Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 39

Thread: Marksmanship and Numbers

  1. #11

    USA Major

    Timo420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Vrijstaat Maastricht
    Posts
    288
    I don't have a problem with accuracy me and my boys have been doing quite the training at longshots and we manage to hit about 25% of our shots at around 250 yards using our so called "rebel power technique" now you gotta find out what that means by yourself as it is top class Confederacy bias tactic.
    QM. Timo
    Click Picture To Enlist.

  2. #12
    OleSawedBones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    14
    Timo420, that's pretty good! Last night I logged in on the Confederate side and managed to kill more men than I have in the previous week of trying. I stopped trying for ranged shots and got up within 20 feet and used the bayonet.

    I am interested in seeing what happens during the NA events if I can get some better film material and some more experiences hands to chime in on effective ranges. It appears the longer you hold your sight beyond a moment the more likely you wander off the target rather than it will sharpen. There is a sweet spot of a few seconds. Sneaky
    "May Divine Providence carry our Cause and if not the Divine Fires of Hades will burn bright, upon the embers of our sullen ashes" ~Moi

    https://www.twitch.tv/mrchess1

  3. #13

    USA Major

    Timo420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Vrijstaat Maastricht
    Posts
    288
    The sweet spot is atleast from what I have been noticing between 3-7 seconds, so take your itme aiming! but not to much xD
    QM. Timo
    Click Picture To Enlist.

  4. #14

    CSA Captain

    Sox's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    England
    Posts
    399
    Quote Originally Posted by OleSawedBones View Post
    Sox, maybe things will appear different later. As it is set to Skirmish Mode only now during Alpha. I do not feel my weapon highly accurate beyond 100 feet. Can you prove me wrong? Of course I've only fired a few hundred rounds and probably only downed 15-25 guys and likely more of them with close up shooting and melee. Next large scale engagement I may upload it's more formation style combat as you can get. Though without hundreds I suppose my observations are premature.
    Well consider this. As things stand you have 30v30 (at least that's what I've been watching all over YouTube) Now I've live fired the 1853 Enfield & I can tell you, for a fact, that at a hundred feet you could take someone's head off nine times out of ten.....BUT: Imagine the problems that the Devs face here, with the real life range of 'effective' at five hundred yards, a thirty v thirty engagement is going to be over very quickly indeed. The real battles of the ACW involved thousands of troops & you are not going to get that in WoR, also in real battles there were other factors in play. Historians have long since acknowledged that the average civil war soldier was not exactly an expert marksman, then add in things like low powder charges in the rounds, badly calibrated sights etc etc (things like the tree on Cemetery Ridge can attest to how many troops 'fired high'). In other words, the accuracy of a weapon in a game is not quite as simple as it may at first seem.

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Sox View Post
    Well consider this. As things stand you have 30v30 (at least that's what I've been watching all over YouTube) Now I've live fired the 1853 Enfield & I can tell you, for a fact, that at a hundred feet you could take someone's head off nine times out of ten.....BUT: Imagine the problems that the Devs face here, with the real life range of 'effective' at five hundred yards, a thirty v thirty engagement is going to be over very quickly indeed. The real battles of the ACW involved thousands of troops & you are not going to get that in WoR, also in real battles there were other factors in play. Historians have long since acknowledged that the average civil war soldier was not exactly an expert marksman, then add in things like low powder charges in the rounds, badly calibrated sights etc etc (things like the tree on Cemetery Ridge can attest to how many troops 'fired high'). In other words, the accuracy of a weapon in a game is not quite as simple as it may at first seem.
    I do appreciate a little bit of 'nerfing' if you will, to make it a bit more fun so you are not constantly killed, especially to compensate for the 'average soldier effect'...
    Quote Originally Posted by Sox View Post
    ...average civil war soldier was not exactly an expert marksman, then add in things like low powder charges in the rounds, badly calibrated sights...
    But, as of right now, the compensation is too aggressive. Personally, the rifles need to be much more accurate in the 0-50 yard range, and more accurate in the 50-100 yard range. Outside of that range, some small accuracy tweaks should be done. And while this lack of accuracy may nothing more than a small to medium annoyance with the rifles, the Springfield 1842 is a different story. The Springfield 1842 cannot hit anything, reliably, farther than 40-50 yards in this game. As multiple people in this forum can attest to based on live firings, and I've seen many people live fire a Springfield 1842 on a target, it's more accurate than people think and can reliably hit anything -100 yards. It's incredibly annoying to constantly miss with this thing when I will always get it as the union on bloody lane, the 1st Texas on any map, and pretty commonly as most Confederate units in general.

