Anvil Game Studios

Holdfast: Nations At War => Game Discussion => Suggestions & Feedback => Topic started by: CptBiym on September 22, 2017, 07:58:02 pm

Title: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CptBiym on September 22, 2017, 07:58:02 pm
I think it'll be beneficial for the dedicated devs of this game to hear what I and a lot of veteran players of musket games have to say. Since days of the original battlegrounds mod, I've seen this genre change and develop and so here is the most important aspect of the game that needs revision (yes, more than melee combat). I suggest reading the entirety of my post before commenting.

MUSKET INNACURACY AND UNWIELDINESS

The bedrock and bread and butter of a musket game, and a necessary component that needs to be done right and also feel satisfying. Muskets of the napoleonic era are no where near as innaccurate as protrayed in films and videogames of the era.

Trained soldiers could hit a human-sized target at 70-90m and volleys to inflict maximum damage were aimed to be conducted just under this range at 60m. Various soldier accounts of the era point to unwiedly accuracy becoming too big a burden at and beyond 150m.

In the 1814 To All Sportsmen, Colonel George Hanger wrote, “A soldier’s musket, if not exceedingly ill-bored, will strike a figure of a man at 80 yards; it may even at a hundred; but a soldier must be very unfortunate indeed who shall be wounded by a common musket at 150 yards, providing his antagonist aims at him; and as to firing at a man at 200 yards with a common musket, you may as well fire at the moon and have the same hope of hitting him."

The reason for closing the distance was not only to get within the musket's kill distance, but to strike fear through the visual and auditory threat a massed enemy force would present.

HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO HOLDFAST?

At the moment the preferred engagement distance and the distance you can be confident (key word: confident) in hitting an enemy (half the time) is around 8-10 meters. The bulletdrop mechanic needs to be redone. For every 15 meters you need to adjust upwards about 1 full reticle. Meaning at 20 meters you need to aiming as if you are lobbing a grenade by your enemy's feet. At 50 meters you need to be aiming at distant clouds for your shot to come back to earth and land near your target. I don't seek to offend, but this would not be the case if someone working on the game would have ever fired a musket of the era in question, ever seen someone fire a musket, read specifications and tactics relating to these weapons, or sought out first hand accounts on how these muskets functioned and were utilised. But that's okay, the drop can be easily fixed by straightening the trajectory and implementing slight bulletdrop beyond 60-90 meters.

The bulletspread of the muskets is another aspect of shooting that needs to be corrected. At around 10m distance the spread seems to be 1-2 meters. Double the distance, and this increases to 3-5 meters. Again, painfully unrealistic and unrepresentative of napoleonic era weapons. Muskets had around a 1/3 meter grouping at 50 meters meaning that a shot at an enemy 50 meters away nearly always delivered a hit. Beyond this distance, the grouping increases slightly and at 100m a soldier could still expect his shots to land within 1-3m of one another.

In other words, Holdfast has a real musket's spread at 100m come into effect at around 15 meters. You can thank blind luck beyond 10 meters if you land a shot. Before any claims are made by someone that they can land shots from 25-40m consistently, the answer is no. You cannot consistently shoot at that distance in Holdfast. I've topped the scoreboard various matches by adjusting the reticle for ridiculous bulletdrop, shooting into masses, and firing quickly. However, most of the kills beyond 20 meters have been on a soldier 2-3 meters to the left or right of my target and rarely directly where I was aiming as should it should be due to the inconsequential spread muskets have within 50 meters distance. Realistically, this spread of over 3 meters would happen at around 90-100 meters. This too can be easily fixed by tightening the shooting pattern significantly according to real musket spreads.

HOW DOES THIS CHANGE HOLDFAST'S GAMEPLAY?

There is enough argument from a realism standpoint to warrant a change to the shooting mechanics. At the moment, the game feels like a miniature, arcade FPS/TPS game set in the musket era because of the 10-20 meter engagement distance and the ineffectiveness of the muskets and rifles. The unit portrait and minimap do not help remedy this at all. However, having been an avid lover of community line battle and siege events for a long time, far before the warband NW mod, I must say that the engagement distance portrayed in this game is a real threat to the atmospheric and strategic depth that could and should be present in this game. Even from watching early event gameplay I noticed how the musket's effective range of around 10 meters causes lines to, after frustratingly trying to trade blows at 30 meters and beyond, close the distance to fire a determining volley and end what could've been an incredible back and forth mass volley engagement if only the muskets had realistic drop and spread. After playing the game for a day and a half straight, I can confirm my doubts.

Another point that must be taken into consideration is that cavalry will not be punished for blind charges at enemy infantry. Closing the gap will be incredibly cost-effective for a cavalry force seeing as the musket's spread will not be seen even as a mild deterrent.

I congratulate you for sticking with me, hopefully the developers and community can come together on this issue and see that, for realism and gameplay purposes, this needs to be labeled as high priority on the early access to-do list right with a melee rehaul.

A strong shooting system must come first and foremost in this type of game. Good shooting and melee systems will propel this game forward while badones will hold it back even if new factions, weapons, and cavalry are introduced. Thankfully, it's easy to fix what's in place because of the base game the developers worked hard to create.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: James Brock on September 22, 2017, 08:02:16 pm
I do find the inaccuracy of muskets a little to much. They should tighten it. Feels like the kill range for a musket is simular if not the same as a pistol. Balancing is needed.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: DΛRKWΛVΣ on September 22, 2017, 08:24:53 pm
I love these long taking musket firefights with artillery coming in. It brings some kind of tension. And when there is need to, there can happen an epic melee charge when the melee is fixed.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: SnuggleBunny on September 22, 2017, 09:29:45 pm
I think low accuracy is fine, but the bullet drop is totally ridiculous.

Keep in mind that if you increased the accuracy to reflect the real capabilities of the weapons, you would have to reduce reload speed. Currently, it seems to be around 10 seconds, even while moving. In real life, of course, very well trained soldiers could reload in 15 seconds, but in the heat of battle with fear and fouled barrels, it was more like twice a minute. I expect that most players would not enjoy that so much, but much more accurate muskets + the same reload speeds as we have now would make melee useless. So I feel that maybe the inaccuracy is fine, but the bullet drop is just stupid. NW had bullet drop, yes, but you really only noticed it past 70 yards or so, and I thought that was fine.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Limbo on September 22, 2017, 10:26:09 pm
Let's put it like this: it feelts odd putting a reticule a certain distance over and above a target of your choosing instead of on it. Especially when you find that target is well within the effective envelope of said weapon...
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Darkenmal on September 22, 2017, 11:38:45 pm
You are absolutely correct CptBiym, the musket range needs to be overhauled. Great post, hopefully the devs take note of this.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Zahari on September 22, 2017, 11:52:09 pm
Guys, wait till you play a proper LB. If you learn the pattern you can easily hit the target (I mean another line not a single person) from 50meters. I would say that after some time you will be able to hit the line from 100 meters as effective as from 50. Regiments will figure it out fast cause you can turn on missile projection and see how it really works and train it. I give you my word that after spending 3 mins of learning the pattern (basically just figuring out where should I place my crooshair) I was able to hit 7/10 shots on the distance of 50-70meters
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: SnuggleBunny on September 22, 2017, 11:56:02 pm
It's not that it's impossible to hit people, it just feels idiotic to have to aim well above the target, especially when the amount of bullet drop does not reflect the actual weaponry at all. I'm fine with muskets not being very accurate, but having to aim almost as high above the enemy's head as when using a bow in warband is just silly.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Limbo on September 23, 2017, 12:35:00 am
It's not that it's impossible to hit people, it just feels idiotic to have to aim well above the target, especially when the amount of bullet drop does not reflect the actual weaponry at all. I'm fine with muskets not being very accurate, but having to aim almost as high above the enemy's head as when using a bow in warband is just silly.

this!!!
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CptBiym on September 23, 2017, 04:19:55 am
Zahari, I will post the same response I gave another person on the steam discussion boards because I think it applies to your comment precisely. Also I'd bet a lot money that you can't hit an enemy soldier at 50-70 meters 70% of the time.

This game's success will come down to strong shooting and melee mechanics and of course the weekly, community-driven linebattle and siege events. These don't have to be necessarily competitive in nature. However, one thing's for sure, both competitive regiment v regiment events and public linebattles will only continue to thrive if they produce strategic depth for commanders, satisfying musket exchanges for the soldiers, and a realistic atmosphere for all players. If shooting is done right, we can place a checkmark after these 3 points. If not, then commanders will only need to ensure their line get the first volley off within 25 meters to secure victory rather than play through the more fruitful alternative of a slow exchange of musket fire at a distance while working cooperatively with friendly lines to approach/flank/outplay the enemy. Soldiers on the other hand will soon become frustrated at these quickly decisive (and unrealistic) close range exchanges. This is mostly from a gameplay perspective. Historically, it makes no sense whatsoever for muskets to have 100+ meter spreads occurring at 20 meters and any atmosphere and realism driven player or regiment will quickly grow tired of the shooting mechanic and its detrimental effect on 125+ player events.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Fixou on September 23, 2017, 10:50:22 am
i agree but the main thing i dont like the much in the game actually is the reticle i dont know if it will be easy to change it but he is so big!
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: TooL69 on September 23, 2017, 01:46:45 pm
Zahari, I will post the same response I gave another person on the steam discussion boards because I think it applies to your comment precisely. Also I'd bet a lot money that you can't hit an enemy soldier at 50-70 meters 70% of the time.

This game's success will come down to strong shooting and melee mechanics and of course the weekly, community-driven linebattle and siege events. These don't have to be necessarily competitive in nature. However, one thing's for sure, both competitive regiment v regiment events and public linebattles will only continue to thrive if they produce strategic depth for commanders, satisfying musket exchanges for the soldiers, and a realistic atmosphere for all players. If shooting is done right, we can place a checkmark after these 3 points. If not, then commanders will only need to ensure their line get the first volley off within 25 meters to secure victory rather than play through the more fruitful alternative of a slow exchange of musket fire at a distance while working cooperatively with friendly lines to approach/flank/outplay the enemy. Soldiers on the other hand will soon become frustrated at these quickly decisive (and unrealistic) close range exchanges. This is mostly from a gameplay perspective. Historically, it makes no sense whatsoever for muskets to have 100+ meter spreads occurring at 20 meters and any atmosphere and realism driven player or regiment will quickly grow tired of the shooting mechanic and its detrimental effect on 125+ player events.

I fully support you!

I like the musket in Blackwake, it really is a formidable weapon at a distance of 100 yards:
Spoiler
[close]
In addition, from a historical point of view, it is close to a real musket (I'm talking about a slow reload and good accuracy):
Spoiler
[close]
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Wallace on September 23, 2017, 07:52:40 pm
I think that the devs should make aiming the musket like in blakewake I feel like aiming down the barrel would help with shooting and make the grouping alittle tighter
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Lecourbe on September 23, 2017, 10:50:17 pm
I think that the devs should make aiming the musket like in blakewake I feel like aiming down the barrel would help with shooting and make the grouping alittle tighter

Ye, it could be cool to have a sight in first person. Doesn't mean it will be more accurate, but it could be realistic and funny. :)
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Leon on September 23, 2017, 11:27:14 pm
I think musket accuracy is set as it should be.
Bullet drops approx. 2cm when shooting from 100m distance.
X and Z axis are great! Wery realistic!

If you want a game with no bullet drops and x  or z-axis changes you should think of changing game platform.
With accuracy being too accurate, there is no sense to have rifles or light infantry in the game.

If you want better shooting, practice it or move your line close to enemy one like they did in good old days. Face to face.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CptBiym on September 24, 2017, 12:12:15 am
Leon, 2cm drop at 100m distance? Are you counting the distance of your monitor or ingame?

No one is calling for perfect accuracy. We're talking about napoleonic warfare - muskets, not modern assault rifles. You need to be aiming a full reticle, a few meters ingame, above your target at 15-20m to have a chance of scoring a hit. This increases to a ridiculous 2-3 reticles worth of projectile drop at 60+ meters.

Real, 18th century smoothbore muskets have a negligible drop up until around 100 meters where a soldier must accomodate for around a 60cm drop. At 50 meters and under the drop does not need to be taken into account. The spread on these real muskets was for all practical purposes inconsequential until over 60m where it would increase to 1-3 meters at 100+ meters. This doesn't mean "no bullet drop and x or y changes."

There are dozens of youtube videos showing average shooters hitting great spreads at 80+ meters. And about a change to accuracy ruining light infantry or rifles.. How did you reach that conclusion? Bewildering. Making the muskets and rifles closer to reality would be a great thing both atmospherically and gameplay-wise.

We don't need to have realistic spreads at 100m in the game but at the moment firing a musket at someone 15 meters away gives you the same spread that a real musket would have at 150 meters and this is unacceptable and there is no justification it. And yes, they lined up to exchange blows because massed infantry helped ally morale and kept order among the ranks while intimidating the enemy. Muskets have a surprising effective range of 90+ meters but to maximize their killing and demoralizing power were generally volley fired around 60-80m. Face to face but not as close as you assume.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: TomaHawkAU on September 24, 2017, 12:30:19 am
The Baker Rifle was meant to have an effective range of around 200m, supposedly a guy made two shots at 550m but either way at the moment if its anything over 30m its quite hard to hit anything. I dont need to be able to shoot someone accurately over 200m because I agree that with only 125 people in the server games might end quick but I do think it needs to be more accurate.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: MrSharkie on September 24, 2017, 12:31:05 am
I'm sorry to say, but this is not something that needs to be "Urgent Change" The shooting is ok for now, let them sort the more important things such as bugs first!
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Leon on September 24, 2017, 12:38:19 am
Leon, I'm having trouble deciding whether you're being sarcastic or you're simply playing a completely different game. 2cm drop at 100m distance? Are you counting the distance of your monitor or ingame?

If it's the latter then you are mad and have come on these forums to willfully lie to people. No one is calling for perfect accuracy. We're talking about napoleonic warfare - muskets, not modern assault rifles. Let me reiterate once again for you since you have made it so painfully clear you did not spend 10 seconds reading my post before commenting. You need to be aiming a full reticle, a few meters ingame, above your target at 15-20m to have a chance of scoring a hit. This increases to a ridiculous 2-3 reticles worth of projectile drop at 60+ meters.

Real, 18th century smoothbore muskets have a negligible drop up until around 100 meters where a soldier must accomodate for around a 60cm drop. At 50 meters and under the drop does not need to be taken into account. The spread on these real muskets was for all practical purposes inconsequential until over 60m where it would increase to 1-3 meters at 100+ meters. This doesn't mean "no bullet drop and x or y changes."

You can learn about all this and save yourself looking dumb if you took 10 minutes and googled your doubts. There are dozens of youtube videos showing average shooters hitting great spreads at 80+ meters. And about a change to accuracy ruining light infantry or rifles.. How did you reach that conclusion? Bewildering. Making the muskets and rifles closer to reality would be a great thing both atmospherically and gameplay-wise.

We don't need to have realistic spreads at 100m in the game but at the moment firing a musket at someone 15 meters away gives you the same spread that a real musket would have at 150 meters and this is unacceptable and you ought to be ashamed for justifying it. And yes, they lined up to exchange blows because massed infantry helped ally morale and kept order among the ranks while intimidating the enemy. Muskets have a surprising effective range of 90+ meters but to maximize their killing and demoralizing power were generally volley fired around 60-80m. Face to face but not as close as you falsely assume.

There is a distance of shooting shown on top right corner.
And yes 2cm or if you prefer in pixels exactly 75.590551181 pixels from the white dot in the midle of the screen to the point of the bullet hit.
Give it 1+2 cm I don't mind

No need to get all angry and stuff. It's just a game mister.¸

Note: You cant measure the distance like in real life because you have no hight of character hight of musket being held and distance to the point of bullet fall so you can only use program that calculates the pixels from x to y destination + after calculating from profile picture drop from line x that represents line of sight to point b the bullet drop point.
In short use Pythagoras theorem which I would really like to recommend you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_theorem. Enjoy your reading! Have a nice day!
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Wallace on September 24, 2017, 05:52:33 am
I just feel like if they make the first person aiming down the barrel it would make people more accurate without changing the actual accuracy of the muskets it would give people a better representation of the actual travel path of the bullet
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Pugglesworth on September 24, 2017, 05:59:54 am
Since this is a game, and the engagement distances and battlefield sizes are smaller than real life, it makes sense that the firearms should be reliable at shorter ranges than real life.

That said, the muskets do seem to be a little too inaccurate. The pistols also seem unbalanced by comparison. The pistol's main downfall is its extreme bullet drop, which can accounted for a little. Muskets don't really out-range pistols because the effective range of a pistol is roughly around the point where I could confidently fire a musket, and even then the musket is far more likely to miss than the pistol. Plus the pistol naturally reloads much faster. I think the pistol range is fine, but it may be a little too accurate, while the musket (+ rifle) range and accuracy need a small increase.

There's also another problem I am frequently encountering, or maybe more of a personal complaint I have. The same scenario keeps happening where I charge at someone who is reloading, and as I start to stab them in the face they finish reloading and instantly shoot me point-blank. I feel like this is because aiming happens too quickly. Making it so that reloading is slower while moving may also help, such that it doesn't provide so much of an advantage to backpedal away (i.e. every second gained from distancing yourself from the attacker is partially or completely lost to additional reload time). Though this might also become less of a problem when they reduce the delay in melee.

Anyways, that's just my 2 cents on the matter.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: TooL69 on September 24, 2017, 12:18:08 pm
Interesting information to learn:
http://www.willegal.net/iron_brigade/musket.pdf
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Leon on September 24, 2017, 01:29:20 pm
Interesting information to learn:
http://www.willegal.net/iron_brigade/musket.pdf

+1
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: TheItalianoX on September 24, 2017, 01:55:44 pm
Totallly agreeing with CptBiym
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Hughes on September 24, 2017, 02:17:20 pm
Yeah, bullet drop needs work.
It's as if the powder charge is only 50 odd grains instead of 150+ grains of powder.

As another person stated, 'We ain't shooting with bows & arrows here'.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Leon on September 24, 2017, 03:24:48 pm
(https://s26.postimg.org/gs0zhti89/Untitled.png)

I took a shot from 61m distance
In which, you can see that bullet drops for 1 - 1,5cm +-
Therefore if it drops for 1cm per 50m it drops 2*1cm for 100m. If you want head shoot from 100m to shoot 2cm up from the head if you want normal kill just aim for the head.

The bullet isn't constantly falling down it only falls after some period of meters like 50m theory...
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Hughes on September 24, 2017, 03:46:08 pm
(https://s26.postimg.org/gs0zhti89/Untitled.png)

I took a shot from 61m distance
In which, you can see that bullet drops for 1 - 1,5cm +-
Therefore if it drops for 1cm per 50m it drops 2*1cm for 100m. If you want head shoot from 100m to shoot 2cm up from the head if you want normal kill just aim for the head.

The bullet isn't constantly falling down it only falls after some period of meters like 50m theory...

Well done, trajectory looks correct.

The problem may be network traffic on a busy server.
I'm aiming near 2cm at 50m for centre mass with line inf.

'Aim High!' is the byword, for sure.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Leon on September 24, 2017, 04:22:14 pm
(https://s26.postimg.org/gs0zhti89/Untitled.png)

I took a shot from 61m distance
In which, you can see that bullet drops for 1 - 1,5cm +-
Therefore if it drops for 1cm per 50m it drops 2*1cm for 100m. If you want head shoot from 100m to shoot 2cm up from the head if you want normal kill just aim for the head.

The bullet isn't constantly falling down it only falls after some period of meters like 50m theory...

Well done, trajectory looks correct.

The problem may be network traffic on a busy server.
I'm aiming near 2cm at 50m for centre mass with line inf.

'Aim High!' is the byword, for sure.
Not only the network traffic, the wind presence is also included. While managing my server i found that you can put wind into the game. It affects the left/right theory trajectory for bullet
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: TooL69 on September 24, 2017, 04:33:11 pm
And what is the speed of the bullets in the game?

------

“Benjamin Robins obtained muzzle velocities between 1425 fps (434 m/s) and 1700
fps (518 m/s) in 1742 with a ¾ inch (19.05mm) diameter ball and 45 inch (1.143 m)
long barrel. A century later Captain Alfred Mordecai studied gunpowder used for an
English musket and recorded an average muzzle velocity of 1561 fps (476 m/s) and
that 1477 fps (450 m/s) was adopted as the minimum velocity for proof of powder
when using 10 grams of powder, whilst 7.5g of powder achieved a velocity of 1550 fps
(472 m/s” (Roberts, 2008). After much research, it was concluded that data indicates
that the musket ball would have probably averaged, at the muzzle, about 1500
fps.(457 m/s).
This information is supported by Eyers (2006), in her Master’s research on the
‘Ballistics of matchlock muskets’. Eyers states that tests carried out in the 1980’s in
Austria by Krenn (1989), ((cited in Harding 1997), using small arms of the 16th, 17th
and the 18th centuries produced muzzle velocities between 450 and 500 metres per
second. This was obtained using flintlock muskets of 17 mm calibre with a powder
charge of 15 grams. Eyers concluded that 17th Century muskets, had velocities of
approximately 400-430 m/s and ranges of approximately 170-180 m when fired
horizontally.


A reference to Robinson's work:
http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys369/workshops/w10b/robins.html
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Leon on September 24, 2017, 04:36:55 pm
And what is the speed of the bullets in the game?

------

“Benjamin Robins obtained muzzle velocities between 1425 fps (434 m/s) and 1700
fps (518 m/s) in 1742 with a ¾ inch (19.05mm) diameter ball and 45 inch (1.143 m)
long barrel. A century later Captain Alfred Mordecai studied gunpowder used for an
English musket and recorded an average muzzle velocity of 1561 fps (476 m/s) and
that 1477 fps (450 m/s) was adopted as the minimum velocity for proof of powder
when using 10 grams of powder, whilst 7.5g of powder achieved a velocity of 1550 fps
(472 m/s” (Roberts, 2008). After much research, it was concluded that data indicates
that the musket ball would have probably averaged, at the muzzle, about 1500
fps.(457 m/s).
This information is supported by Eyers (2006), in her Master’s research on the
‘Ballistics of matchlock muskets’. Eyers states that tests carried out in the 1980’s in
Austria by Krenn (1989), ((cited in Harding 1997), using small arms of the 16th, 17th
and the 18th centuries produced muzzle velocities between 450 and 500 metres per
second. This was obtained using flintlock muskets of 17 mm calibre with a powder
charge of 15 grams. Eyers concluded that 17th Century muskets, had velocities of
approximately 400-430 m/s and ranges of approximately 170-180 m when fired
horizontally.


A reference to Robinson's work:
http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys369/workshops/w10b/robins.html

As shown on picture 258.627....
The theory is correct but not in all the games. For example. in NW its much higher  and here is lower + there is gravity that is impacting the bullet speed and trajectory.

To add yes in the 17th Century the muskets had more grams of powder because then it didn't matter will the bullet actually hit the target... rather scare or to hit a big bunch of people in one place. It had higer shooting distance but the moving of a bullet was terrible. After working on barrels in Napoleonic and post Napoleonic era they orientated on bullet hiting the target for sure then rather gambling if it will hit anyone.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Timo420 on September 24, 2017, 04:42:57 pm
I mean I only really have problems with bullet drop, accuracy is well bad but you have to take in account that in real life there where factors that made aiming alot harder, like the sounds, smoke and people dying next to you so I don't have a huge problem with the innaccuracy.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: TooL69 on September 24, 2017, 06:22:30 pm
And what is the speed of the bullets in the game?

------

“Benjamin Robins obtained muzzle velocities between 1425 fps (434 m/s) and 1700
fps (518 m/s) in 1742 with a ¾ inch (19.05mm) diameter ball and 45 inch (1.143 m)
long barrel. A century later Captain Alfred Mordecai studied gunpowder used for an
English musket and recorded an average muzzle velocity of 1561 fps (476 m/s) and
that 1477 fps (450 m/s) was adopted as the minimum velocity for proof of powder
when using 10 grams of powder, whilst 7.5g of powder achieved a velocity of 1550 fps
(472 m/s” (Roberts, 2008). After much research, it was concluded that data indicates
that the musket ball would have probably averaged, at the muzzle, about 1500
fps.(457 m/s).
This information is supported by Eyers (2006), in her Master’s research on the
‘Ballistics of matchlock muskets’. Eyers states that tests carried out in the 1980’s in
Austria by Krenn (1989), ((cited in Harding 1997), using small arms of the 16th, 17th
and the 18th centuries produced muzzle velocities between 450 and 500 metres per
second. This was obtained using flintlock muskets of 17 mm calibre with a powder
charge of 15 grams. Eyers concluded that 17th Century muskets, had velocities of
approximately 400-430 m/s and ranges of approximately 170-180 m when fired
horizontally.


A reference to Robinson's work:
http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys369/workshops/w10b/robins.html

As shown on picture 258.627....
The theory is correct but not in all the games. For example. in NW its much higher  and here is lower + there is gravity that is impacting the bullet speed and trajectory.

