first language but I would recommend a quick spell check on your posts.

[JG11Preusse]

I understand that English is not your first language but I would recommend a quick spell check on your posts.

i would recommend you to accept other peoples opinions, if in super native english or in chinese.

people who start their answers with words like "rubbish" arent woth to talk with them and i guess its better that such morones dont recommend something to other people.

[c3k]

Actually, JG11Preusse, what you wrote is worthy of checking online. It was an easily made spelling mistake with a bit of humor. No one is making fun of your English.

Onto marksmen/snipers. I, too, have the occasional feeling that they are not as accurate as they could be. I will perform some tests. Setting up QB's are not good tests. There are far too many variables that could be at play.

Regards,

Ken

[JG11Preusse]

Actually, JG11Preusse, what you wrote is worthy of checking online. It was an easily made spelling mistake with a bit of humor. No one is making fun of your English.

Onto marksmen/snipers. I, too, have the occasional feeling that they are not as accurate as they could be. I will perform some tests. Setting up QB's are not good tests. There are far too many variables that could be at play.

Regards,

Ken

for me it is the best way to test at qb´s, because you can setup almost the same enviroment and test several different kind of tanks, infantry, ari and so on.

playing whole szenarios needs to long time for testing sch things and there are also to many troops on the map to obersver as much behavior of special units, as possible.

i hope units will behave in qb´s same as in scenarios or in a campain, otherwise my tests will relly be obsolete.

to come back to the fat marked sentence ... most wouldnt do that, bt some for sure do, as i also undertand with my pack of english

if you like to test it with me together online, i will b e happy to make such testgames with you. so we can se teamspeak or something similar.

in 2 weeks i will be back from asia and then i will have a fast and stable internet. here i get disconnects every 5-10 minutes

[Magpie_Oz]

i would recommend you to accept other peoples opinions, if in super native english or in chinese.

people who start their answers with words like "rubbish" arent woth to talk with them and i guess its better that such morones dont recommend something to other people.

The word is actually spelt moron and if you want people to think you are talking about your balls go right ahead.

Thing is you are stuck on the assertion that firing at real people in combat is the same as firing at targets on a range and that is simply not true as a number people who have actually been in that situation have pointed out.

The idea is to to put together a series of inputs to determine whether the game is accurate or not but if you have already made up your mind... why bother discussing it?

[JG11Preusse]

The word is actually spelt moron and if you want people to think you are talking about your balls go right ahead.

Thing is you are stuck on the assertion that firing at real people in combat is the same as firing at targets on a range and that is simply not true as a number people who have actually been in that situation have pointed out.

The idea is to to put together a series of inputs to determine whether the game is accurate or not but if you have already made up your mind... why bother discussing it?

yes mr. english teacher ........ the rest of your text i will not read ........ if you still found grammar problems with this short reply now, let me know via pm

[Battlefront.com]

Let's keep the temperature down, OK? Instead, let's focus on the issues.

First, since the very beginning of game making experience we have always rejected anecdotal, vaguely described "tests" as meaningless. We need to see a very detailed, specific set of circumstances to verify there is a problem. This is called "scientific rigor" and it is the ONLY way to approach potential problems in a sim. Otherwise we would be spending large amounts of time looking for problems that do not exist or at least wasting our time testing the wrong variables and making conclusions based on that.

This is an example, from siffo998, of the sort of scientific reporting that has value to us:

so after nobody started a test with 1.01 for themself i raised my tired body up from writing my exam work and ran some test:

8 lanes each separated from the other...

german snipers 50-100m away from an sherman m4a3 76mm

shermans with cover arcs so that they wont fire back.

i expected similar results as in my thread posted above (no tc hit after around 40 tests one minute each, all tcs stayed unbuttoned), but then:

after 5 seconds or less most sherman crews where completely buttoned up and started fire at the snipers. 4 of the tcs where hit by the snipers within 5 seconds (first hit). so i stopped the test because obviously bfc has fixed this sniper center-mass problem with 1.01 patch. case closed...

Compare this with JG11Preuse's comments:

i tried many quickbattles with many different settings. from elite snipers down to regular ones and it seems that they need several shots to hit something even at still standing targets.

