Odd irons "issue" with Mk23 and MP5

[cracwhore]

Ok, so I noticed that I've been missing (what should be) headshots recently with the MP5. I'm almost 100% every time on moving targets with the AK or M9 if I'm on top of my game. Other guns, not too bad either. The point is; I'm a semi-whore and hardly ever use full auto.

Now, the thing I noticed is this. When on the shooting range, I line up the bare MP5 with the target at 100m. I'm positive I'm 100% on the mark. I fire and the bullet goes down and to the left of the bullseye. I whip out the M9, take half as long as I took to be "100%" with the MP5. Bam, bullseye. After about 20 minutes of trying to figure that out, I grabbed the Aimpoint MP5 and started hitting the bullseye at least 70-80% of the time at a fast ROF. I decided to give this a shot with the Mk23. WAY off. Almost twice as bad as the bare MP5. So what's the deal? If the guns are realistically made to account for their acc. at long distances, then the M9 surely shouldn't be as accurate as it is compared to the other weapons I've been shooting (HK MP5 + SOCOM). I find it very hard to accurately shoot with the Mk23 for more than 25m (somtimes even 5m ;/).

From the back of the ammo room, aiming at the far right target in the 100m range, I could get a VERY nice "50% in bullseye" score with controlled bursts using the aimpoint. Trying the same thing with the bare MP5 resulted in a much lesser score . I never thought the aimpoint helped that much. It seems like the irons aren't accurate. Could it be because of the grid system used for the mouse? At any rate, I've spent hours trying to figure this out. My biggest problem is with the Mk23. If I can pinpoint a 100% bullseye from over 100m using the M9, I should be able to pinpoint a bullseye at 50m with the Mk23. I guess I'll never get used to those irons .

Anyway, I hear that a lot of people dislike the Mk23, and I'd have to agree, as much as I want to love it. You already know how I feel about the "balanced" 3lb add-ons. I would've rather seen the 9mm/.40SW/.45ACP/.357SIG USP (maybe even the compact? ) personally, but still, HK pistols are sehr gut. So Beppo, anybody at all? Any problems you guys ran into similar to mine? I just find it hard to believe, that with all of the time I've been practicing with this pistol, I just can't seem to be even remotely decent with it, when I have pinpointed shots from all the way across "Chemical Threat" with the M9 . If anybody wants to setup a shooting range server, I will gladly show you how much I suck with the Mk23. And if anybody can get 100% bullseye groupings with it at 100m, I'll have your babies.

 

[Cleeus[JgKdo]]

Thats whats beeing called wrong offsets. It was much worse in 2.86 (remeber the PSG1 and M16 ...). Every weapon is adjusted (in the code) so that it's ligned up and the ballistics are correct. But this is not an easy job, exspecially when the models are old and not very exact (MP5).

 

[geogob]

don't get me wrong... I'm really asking this because I have no clue at all... but what does the model have to do with the balistics and zeroing? Isn't that a "simple" question of coding?

 

[Cleeus[JgKdo]]

I didn't look into the weapons code enough to know exactly why, but IIRC there were some complaints about the M16 and MP5 model in the 29-beta-mails when the alignment of the weapons was adressed,

 

[UN17]

Wow, Crac, you're good! I couldn't hit the target, let alone the bullseye at 100m.

Regarding the pistols, I have noticed headshots are difficult from a crouching position because the bullets seem to clip the shoulder hitbox area before it hits the head area.

Regarding the Socom, I don't like the heavy attachments. It's just a pistol! 6 bulk for a suppressor & flashlight seem way too high for the benefits they give. I'd make them 1 bulk per attachment. So a fully loaded Socom = 8 bulk + 1 bulk per clip. Instead of 12 bulk.

Also, I don't have access to a Socom LAM, but the fact you have to cycle to your flashlight if you want to turn the Laser off drives me nuts. How are you supposed to be a stealth player if your pistol lights you, and 20 meters around you, up everytime you cycle the laser? Can't it just be Weapon Mode = On / Off. Weapon Attachment = Laser / Flashlight. That key setting would solve my problems

Regarding the M9, in 2.86 it was the ultimate pistol. Sniper like accuracy, SMG like rate of fire, high clip. In 2.9, it's still just as powerful. Gives Specialists a chance if they spawn with the M9.

 

[yurch]

I remember going through and finding rotational offsets to correct most of the weapons. The m16 was by far the worst. The point of origination of the bullet and the rotation of that bullet do not always match what the model appears to - it's basically an independant value.

In many cases the gun also lines up oddly (mk23, mp5, DE... a few others), IE not straight in the middle of the outer posts, so I had to 'guess' where the shot should be hitting for most people. Use a full hold-breath before firing, and use the front sight post.