To add yes in the 17th Century the muskets had more grams of powder because then it didn't matter will the bullet actually hit the target... rather scare or to hit a big bunch of people in one place. It had higer shooting distance but the moving of a bullet was terrible. After working on barrels in Napoleonic and post Napoleonic era they orientated on bullet hiting the target for sure then rather gambling if it will hit anyone.

The muskets of the 30-year war were fairly light (4.5-5 kg) and had the same caliber as that of Brown Bess.
http://www.engerisser.de/Bewaffnung/weapons/Matchlockmusket.html

The charge of gunpowder at half the weight of the bullet can be explained by the need to pierce steel cuirasses of pikemen. In the 18-19th century, the charge of gunpowder was reduced to one-third the weight of the bullet. Because the probability of encountering an enemy in the armor has drastically decreased (but this is just my theory).

Note the muskets of the 17th century had a developed sight. According to Graz, matchlock musket has an accuracy of 30 MOA per 100 meters. This is very good.
Spoiler
[close]
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CrocHunter on September 24, 2017, 07:46:48 pm
I think what Leon means by those 2 centimeters is how high is his point of aim above the target to hit at the distance of 60 meters. But while the crosshair is only 2 centimeters above the target from the perspective of the shooter, the point of aim is actualy several meters above the target which lead to a unrealistic drop from the point of aim to the target.
This picture with very rough measures shows how enourmous the drop is at the range of aprox 90 meters
Spoiler
[close]
There is some consistancy to the offset of the point of aim compared to the point of impact at set ranges and knowing these even with the random spread can lead to hits even at further distances. The issue may not be in the bullet's trajectory (as shown by Leon's image) as much as in the fact that the firearms at this stage of the developement are not at all sighted to any distance and that the projectile's point of origin is not aligned with the barrel but in a downard pointing angle, this would results in need to aim above the target even at close distances as is currently happening in the game. Changing the bullet's trajectory point of origin to zero with the aiming crosshair at a set distance could fix the currect issues.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Leon on September 24, 2017, 09:11:11 pm
I think what Leon means by those 2 centimeters is how high is his point of aim above the target to hit at the distance of 60 meters. But while the crosshair is only 2 centimeters above the target from the perspective of the shooter, the point of aim is actualy several meters above the target which lead to a unrealistic drop from the point of aim to the target.
This picture with very rough measures shows how enourmous the drop is at the range of aprox 90 meters
Spoiler
[close]
There is some consistancy to the offset of the point of aim compared to the point of impact at set ranges and knowing these even with the random spread can lead to hits even at further distances. The issue may not be in the bullet's trajectory (as shown by Leon's image) as much as in the fact that the firearms at this stage of the developement are not at all sighted to any distance and that the projectile's point of origin is not aligned with the barrel but in a downard pointing angle, this would results in need to aim above the target even at close distances as is currently happening in the game. Changing the bullet's trajectory point of origin to zero with the aiming crosshair at a set distance could fix the currect issues.
Im sorry i didnt check pic good first time now i see what you ment to say
Yes just put your character into fpas mode and then mesure it
3rd peraon camer gives difrent perspective
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CrocHunter on September 24, 2017, 10:14:18 pm
Did a both FPS and TPS test on the same place, I shot a little bit to the right so I could see where the shots are landing in grass.
Spoiler
[close]

Also did a small test for FPS accuracy and spread. I dont know the exact distance, but it was shot from the back of french A spawn on the desert map. I shot my whole ammo bag.
Spoiler
[close]

As I wrote in my first post, there seems to be some kind of projectile balistic trajectory with a random large horizontal, small vertical spread. The projectile path seems to be not paralel with the barrel of the musket but seems to be in a downard angle. A solution would for example to be to sight the muskets to a certain range, let say 70 meters (only for this example), so when you aim with the crosshair at something 70 meters away it would hit withing that crosshair with variation by spread. Easiest solution (only assuming, I dont know how exactly they did it in holdfast), would be to rotate the bullet point of origin trajectory upward so it would cross the crosshair at that set distance. This would do away with the unrealistic high aiming that is present.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Feldmarschall_Ben on September 24, 2017, 10:43:43 pm
I think it'll be beneficial for the dedicated devs of this game to hear what I and a lot of veteran players of musket games have to say. Since days of the original battlegrounds mod, I've seen this genre change and develop and so here is the most important aspect of the game that needs revision (yes, more than melee combat). I suggest reading the entirety of my post before commenting.

MUSKET INNACURACY AND UNWIELDINESS

The bedrock and bread and butter of a musket game, and a necessary component that needs to be done right and also feel satisfying. Muskets of the napoleonic era are no where near as innaccurate as protrayed in films and videogames of the era.

Trained soldiers could hit a human-sized target at 70-90m and volleys to inflict maximum damage were aimed to be conducted just under this range at 60m. Various soldier accounts of the era point to unwiedly accuracy becoming too big a burden at and beyond 150m.

In the 1814 To All Sportsmen, Colonel George Hanger wrote, “A soldier’s musket, if not exceedingly ill-bored, will strike a figure of a man at 80 yards; it may even at a hundred; but a soldier must be very unfortunate indeed who shall be wounded by a common musket at 150 yards, providing his antagonist aims at him; and as to firing at a man at 200 yards with a common musket, you may as well fire at the moon and have the same hope of hitting him."

The reason for closing the distance was not only to get within the musket's kill distance, but to strike fear through the visual and auditory threat a massed enemy force would present.

HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO HOLDFAST?

At the moment the preferred engagement distance and the distance you can be confident (key word: confident) in hitting an enemy (half the time) is around 8-10 meters. The bulletdrop mechanic needs to be redone. For every 15 meters you need to adjust upwards about 1 full reticle. Meaning at 20 meters you need to aiming as if you are lobbing a grenade by your enemy's feet. At 50 meters you need to be aiming at distant clouds for your shot to come back to earth and land near your target. I don't seek to offend, but this would not be the case if someone working on the game would have ever fired a musket of the era in question, ever seen someone fire a musket, read specifications and tactics relating to these weapons, or sought out first hand accounts on how these muskets functioned and were utilised. But that's okay, the drop can be easily fixed by straightening the trajectory and implementing slight bulletdrop beyond 60-90 meters.