I hope everybody sees a clear difference. Now, there could be some sort of tweak needed. But siffo988's test doesn't suggest there is anything wrong. JG11Preuse's experiences, however, may be valid. But what variables can we use to reproduce his experience and not reproduce siffo998's? If JG11Preuse can so easily produce these bad results, then he needs to tell us what they are by providing a test scenario. Which apparently he already has on his harddrive, so we're not asking the impossible.

"Scientific rigor" is the *only* way to examine something like this in more detail.

Steve

[Ryujin]

I did some more messing around and even the regular snipers can score 700m hits, often within the first 2 or 3 shots (I used squads walking towards the sniper). A few times he'd even get first round 700m hits. The crack/elite snipers are better, but even a regular sniper can often put a round somewhere on an standing guy at that range.

Test map was just 800m of empty with a sniper on one end and a couple walking squads on the other.

I also noticed the cowering guys got a lot of abstracted cover, saw a few rounds go through them without doing damage.

I haven't noticed anything that seemed off yet, except maybe the snipers being too eager to take low probability of hit shots.

[JG11Preusse]

Let's keep the temperature down, OK? Instead, let's focus on the issues.

First, since the very beginning of game making experience we have always rejected anecdotal, vaguely described "tests" as meaningless. We need to see a very detailed, specific set of circumstances to verify there is a problem. This is called "scientific rigor" and it is the ONLY way to approach potential problems in a sim. Otherwise we would be spending large amounts of time looking for problems that do not exist or at least wasting our time testing the wrong variables and making conclusions based on that.

This is an example, from siffo998, of the sort of scientific reporting that has value to us:

Compare this with JG11Preuse's comments:

I hope everybody sees a clear difference. Now, there could be some sort of tweak needed. But siffo988's test doesn't suggest there is anything wrong. JG11Preuse's experiences, however, may be valid. But what variables can we use to reproduce his experience and not reproduce siffo998's? If JG11Preuse can so easily produce these bad results, then he needs to tell us what they are by providing a test scenario. Which apparently he already has on his harddrive, so we're not asking the impossible.

"Scientific rigor" is the *only* way to examine something like this in more detail.

Steve

you are right steve, will do some more test later, wenn im back at hoem from asia and then i will report detailed the situations.

if i remember right, it is also possible to save a quickbattle game ? if so i can snd the save file and your team will be able to review the what happened right ?

last time i reported and sent a safe file, it was from a single player missin, where several vehicles was eaten by a bridge

[Battlefront.com]

Thanks for the follow up. There is an argument to make about where the line between "engage or don't engage" should be drawn. In fact, there always is because situational context is often more subtle than the game can possibly handle. We're usually satisfied when the TacAI mostly picks the right time to fire.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

you are right steve, will do some more test later, wenn im back at hoem from asia and then i will report detailed the situations.

if i remember right, it is also possible to save a quickbattle game ? if so i can snd the save file and your team will be able to review the what happened right ?

last time i reported and sent a safe file, it was from a single player missin, where several vehicles was eaten by a bridge

Yup, you can save the game in either the Orders or Review part of the game. It's often best to save it in the Review part because this means we will see the same thing you see 100% of the time. If you save it in the Orders Phase this may not happen because of random factors that haven't been calculated.

Steve

[BloodyBucket]

I'd like to start off by saying I don't belittle military service of any type. My own experience showed me that much of what one is asked to do is a crap game, and while those who roll boxcars and get to shoot "for real" deserve all the credit that entails, the willingness to be a part of the lottery counts for something.

I'm a firm believer that, as somebody said prior, a two way rifle range is a completely different story than the peacetime type. It's also well to remember that the vast WWII armies of mass conscription were a different beast from the small, rather intensely trained military forces of most nations today.

I'm glad to see that unscientific anecdotal concerns can generate tests from the community that seem to settle questions, and would hate to see a "extensively test or stay silent!" forum. I know that testing every concern or theory would be an impossible task for BF, so when the community steps in, it's all good.

Fascinating subject. The idea of a sniper holds a lot of mystique in the popular culture, and among gamers, too.