Also, the mk23 and Mp5 have some of the slowest bullet ballistics around and are not zeroed for terribly far ranges(if they are, they will shoot over people's heads at shorter ranges!), you will see a good deal of drop. The aimpoint may be more accurate height-wise because I believe it has a steeper zero.

 

[cracwhore]

Yurch, that sounds wonderful and all....
but....

If I can shoot a 9mm M9 100m and get a 100% bullseye with controlled breathing and an "almost bullseye" without controlled breathing, surely, I should get a bullseye with the MP5 and Mk23 while laying prone AND controlling my breathing .

The Aimpoint makes the MP5 50% better or more at ranges of 100m+. I thought it had something to do with the grid, since the irons are thicker with the Aimpoint.

No matter how much anybody can argue bullet drop and ballistics, I can prove them wrong with the M9's superior sniping power . Something is up with the Mk23 (especially) and the MP5 if they can't hit bullseyes at 100m on semi + controlled breathing when aimed properly.

Maybe it's something that can be fixed by code? Maybe it's something nobody cares about?

I'm sure 90% of the community will agree with me on the Mk23. The MP5 maybe only 20%, since most people spray full auto with it at close ranges and don't notice.

I'm adding it to my official pile of "oops" (can't use the term 'bug' or Beppo will kill me ).

Also, on a side note, how long is the head hitbox? I aimed the M9 about a foot behind KeihasWarrior's head the other day and fired the M9. It killed him surprisingly.

-Edit:
The .40SW should also pack a little more of a punch should it not? Seems pretty weak. KW probably knows more about this than I do. Let the debate begin...

 

[sublime]

I guess you didn't read or didn't understand yurch's post. Everything he typed described what you see.

Anyway, the hitbox has been discussed 100 times before. The player model leans forward slightly. The hitbox, being basically the typical UT cylinder-one, doesn't.

 

[cracwhore]

I read it, and since I'm not a coder, I guess I didn't get all of it.

Still, couldn't this be fixed by a little patch? Even if the guns would do that in real life, the M9 surely wouldn't be that accuracte then. That's my "proof". Maybe you're missing my point.

So far, I can bullseye almost anything with the M9, regardless of distance. Maybe RtK being the only acception (since I can't even see my target). But I have headshotted with the M9 from all the way across Chemical Threat, where the other guy was pretty much 3 pixels. So if the Mk23 and MP5 are realistic, then surely, the M9 is not. Something is off.

So is yurch saying that they're lined-up correctly, but not according to the models?

Either way, something is not right.

 

[ecale3]

i've never noticed any odd accuracy errors with the MP5 with just irons...wierd.

 

[Mappie]

I must agree with Crac. I tested the M9 at 50 yards and i got solid 100%. However, when it came time to test the Socom it was always without fail Down and to the Left. Somthing should be corrected.

 

[PBH]

I totally agree with what cracwhore is saying. Over extensive use of the mp5 and the not so much extensive of the mk23 i have noticed that the sights arent right. When i try to snipe with both weapons i surprisingly have a low hit rate. I normally always use semi on all the weapons that i chose and i noticed that the mp5 isnt accurate over 50m for me . On the mk23 i can barely hit a target more that once at 10m which is extremly bad. Now its a completly different story with the m9 since i can get headshots across chem threat and hit enemys with fire at quick succesion from over 50m. Since the m9 is a 9mm it takes me about 4 body shots to kill an enemy. Now i dont as much as everone on this forum about ammo but should the .40 cal pack a significantly bigger punch. I was being shot with the mk23 and it took the opponent 4 shots and i didnt die. Im almost positive i didnt have armor on either. The mp5 isnt as bad but being a smg it should only take a couple and i have had instances where it took more than that. I havent used the aimpoint much and but i will have to agree with cracwhore on that topic as well. Overall i deffinatly think somthing should be done about these since the are some of my favourite weapons. And ill have to thank cracwhore for bring the topic to the comunintys attention since i am to lazy to do so.

 

[keihaswarrior]

Here are the damage values for the pistols

Weapon -Unarmored -LII - LIIIA(F/R) - Helmet
M9....... 37 ...... 3......1/3 ........ 0
Five7.... 34 ..... 25..... 22/25 ...... 0
DE....... 52 ...... 6 .....1/4 ........ 0
SOCOM.... 45 ...... 3 .....1/3 ........ 0

There is nothing random about these, so it should never take 4 hits with any pistol to kill an unarmored target.

 

[Meplat]

Wow. I just played a quick offline using the SOCOM. No problem zapping bots at all. 51% accuracy rating, but I double tap.. (The suggestion on using the "hold" function is VERY valid. Got a one shot drop at range doing this. )

The MP5 I've also not had problems with, but I leave it on "Auto" and pop three into the softie. Front sight, tap, and move.