The bulletspread of the muskets is another aspect of shooting that needs to be corrected. At around 10m distance the spread seems to be 1-2 meters. Double the distance, and this increases to 3-5 meters. Again, painfully unrealistic and unrepresentative of napoleonic era weapons. Muskets had around a 1/3 meter grouping at 50 meters meaning that a shot at an enemy 50 meters away nearly always delivered a hit. Beyond this distance, the grouping increases slightly and at 100m a soldier could still expect his shots to land within 1-3m of one another.

In other words, Holdfast has a real musket's spread at 100m come into effect at around 15 meters. You can thank blind luck beyond 10 meters if you land a shot. Before any claims are made by someone that they can land shots from 25-40m consistently, the answer is no. You cannot consistently shoot at that distance in Holdfast. I've topped the scoreboard various matches by adjusting the reticle for ridiculous bulletdrop, shooting into masses, and firing quickly. However, most of the kills beyond 20 meters have been on a soldier 2-3 meters to the left or right of my target and rarely directly where I was aiming as should it should be due to the inconsequential spread muskets have within 50 meters distance. Realistically, this spread of over 3 meters would happen at around 90-100 meters. This too can be easily fixed by tightening the shooting pattern significantly according to real musket spreads.

HOW DOES THIS CHANGE HOLDFAST'S GAMEPLAY?

There is enough argument from a realism standpoint to warrant a change to the shooting mechanics. At the moment, the game feels like a miniature, arcade FPS/TPS game set in the musket era because of the 10-20 meter engagement distance and the ineffectiveness of the muskets and rifles. The unit portrait and minimap do not help remedy this at all. However, having been an avid lover of community line battle and siege events for a long time, far before the warband NW mod, I must say that the engagement distance portrayed in this game is a real threat to the atmospheric and strategic depth that could and should be present in this game. Even from watching early event gameplay I noticed how the musket's effective range of around 10 meters causes lines to, after frustratingly trying to trade blows at 30 meters and beyond, close the distance to fire a determining volley and end what could've been an incredible back and forth mass volley engagement if only the muskets had realistic drop and spread. After playing the game for a day and a half straight, I can confirm my doubts.

Another point that must be taken into consideration is that cavalry will not be punished for blind charges at enemy infantry. Closing the gap will be incredibly cost-effective for a cavalry force seeing as the musket's spread will not be seen even as a mild deterrent.

I congratulate you for sticking with me, hopefully the developers and community can come together on this issue and see that, for realism and gameplay purposes, this needs to be labeled as high priority on the early access to-do list right with a melee rehaul.

A strong shooting system must come first and foremost in this type of game. Good shooting and melee systems will propel this game forward while badones will hold it back even if new factions, weapons, and cavalry are introduced. Thankfully, it's easy to fix what's in place because of the base game the developers worked hard to create.

+1, especially the part about the gameplay.

Definately on your side on regards of the muskets accuracy!
Valid points which strenghten the gameplay in my opinion. Especially regarding linebattle events this would cause the game to be even more dynamic, a feature I´d really appreciate to avoid campers. I would definately like to see your suggestions come true.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Charles Caldwell on September 24, 2017, 11:34:14 pm
I love the fact that its not just, point, click and kill. The random element of the ball is not only realistic but adds to gameplay imo. As mentioned, if we tinker too much with the accuracy then games will end quicker and we'll also end up with 125 snipers camping. Its going to be difficult for the Devs to balance, but currently its fun not knowing if this shot is going to be a kill or miss.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Leon on September 24, 2017, 11:54:19 pm
Did a both FPS and TPS test on the same place, I shot a little bit to the right so I could see where the shots are landing in grass.
Spoiler
[close]

Also did a small test for FPS accuracy and spread. I dont know the exact distance, but it was shot from the back of french A spawn on the desert map. I shot my whole ammo bag.
Spoiler
[close]

As I wrote in my first post, there seems to be some kind of projectile balistic trajectory with a random large horizontal, small vertical spread. The projectile path seems to be not paralel with the barrel of the musket but seems to be in a downard angle. A solution would for example to be to sight the muskets to a certain range, let say 70 meters (only for this example), so when you aim with the crosshair at something 70 meters away it would hit withing that crosshair with variation by spread. Easiest solution (only assuming, I dont know how exactly they did it in holdfast), would be to rotate the bullet point of origin trajectory upward so it would cross the crosshair at that set distance. This would do away with the unrealistic high aiming that is present.
Yes you are right i tested it iv shoot and saw that the project. Dosent start from the barrel. It starts about few cm to the right of the barrel.
Anyways this i think should be fixed so bullet comes straight from barell but other things i dont minde. For me bulletdrop is somehow natural.
Was pleasent time to discuse this things with you gents!
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CptBiym on September 25, 2017, 12:22:55 am
Interesting discussion Leon and Croc, but more than that, helpful for me and the devs to understand exactly how the accuracy is busted. I apologize for any misunderstanding. I have not been too active here but am regularly posting my thoughts on the steam discussions as there are many users that simply don't understand the impact this has on the overall quality of the game.

I'm glad that a lot of new and veteran players can see the reasoning of my argument and why it was put forth with such fervor.

Charles Caldwell, how is it possible that you are a lieutenant in a rifles company and say the ballistics are currently realistic? You can say that you subjectively enjoy the current musket mechanics, but don't mention realism in the same breath. Please read my original post that way you and your fellow clanmates at least understand the ranges at which muskets, and in extension rifles, operated. Striking a balance between the current ridiculous spread at 20m and the realistic musket spread of 1-3 meters and bullet drop of 60cm at 100m will not have everyone become snipers. Compromising and having a real musket's 100m spread and drop come into effect at around 50-60m (rather than currently at 15-20m) is one way to solve this issue and make combat in public servers and linebattle events closer to reality and far more rich and rewarding.

Good day
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CrocHunter on September 25, 2017, 02:39:15 am
So I got myself a server for further testing and to see the trajectory as shown by the game's built-in trajectory render and this is what I found.

I repeated the shots from my first and second post as that is a nice spot to shoot from.
First some notes, the point of origin for the bullet's trajectory is the crosshair, this is why on this following image, the point of origin is a little bit above, to the right and a bit behind the character. The angle at which I took the screenshot make it look more behind the character than it actualy is.
Spoiler
[close]
As the image shows, my theories from previous two post are proven wrong. The trajectories and points I have indicated on the image may be a little bit off but I think they speak for themselves.