[Georgie]

Hello everybody, I've been following this thread with interest and here is my slant on the accuracy of "snipers". I think that the shooting accuracy of the man using a sniper rifle should be much better at long range than if that man was using a non scoped rifle. It should be better enough that it would be "fun" to utilize him in your game play. This is a game and I think that there are a lot of things that go on in this game that weren't that way IRL. BF maintains a good balance between "IRL" and "fun" and I don't think that an effective regular grade "sniper" will upset the balance of the game. It would just be more fun.

[De Savage]

I've been reading a book "Dying for Saint-Lô". Good description about battle for Saint-Lô. There was few lines about German snipers who usually killed by first shot from 300-600 meters. It was a pain for US troops to locate sniper in ruined city.

I am happy that snipers are not as efffective as they were in older CM. I find it too gamey to fire on tanks with sniper and hopefully to kill TC. I hated that in most H2H games my opponent is using several snipers just to button tank and/or kill my TC.

I do believe good sharpshooter can hit accurately up to 800m. CMBN might have lowered accuracy compared to real life. INHO this is good thing. I do not want to see super snipers and overuse of them in H2H.

Anyway it's okay to just add little more cover for sniper and little more accuracy. But JUST LITTLE and not to make snipers too effective super-unit.

[JG11Preusse]

btw ... tested arround 14 quickbattles with eliesnipers at one side and there is for sure something wrong in the game. 3 elitesnipers shoot at 1 good visible target and all 3 get out of ammunition and didnt hit at 173 meters .. only one example i engaged today

[siffo998]

ok preusse i rerun the test with infantry here are the conditions and results:

8 lanes each separeated from the other.

8 German Snipers Squads "Elite" (everything else on normal "0") in buildings (2 floors, placed in the upper floor) facing the enemy (one us rifle squad) in the lane with a cover arc. (each squad consits of 2 men, sniper and spotter)

8 US-Rifle Squad "Regular" (everything else on normal "0") moving ("move") towards the buildings (each in his own lane). (each squad consists of 12 men, some have bazookas others not)

range between the teams in one lane: 200m (us squads moving towards the enemy)

(so every german squad is facing one us-squad in his lane. i know the test conditions are not perfect because in some situations the germans in the 2nd floor could shoot over the wall that is separating the lane and kill enemys from another test lane!)

Results after one minute (one round) testing = 8 different tests:

German Side:

No losses at all

No Panic

Everything ok

US Side:

Team 1: 4 OK, 2 Injured, 6 KIA, Team panicked

Team 2: 5 OK, 0 Injured, 7 KIA, Team panicked

Team 3: 4 OK, 1 Injured, 7 KIA, Team panicked

Team 4: 8 OK, 1 Injured, 3 KIA, Team shaken

Team 5: 4 OK, 0 Injured, 8 KIA, Team panicked

Team 6: 6 OK, 0 Injured, 6 KIA, Team panicked

Team 7: 4 OK, 0 Injured, 8 KIA, Team panicked

Team 8: 5 OK, 2 Injured, 5 KIA, Team panicked

My opinion:

In my opinion nothing seems to be wrong with the results or the game. My results are completely different from your results. Do you use a MAC version of the game ? Please post detailed testing conditions or rerun the test with my testing conditions maybe we will see a difference ?!

PS: this was a yankee massacre !!!! I would definitly invest points in elite snipers.

[JG11Preusse]

ok preusse i rerun the test with infantry here are the conditions and results:

8 lanes each separeated from the other.

8 German Snipers Squads "Elite" (everything else on normal "0") in buildings (2 floors, placed in the upper floor) facing the enemy (one us rifle squad) in the lane with a cover arc. (each squad consits of 2 men, sniper and spotter)

8 US-Rifle Squad "Regular" (everything else on normal "0") moving ("move") towards the buildings (each in his own lane). (each squad consists of 12 men, some have bazookas others not)

range between the teams in one lane: 200m (us squads moving towards the enemy)

(so every german squad is facing one us-squad in his lane. i know the test conditions are not perfect because in some situations the germans in the 2nd floor could shoot over the wall that is separating the lane and kill enemys from another test lane!)