Meplat-

 

[yurch]

So far, I can bullseye almost anything with the M9, regardless of distance. Maybe RtK being the only acception (since I can't even see my target). But I have headshotted with the M9 from all the way across Chemical Threat, where the other guy was pretty much 3 pixels. So if the Mk23 and MP5 are realistic, then surely, the M9 is not. Something is off.

You aren't making the distinction between the correctness of the sighting system and the final destination of the bullet. The aiming system only has to do with where the weapon is pointed, think of that as a laser emitted from the barrel.

Where the bullet actually hits is usually not the same place as the laser. When I say the .40 and the .45 are slow rounds, I mean that they spend more time in the air - they will drop further and be affected more by wind. Inf does not model wind, but it does have a dispersion for bullets (which I had no part of and don't know the values) The 9mm is actually a pretty fast round compared to those, it's known in reality to go as far as 1800 meters.

As for estimating aim for ranged targets, the m9 may to be less effected by breathing motions than the iron mp5 or mk23, and the aimpoint isn't effected by breathing motions at all by virtue of being an aimpoint.

I strongly suggest a hold-breath before testing.

 

[cracwhore]

If I can shoot a 9mm M9 100m and get a 100% bullseye with controlled breathing and an "almost bullseye" without controlled breathing, surely, I should get a bullseye with the MP5 and Mk23 while laying prone AND controlling my breathing .

I have been using controlled breathing, and it's still not getting decent groupings. The SOCOM itself is supposed to get groupings within 2 inches at 50 yards. Which is about 40.213423521424234 meters (sorry, I stopped worrying about the metric system when I gave up most mathematics ). It's a pistol well-known for it's accuracy, and from my tests at least, it hasn't really been truly represented in 2.9. Sure, I haven't fired one in real life, but again I bring up the M9 statement. Regardless of how light the 9mm round is....if what you're saying is true, it should not be as accurate as it is then. If I can headshot all the way across a huge map with the M9 (with 100% dead-on accuracy), the SOCOM should get decent markings at 50m.

Yurch, I understand that you're not the one calling the shots on this and I appreciate what you and the SS team have done for this mod. I've just noticed that the Mk23 has "lackluster" (at best) performance in this game. Since it has so much hype and rave reviews, I imagine it is a little better than the M9 IRL. I'm guessing if you asked an Army soldier if he would prefer to carry an M9 or a spec-ops pistol such as the SOCOM, he would pick the Mk23. At 50m, the Mk23 should perform much better than it does.

As for the simulated "windage" and whatnot, I have no clue. But obviously, the M9 isn't affected by this (in the game) since I can get sick headshots with it. I'm pretty sure the Mk23 outperforms the M9 in a lot of categories. I could be wrong, but with all of the hype surrounding it (and the USP Tactical), plus the great reputation HK has built up from making extremely reliable/accurate weapons, it would seem that it's a great handgun.

The 9mm is actually a pretty fast round compared to those, it's known in reality to go as far as 1800 meters.

Does it go 1800 and hit it's target in the exact position that was aimed at? Is it not also affected by drop? The 9mm round is fast, but I've hit headshots on the map "Chemical Threat" (PBH and I tried it). We each stood at opposite ends in the field and took pot shots at each other. According to what you're saying, that's not reasonable. This is what I'm saying Yurch. "If the M9 can do it. Why can't the Mk23 perform at even a fraction of that?" I'm aware of the different ammo types and such, I understand that. And maybe the SOCOM can't "shoot as far" as the M9. But I'll be damned if it's not as accurate, especiailly at 50m. Seems pretty useless for the US gov. to spend so much money on a weapon that isn't good at 50m doesn't it? I just feels like it's unrealistic is all.

And for the record, again, I AM HOLDING MY BREATH!
..I'm not a "n00b"...

Obviously Yurch, you know more about the UT/INF workings than I do. And I'm not trying to get in a pissing contest with anybody. I'm just saying, I found this out, and I think it's kinda BS, as do most people (with the Mk23 at least). Is it really not that good? I have read that it is a remarkable pistol, and that it's only downfall is it's large size (which was fixed by the USP Tactical).

But, I'm tired and I'm going to stop posting for today before I make myself look like an ass from some major typo or random brain fart .

 

[Mappie]

FROM HK SITE

http://www.hk-usa.com/pages/military-le/handguns/mk23.html

"During testing, MK 23 pistols met the most stringent operational and accuracy requirements ever demanded of a combat handgun. Endurance testing demonstrated a service life of over 30,000 rounds +P ammunition. To meet the reliability requirement, the pistol had to demonstrate a minimum of 2,000 mean rounds between stoppages (MRBS) with both M1911 ball and +P ammunition. All pistols exceeded the 2000 MRBS with an average of 6000 MRBS. In more than 450 accuracy test firings from a precision firing fixture at 25 meters, MK 23 pistols far exceeded the government requirement, averaging 1.44 inches, with 65 groups of less than one inch. There were four groups of .5 inches, with 5 rounds going
through the same hole!"