As I noted previously, the bullet's trajectory originate in the crosshair, given that the crosshair is in a different spot, depending on the player's gameplay perspective a different trajectory will be made even when shooting from the same spot with aiming at the same target. Please note, that the trajectories goes differently due to the spread, but the point of origin of the shots is visibly different.
Spoiler
[close]

Given this realisation, I went to test a potentional exploit and found it to be existing. In the following picture, you will see the shooting player being hidden behind a wall, with the musket clearly pointing into the wall, yet still being able to shoot at targets behind the wall.
Spoiler
[close]

As previously noted, given that the trajectory's point of origin is different between FPS and TPS, a first person player will be at a disadvantage. Please note, that in the following screenshot, the shooter is standing in the same place and aiming at the same spot as in the TPS picture. The shot got stopped by the wall.
Spoiler
[close]

As a conclusion these observations were made quickly, so there may be some margins of error when taking shots or when taking screenshots as it is not easy to old the right mouse button, the freelook key and pressing F12 to make screenshots.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Leon on September 25, 2017, 06:31:03 am
Damn i lost a track from all this long quotes:D
Yes as you can see you can shoot over the wall  while aiming trough it. That should be changed and also by meaning that make bullet fall a little bit smaller. Not a bunch but a little bit. + as i said trajectory of bullet from barell.

Hint: use regular infantry becuse  they have "normal" settings for shooting.
Light and rifles have if i am correct slightly better accuracy.

And you could of just asked i would give you pass to my server wich i creates for tests and reg:D
Best 10 euros ever spended
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Lecourbe on September 25, 2017, 07:28:45 am
Best 10 euros ever spended
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Charles Caldwell on September 25, 2017, 09:27:22 am
Clearly the mechanics of the muskets and rifles in this game needs looking at, however the overall accuracy of the weapon perhaps should not be overly tweaked...

Hows this for a sobering thought:

Quote
W.Müller author of Elements of the Science of War (1811) recorded the following results:

In a trial of well trained & competent men, fired at targets representing a line of 'Cavalry' (Not troops - so a greater target) at 100 yards.

The hit ratio at this range was a surprising 53% success rate, just over half the shots hit their target.

At 300 yards, it fell to 23%.....disappointed huh!

It was commented that 'Ordinary' soldiers fared far worse in the trials.

I think this shows that those players expecting to always hit their targets with perhaps a revise hit system SHOULD be disappointed.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CrocHunter on September 25, 2017, 10:02:24 am
Thank Leon for the offer but I hosted the server localy from my computer, make testing a bit easier.

I did further testing and used other classes to see how it behaves and I am shocked about what I found.
I set up my position next to the cannon and used the split between the mountains in distance and the skybox as my aiming zone, I used a tree in the distance to target horizontaly.
Please note that on this following picture I moved a bit to the left after shooting to check the trajectory, which hit at the distance of 304 meters.
Spoiler
[close]
Observing the displayed stats in the top right corner I noticed several variations in values.
For the musket, the values are:
Muzzle velocity: 339.5, 298.5, 284.6, 264.5, 323.6, 319.7, 352.2, 328.5, 319.7, 327.7
Gravity:28.5,65.6,71,32,42.5,74.1,46.6,60.5,27.2,58.7
Impact distance:304.7,178.7,171.1,237.5,258.1,191.8,246.4,196.7,286.9,196.2

For the rifle, the values are:
Muzzle velocity: 126.4,126.6,112.8,128.3,126.8,110.1,126.6,116,127.2,113.3
Gravity:10.9,10.8,10.5,10.2,10.9,11,10.6,10.9,10.3,10.2
Impact distance:176.4,189.3,168.9,191.9,177.1,154,176.8,173.9,177.8,169.9

You can see from this data sample:
That "muzzle velocity" on the musket varied between 264.5 - 352.2 while on the rifle it varied between 110.1 - 128.3.
That "gravity" value on the musket varies a lot, with values between 28.5 - 71 while "gravity" value for the rifle was between 10.2 - 11.
That "impact distance" for the musket varied between 171.1 - 304.7 while on the rifle it varied between 154 - 189.3

From this data sample I can only conclude that given the overall consistency of the rifle's values a rifleman will have a predictable shooting pattern while his rigle actualy underperform in range compared to the musket which on the other hand have values all over the place and while it can shoot further, the random factor make shooting the musket a pain.

These trajectories are a sad joke and this innacuracy cannot be reasonably argued. I have seen some player here and on steam forums arguing that innacuracy is good as it prevent the game from turning into a "camping match" and put emphasis on melee which according to some was so prevalent in that period (an opinion based on games, movies and not actual sources). While a certain deviation from reality is needed to make the game playable and given this game dont atempts to be ArmA: Napoleonic Wars having values that are not exactly realistic is ok. But what is presented in this game at this moment cant even be called "arcadey", its simply wrong.
This level of innacuracy is bad regardless of what your historical perception is, if or when cavalry is implemented the inability of infantry to defend itself from cavalry apart of depending on bayonets would lead to cavalry dominating the battlefield. Even in the NW DLC for Warband where precision is higher and melee responsive infantry is easily killed by cavalry.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Charles Caldwell on September 25, 2017, 11:11:51 am
Look I'm sure the ballistics in Alpha will be constantly be tweaked and for the better, and we as players will adapt with every change... but I dont appreciate the venom, bordering anger at which to 'Urgent Change advocates' put your cases forward. Chill guys!!!

Currently the game is more than playable, and the level at which you guys have dissected the ballistics is beyond the will or want of most players. However Im sure the Devs will look at your findings and take all views into consideration. Currently for me I hit most things I want (with a great deal of practice) and with that enjoyable random element as previously stated (whether Realism or subjective). Would I like to be more accurate hell yes, but not so much as to corrupt the gameplay too much. I hope you can see beyond stats and figures to appreciate this view. ;)





Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Leon on September 25, 2017, 02:26:11 pm
Agree, the fall and everything will be surely changed as the week's pass.
As you said, Charles Caldwell, most disturbing for me is the actual name of this post.
I am not insulting anyone by this meaning but I think first the other bugs and lags need to be changed.
Only one tiny detail that i have problem one is the bullet trajectory coming out from different position then barrel.
We gave mods data that surely can help for later fixes that's the most important thing.