Results after one minute (one round) testing = 8 different tests:

German Side:

No losses at all

No Panic

Everything ok

US Side:

Team 1: 4 OK, 2 Injured, 6 KIA, Team panicked

Team 2: 5 OK, 0 Injured, 7 KIA, Team panicked

Team 3: 4 OK, 1 Injured, 7 KIA, Team panicked

Team 4: 8 OK, 1 Injured, 3 KIA, Team shaken

Team 5: 4 OK, 0 Injured, 8 KIA, Team panicked

Team 6: 6 OK, 0 Injured, 6 KIA, Team panicked

Team 7: 4 OK, 0 Injured, 8 KIA, Team panicked

Team 8: 5 OK, 2 Injured, 5 KIA, Team panicked

My opinion:

In my opinion nothing seems to be wrong with the results or the game. My results are completely different from your results. Do you use a MAC version of the game ? Please post detailed testing conditions or rerun the test with my testing conditions maybe we will see a difference ?!

PS: this was a yankee massacre !!!! I would definitly invest points in elite snipers.

i use the pc version with patch 1.01

as i said before, when im back from asia, i will send all savegame files and complete description about map, settings, troups and whatever.

i alltime use for testing the tiny open map from the downloadable mappack with 11 qb-maps.

[JSB]

I just made a tiny little test.

The german elite sniper seems very accurate but does he aim the right guy?

(only one kill in about 3 minutes of shooting in comfortable conditions: not spotted and C2 link OK, target 325m away and stationary)

Seriously, it seems that the sniper is aiming at the chest of the MG gunner, as numerous bullets hit the shield just in front of his belly (accurate shot, but a bit too low).

In final, 24 shots were necessary to eliminate the four passengers of the halftrack.

[siffo998]

i set up a test:

8 lanes each separeated from the other.

8 German Snipers Squads "Elite" (everything else on normal "0") in buildings (2 floors, placed in the upper floor) facing the enemy (one us rifle squad) in the lane with a cover arc. (each squad consits of 2 men, sniper and spotter)

8 US-Halftracks M1A3 "Regular" (everything else on normal "0") standing (each in his own lane). (no passengers) (each with short cover arc so that he wont fire back)

range between the teams in one lane: 300m (the german spotter would not use his mp40 at these range)

(so every german squad is facing one us-halftrack in his lane. i know the test conditions are not perfect because in some situations the germans in the 2nd floor could shoot over the wall that is separating the lane and kill enemys from another test lane!)

Results after one minute (one round) testing = 8 different tests:

German Side:

2 Snipers lost, spotters ok (due to 50cal fire after spotting the sniper team)

No Panic

US Side:

5 out of 8 gunners lost.

all drivers ok.

My opinion:

In my opinion at the first look nothing seems to be wrong. but i think it might be that you are right and the sniper really aims at the center part of the gunner and therefore just hits the armor in (too ?) many cases ! I will retest it with shermans...

what i can say after all that testing is that bfc might have changed something regarding the response of teams with short cover arc when under fire. after the team with the short cover arc feels a direct thread they will ignore the cover arc and fire back. nice work guys feels much more realistic !

[YankeeDog]

Bear in mind that the armor on an M3 halftrack is quite thin, and can be penetrated by a rifle-caliber round at many combat ranges & aspects.

So yes; there is a real risk to crew and passengers inside the vehicle from sniper fire.

Of course, it will be much harder for a sniper to precisely aim at someone inside the vehicle, whom he cannot see. But if he shoots at the MG gunner and misses low, there would certainly be risk to the driver or others inside the vehicle.

[JSB]

The passengers weren't shot inside the halftrack, they replaced the gunner one by one.

What you see on the screenshot is an artefact, the bullet seems to pass through the armor, but just after, there is a ricochet. (hard to catch )

In my "test" the sniper is prone in light wood terrain; he gets unspotted all the time, being able to shoot 25 times without being disturbed.

The occurence of shots in the same exact location (gunner's belly) seems very high. Perhaps the results would be more effective with a green sniper team!