You cannot honestly tell me that when adding 25 more meters, the rounds would be this far off the mark. And always in the same direction...come on people. We arnt even dealing with this "wind" issue either.

 

[cracwhore]

I'm trying to describe this without offending Beppo and the SS team. It's not a horrible weapon in game, it just, I believe, has an issue with regards to it's accuracy, especially at long ranges. I have hit the 50m in the red, but I had to aim a little higher and to the right. I've hit the 100m in the red after about 500 tries. I found you have to aim about a foot diagonally right of the red in order to get one in there. Yet, with the M9, my bullets always go where they're supposed to go according to the irons. Just seems odd is all. Hence the topic, "odd". The weapon is almost entirely impractical online, due to it's 3lb add-ons and it's "caveman slow" ROF . It seems online, all weapons seem to lag quite a bit, and the SOCOM gets the worst I guess . Also, it seems like the .45ACP should do more damage than it does. There are lots of weird things one finds in INF2.9..this is just something I bumped into and wanted to get some feedback on. But also noted, when I finally got around to nailing the red on the 100m mark with the Mk23, I had to hold my breath and focus as long, or longer than you have to with the Robar (when using it on a map like RTK). It just seems that the "balance" between the Mk23 and the M9 is a pretty large margin when talking about "how far and how accurately" it can shoot. I hate to see the SOCOM go to waste. Nobody uses it online and whenever I do, I get frustrated and resort to the M9. Anyway, I'd like to get some more community feedback on what they think about how the Mk23 behaves and if they believe something needs a little tweak or not. I personally think it does. I did a good job at killing "mildly retarded" (standing still/falling prone) bots from about 30-50m away. But still, something just feels wrong. Again, I'm sorry if my posts sound really negative and offend Beppo or anybody that worked on 2.9. I can't stress enough how much I love your game. And I broke my own promise of not posting at early "sleeping hours". Damn me.

Somebody wanna setup a server just for the fun of it one of these weekends so we can take it to the range? .

I've just noticed that nobody really likes it, so obviously, something is up. It's not really preference; most people say that it doesn't do enough damage, others say the ROF is terrible. I agree with both in a sense. The ROF is bad because it lags massively online (not SS's fault, but it does make the weapon useless). It's not so bad offline, but online, it is. The damage, I believe, should be upped just a tiny bit. As I recall, .357 and .45 are very similar ammunition types. Most studies I read were in favor of the .357 being the compromise between .40SW and .45, and in most cases, the most superior calibur. However, it's 3am and I'm in no mood to research these pages right now. Maybe later. But still, something is either up with these weapons, or the M9. I could be wrong about this whole thing, but a lot of people hate the Mk23 and I would just like to see it "fixed", if there is indeed something wrong with it's acc. and damage. Anyway, I'll probably look at this in 12 hours and realize "I could've worded that better", so please, realize that I'm dead tired right now and trying to be as non-offensive as I can be.

 

[Tiffy]

FROM HK SITE

http://www.hk-usa.com/pages/military-le/handguns/mk23.html

"During testing, MK 23 pistols met the most stringent operational and accuracy requirements ever demanded of a combat handgun. Endurance testing demonstrated a service life of over 30,000 rounds +P ammunition. To meet the reliability requirement, the pistol had to demonstrate a minimum of 2,000 mean rounds between stoppages (MRBS) with both M1911 ball and +P ammunition. All pistols exceeded the 2000 MRBS with an average of 6000 MRBS. In more than 450 accuracy test firings from a precision firing fixture at 25 meters, MK 23 pistols far exceeded the government requirement, averaging 1.44 inches, with 65 groups of less than one inch. There were four groups of .5 inches, with 5 rounds going
through the same hole!"

You cannot honestly tell me that when adding 25 more meters, the rounds would be this far off the mark. And always in the same direction...come on people. We arnt even dealing with this "wind" issue either.

Maybe not, but taking that "Precision firing fixture" out of the equation will make a hugh difference.

The above accuracy test appears to have used a bench rest and the results ain't to clever . What is described isn't a precission pistol but a rugged combat handgun that will be useful at short ranges with training.

The real issues here are all the people who claim to be able to hit anything with a beretta at 100m plus. IRL most of you would have real trouble hitting the target screen at those ranges. Long range (that's over about 15m) pistol shooting is difficult and requires a lot of training.

 

[Meplat]

Considering that the hole made in a target by a .45 ACP projectile is about 1/2 inch in diameter, a one inch group is not incredible. Especially from a Ransom rest.