  6. #16

    USA General of the Army

    A. P. Hill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    In Maryland State Near to both Antietam and Gettysburg, Harper's Ferry et al.
    Posts
    3,390
    I personally have taken opponents down at ranges of 100 - 150 yards, and then at other times, couldn't hit a guy 25 feet away.

  7. #17

    CSA Captain

    Sox's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    England
    Posts
    399
    During the war the average range that regiments engaged during a 'fire fight' seems to have been around a hundred yards. So it seems to me, that in a game, the standard Infantry weapons should be accurate at that distance at least. Three problems that are related to accuracy, from what I've seen so far, seem to be 'weapon sway, gun smoke and the timing of officers commands between 'aim' and 'fire'.

    As an ex serviceman & re-enactor I have no clue as to why weapon sway is put into games, it's just not realistic & is something we removed from Unsung after talking to many veterans. The smoke from firing is a double edged sword, during re-enactments it has always depended on the wind of course, in game it does seem to hang a tad too long in my opinion. In almost all the video's I have viewed where line firing is in use the officers are not giving their troops near enough time between the command 'aim' & 'fire', shots are most often 'in the general direction' as opposed to aimed.

    Having said all that, if weapons are not performing 'on the range' then obviously they have a problem with ballistics.

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Sox View Post
    During the war the average range that regiments engaged during a 'fire fight' seems to have been around a hundred yards. So it seems to me, that in a game, the standard Infantry weapons should be accurate at that distance at least. Three problems that are related to accuracy, from what I've seen so far, seem to be 'weapon sway, gun smoke and the timing of officers commands between 'aim' and 'fire'.

    As an ex serviceman & re-enactor I have no clue as to why weapon sway is put into games, it's just not realistic & is something we removed from Unsung after talking to many veterans. The smoke from firing is a double edged sword, during re-enactments it has always depended on the wind of course, in game it does seem to hang a tad too long in my opinion. In almost all the video's I have viewed where line firing is in use the officers are not giving their troops near enough time between the command 'aim' & 'fire', shots are most often 'in the general direction' as opposed to aimed.

    Having said all that, if weapons are not performing 'on the range' then obviously they have a problem with ballistics.
    As A.P. Hill said, the weapon ranges are so varying that it's strange, which is why I used the words 'reliably hitting' in my post, because I cannot reliably hit people at any range honestly. Sometimes I cannot hit a damn thing beyond 15 feet, but then I am a Sharpshooter and with an 1853 Enfield, I'm nailing sprinting targets out past 100 yards. Officers, like you said, giving commands can also drastically affect a units accuracy. Most officers who I know for a fact have played the game a lot and genuinely know how it works, will wait at minimum 6 seconds, at max 9 to allow for aiming. I have heard officers give us the aim command, two seconds later I hear fire, and unless it is an emergency, I see a lot of people holding their fire because it's stupid and they know they have a higher chance of shooting a butterfly than hitting the enemy.

    Weapon sway is really annoying, and it used to be extremely aggressive, luckily they did tone it down some but it's still pretty unrealistic. Now, I could get behind an effect where if you have low morale and artillery is hitting next to you, maybe your weapon sways a bit. Although, sometimes I feel like my guy has the strength of a 4 year old trying to aim the weapon with the amount of sway going on. The smoke though is something that should stay, it is realistic to the time and I agree with it wholeheartedly, as annoying or advantageous as it can be.

    tl;dr, weapons right now are really inconsistent with accuracy and all of the other factors like smoke and officers not allowing time to compensate for the sway or even aiming doesn't help.

  9. #19
    I just don't buy the game ballistics at all. Do the tree drill I talked about and you'll see what I mean.

    You don't need to nerf the weapons to make the gameplay last. It's frustrating and feels rather pointless at times shooting because every bullet doesn't count. The misses don't don't. It's all binary. Did I hit them or didn't I. It sucks the joy out of shooting when you're not having any effect 9/10 at an even remotely tough target. There is little-to-no suppression by bullets, even when firing at a lone guy some ways off, so you're basically throwing bullets away and watching the same reload animation over and over if you aren't hitting the target.

  10. #20
    I think all of our points can be summed up with this;

    Weapon ballistics are weird, unreliable, and unrealistic, please fix them, it's not fun.

    Is that fair?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •