sparky? did you make that flash animation with the ghost in your picture?
hmm forget what its called now
hmm forget what its called now
Yurch's antics reach a new level!
- Thread starter yurch
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
you mean animated .gif 
The robar is removed in the *current* version of rav2 (the one in my sig) If you have more than one primary.
The starting-with-grenade problem is based opon your weapon preference settings, i think its in your inis somewhere. Its specific from computer to computer, and I unfortunately do not know where the setting is located. Anyone who does happen to know, please speak up, I have the same problem.
The robar is removed in the *current* version of rav2 (the one in my sig) If you have more than one primary.
The starting-with-grenade problem is based opon your weapon preference settings, i think its in your inis somewhere. Its specific from computer to computer, and I unfortunately do not know where the setting is located. Anyone who does happen to know, please speak up, I have the same problem.
ecale3
Sniper - May be harmful to your health.
hey yurch,
Well couldn't you solve the distance problem by zooming WAY in. For example having the smallest zoom increment on the robar equal to it's current max. The FOV loss due to such an extreme amount of zoom would also make it harder to snipe. Then have the PSG's zoom about equal to the robar's current max. Thus creating more specialised sniper weapons because of the extreme hit you would take to your FOV. It would also give you a realistic range advantage over non-dedicated sniper rifles.
Well couldn't you solve the distance problem by zooming WAY in. For example having the smallest zoom increment on the robar equal to it's current max. The FOV loss due to such an extreme amount of zoom would also make it harder to snipe. Then have the PSG's zoom about equal to the robar's current max. Thus creating more specialised sniper weapons because of the extreme hit you would take to your FOV. It would also give you a realistic range advantage over non-dedicated sniper rifles.
hmm in an ini? are you sure?
cause its only on afa2 it happens
every normal server i go to gives me nade first pick?
by normal i mean not the one and only fun server
cause its only on afa2 it happens
every normal server i go to gives me nade first pick?
by normal i mean not the one and only fun server
ecale3
Sniper - May be harmful to your health.
Yes, the FOV in way too wide. Basically all 3 scopes in game are wrong if you consider FOV. The worst part is RC50's low-powered zoom -- it works totally wrong and thus target acquisition is incorrectly easy.
weapon priority
I believe it's in infiltrationuser.ini. The reason it's different on RA servers is that RA uses new weapontypes (rablahblah instead of just blahblah). Also, IIRC they aren't all properly populated until you actually use one in game... hope that helps.
Also another bit I'd like to add regarding vision and range. A friend of mine does high power rifle competition (I will be joining him next spring yay!=) and they fire from the prone on targets 600 yards away with open sights. That's right, no optics, 600 yards. He tells me that a roughly man sized target appears to be maybe one or two mm tall at that range and that they certainly make heavy use of spotting scopes to make adjustments after establishing a group. My point, you ask? Optics aren't strictly necessary for any ranges currently encountered in infiltration - or at least they wouldn't be in real life. Do they make it a bit easier to be precise at long range? Sure. Also, I've been told by a number of folks whom I trust on the subject and have a wide range of experience that a) it is generally preferable to keep both eyes open when using an optical scope - the right eye to look at the scope and the left eye to track, and b) it is generally preferable to keep the rifle mounted to the shoulder when cycling the action on a bolt action piece. Also, a good rifleman should be able to immediatly cycle the bolt and be back on target ready to fire (as in recovered from recoil) before the empty hits the ground.
I believe it's in infiltrationuser.ini. The reason it's different on RA servers is that RA uses new weapontypes (rablahblah instead of just blahblah). Also, IIRC they aren't all properly populated until you actually use one in game... hope that helps.
Also another bit I'd like to add regarding vision and range. A friend of mine does high power rifle competition (I will be joining him next spring yay!=) and they fire from the prone on targets 600 yards away with open sights. That's right, no optics, 600 yards. He tells me that a roughly man sized target appears to be maybe one or two mm tall at that range and that they certainly make heavy use of spotting scopes to make adjustments after establishing a group. My point, you ask? Optics aren't strictly necessary for any ranges currently encountered in infiltration - or at least they wouldn't be in real life. Do they make it a bit easier to be precise at long range? Sure. Also, I've been told by a number of folks whom I trust on the subject and have a wide range of experience that a) it is generally preferable to keep both eyes open when using an optical scope - the right eye to look at the scope and the left eye to track, and b) it is generally preferable to keep the rifle mounted to the shoulder when cycling the action on a bolt action piece. Also, a good rifleman should be able to immediatly cycle the bolt and be back on target ready to fire (as in recovered from recoil) before the empty hits the ground.
Exams.
Don't worry, I have seen it. (All 3)
It sounds decent enough, and I know my scopes surely do not have that wide a FOV.
I only question its accuracy - I don't have an ACOG at home to try. I should ask Tiffy, I think he has used something similar.
Re: weapon priority
Ahh, but the robar has a long bolt that requres you to move the rifle - or the bolt hits you in the face.
Agreed. I was tired and just spouting anecdotes =) Upon further reflection, however, I suppose one could keep the rifle mounted and simply move his head out of the way. In any case, probably more than you want to do with RA, as it's mostly a matter of new animation.
Heres a small problem.
When I do this, the grid effect will become even more apparent. People won't like that much.
Bah...they need to all use PS2RATE!!!!
I'll post it for everyone when I get home tonight...say goodbye to the gridding effect!
I'll post it for everyone when I get home tonight...say goodbye to the gridding effect!
really?
well, I aint exactly the worlds greatest irl rifleman...
but you could use teh momentum thingy and the scopes woggel to your advantage.
after this next version, the scopes not really clicking on a "grid" in a sense... its more like a heavy rock on ice, sliding along before and after you intended aim point.
your not really pointing, more like guiding.
ok... Im not making any sense even to myself.
Ill try again:
instead of the mouse movements corresponding to a square where you move mouse-up 2 inches (scope responds by raising itself 2 inches of equivilant travel)
make it so the scopes responding to the speed at which the mouse did those 2 inches.
if you move the mouse fast, the scope starts to move fast.
move it slow, the scope moves slow.
when you stop moving the mouse, the scope glides to a hault and settels back into the proper wobbel pattern.
err, that still dont make much sense... oh well :/
but you could use teh momentum thingy and the scopes woggel to your advantage.
after this next version, the scopes not really clicking on a "grid" in a sense... its more like a heavy rock on ice, sliding along before and after you intended aim point.
your not really pointing, more like guiding.
ok... Im not making any sense even to myself.
Ill try again:
instead of the mouse movements corresponding to a square where you move mouse-up 2 inches (scope responds by raising itself 2 inches of equivilant travel)
make it so the scopes responding to the speed at which the mouse did those 2 inches.
if you move the mouse fast, the scope starts to move fast.
move it slow, the scope moves slow.
when you stop moving the mouse, the scope glides to a hault and settels back into the proper wobbel pattern.
err, that still dont make much sense... oh well :/
Yes, but that makes shooting a matter of timing then a matter of patience. You don't jerk the trigger at just the right moment while shooting anything. That results in misses even with clay-shooting.
ecale3
Sniper - May be harmful to your health.
"When I do this, the grid effect will become even more apparent. People won't like that much."
well, maybe remove the sensitivity fix temporarily until a better sytem is though up. With the reduced FOV people are less likely to use it than the way it is now where it is incredibly easy to track and shoot a target, even with RA.
well, maybe remove the sensitivity fix temporarily until a better sytem is though up. With the reduced FOV people are less likely to use it than the way it is now where it is incredibly easy to track and shoot a target, even with RA.
How would it degrade to a matter of timing? RAZZ's thing sounds like a broken down version of the inertia thing JamesT, I and others have discussed, the effect would be pretty quick and subtle, rapid mouse movement would just throw the aim off, but fine movements of the mosue would simply cause the sight to 'roll' over a little rather than referencing movement along a grid.
Instead of the gun corresponding directly to movements of the mouse along a grid, the weapon moves according to say the velocity of the mouse moving across a grid? So if the mouse moved one notch over a period of time, the weapon would start moving in that direction at a related speed. If it starts drifting to far, the user would start rolling his mouse back and thus making a steadying motion. All this on screen would be a matter of a few pixels. Cross this with the slow weapon drop...
I think that if this were done tightly enough, it really wouldn't be noticable unless you were making precise shots or trying to really whip your gun back and forth a lot.
Instead of the gun corresponding directly to movements of the mouse along a grid, the weapon moves according to say the velocity of the mouse moving across a grid? So if the mouse moved one notch over a period of time, the weapon would start moving in that direction at a related speed. If it starts drifting to far, the user would start rolling his mouse back and thus making a steadying motion. All this on screen would be a matter of a few pixels. Cross this with the slow weapon drop...
I think that if this were done tightly enough, it really wouldn't be noticable unless you were making precise shots or trying to really whip your gun back and forth a lot.
Besides, shooting really is a matter of timing : you have to wait for the proper phase of your breathing (wait for the gun to go up or down) before firing, at least it's the way i do it when i attempt to properly sight my gun and fire...
Well, of course, but thats not what I mean.
I don't want players "rolling" thier guns across the target quickly, and attempting to fire the shot off. If it is tight enough, yes, but you have to walk a fine line here.
I don't want players "rolling" thier guns across the target quickly, and attempting to fire the shot off. If it is tight enough, yes, but you have to walk a fine line here.