Keep up with testing boys!
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CptBiym on September 25, 2017, 06:59:18 pm
Crochunter.. Truly great stuff and much appreciated. In my first point, I made it clear why this is a necessary and urgent change. The entire game suffers because of the musket mechanics and the events even more so. I am worried that many players such as you, Caldwell, will become complacent in its flaws and put no pressure for this part of the game (the core of a musket game)  to be rehauled.

As for your comment on not "courrpting" the gameplay too much with laser accurate muskets, I will post a response that I gave to your exact complaints that others have expressed on the steam discussion boards. I said:

"Nice to see people understand how necessary and helpful these changes are for Holdfast. However, there is one recurring complaint I keep seeing and that is that "muskets would now be snipers" and "linebattles would end too fast."

To quickly address the first point. No, they wouldn't. The guns should have a range at which there is negligible spread and you will be guaranteed a hit. Currently this is within 2-3 meters. Negligble spread on a human sized target with a real musket happens at around 50 meters. If we are aiming for a 1:2, 1:3 scale of Holdfast to realism then we can have this spread occur at around 15-20 meters. If you aim dead center on an immobile target within this range, your 1/3 meter spread should gurantee a hit most of the time. Increasing the distance will increase the spread. Let me add here that having this predictable spread will have a huge impact on the skill factor of the shooting mechanics. You could now increase your chances of striking by learning the musket and rifle spreads at each distance and aiming accordingly. Practicing shooting at various distances is now useful, because player input will play a bigger role in the projectile's trajectory than the pure slot machine that currently flings the shot far left, right or wherever it wishes. You will now be encouraged to lead your targets and this multiplies the skill factor even further.

To address the second point that this would end battles too quickly: Good accuracy at 20m seems to be scary for a lot of people because the past few days have encouraged players to close the distance and trade blows within that distance. What would really occur is the engagement distance would increase slightly. Rather than running up to the enemy and firing shots at 15-20 meters distance and missing most or all of those shots, players would begin to exchange musket fire at 40-45 meters. They wouldn't magically pick off players at this distance. The spread would be reasonably tight to 20-25m but no further. However they could be sure that aiming dead center at a charging enemy 10-15 meters away would secure a kill.

In my main post I explain how linebattles and other coordinated events will see a massive benefit with this change in place. Lines would begin to exchange musket fire at 60+ meters and the regiment with the more experienced marksmen, that know where to aim and how to lead targets to increase their chances that the spread will hit, will inflict more casualties. At this distance, lines would not be obliterated as has been stated above. Currently, exchanging fire at beyond 30 meters is laughable. The first line to come within this distance of 20-30m and fire a volley will inflict massive casualties and end the engagement quickly. Events will be slower strategically with an increase to musket accuracy but faster to get into real action. More activity, but more strategy and depth as well."
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Leon on September 25, 2017, 07:58:40 pm
Yes yes CptBiyam but the problem is there are none line battles or events that are eaven destroyed by this problem.

Me and my regiment wanted to atend a linebatlle witch was canceled becuse of amount of lag we all had.

Therefor you cant eaven tallk about bad accuracy.
Lets let mods first to fix lags and bugs and then accuracy

The game is 4 days old
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: TooL69 on September 25, 2017, 08:04:32 pm
Clearly the mechanics of the muskets and rifles in this game needs looking at, however the overall accuracy of the weapon perhaps should not be overly tweaked...

Hows this for a sobering thought:

Quote
W.Müller author of Elements of the Science of War (1811) recorded the following results:

In a trial of well trained & competent men, fired at targets representing a line of 'Cavalry' (Not troops - so a greater target) at 100 yards.

The hit ratio at this range was a surprising 53% success rate, just over half the shots hit their target.

At 300 yards, it fell to 23%.....disappointed huh!

It was commented that 'Ordinary' soldiers fared far worse in the trials.

I think this shows that those players expecting to always hit their targets with perhaps a revise hit system SHOULD be disappointed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trgZmM9fNS0

Surprisingly, for a modern reenactor there is no problem to get into the target of 1.8x3 meters, and even to the target of 1x1 meter per 100 meters. It was a difficult task for a soldier of the 18th and 19th centuries! Only 40-50% of his shots fell into a large target the size of an infantry / cavalry line per 100 yards.
It is possible to draw a logical conclusion that the soldier of Napoleon's age was three or four times worse than the modern reconstructor.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Leon on September 25, 2017, 08:10:02 pm
Yeahan thats all good but ,
The barell is the bigest cooperator where the bullet will go.
This rifles shown in video are made by new-modern drills.
While in 18th Cet. I doubt they had same drills etc...
Smoother the barell are the clearer shoot will be.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Charles Caldwell on September 25, 2017, 08:36:56 pm
Surprisingly, for a modern reenactor there is no problem to get into the target of 1.8x3 meters, and even to the target of 1x1 meter per 100 meters. It was a difficult task for a soldier of the 18th and 19th centuries! Only 40-50% of his shots fell into a large target the size of an infantry / cavalry line per 100 yards.
It is possible to draw a logical conclusion that the soldier of Napoleon's age was three or four times worse than the modern reconstructor.

Note this Marksman is supporting his weapon, not under combat stress and has the luxury of refined modern powder and balls.

Also note these modern reenactors are clearly scoring a lower hit ratio than Napoleonic troops.

https://youtu.be/8Cw8ktmlF1A?t=11m36s
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CptBiym on September 25, 2017, 11:18:41 pm
First off, I ask what exactly are you trying to prove? You should make it extremely clear in your posts, as clear as I have made it in mine, the point you are trying to get across.

I stated that muskets have a 1-3 meter spread around 100m and a 1/3 meter spread at 50m. I then STATED MY REASON for giving these numbers and addressed why they were significant for Holdfast's gameplay and success. We are trying to make this game better by suggesting a fix to ballistics not only for it to feel more realistic but for the gameplay to improve as well. You have not done this. It seems like you are blabbering away trying to uphold a semblance of a counter argument for nothing at all. Simply to what? To suggest that the current ballistics are working fine and should be left alone? If not, then what solution do you have to offer? Is my 1:2,1:3 scale solution not a better alternative? Why not? You have made clear in your posts that you don't have the slightest clue on how napoleonic warfare was conducted and have consequently shown your disinterest in improving the game.

The brown bess has very good accuracy and tool's video shows just that. There are many napoleonic era accounts, not from reenactors, of musket accuracy showing 50-60 meters as a good distance to land center mass shots and 100 meters as a perfectly reasonable distance to inflict casualties. It's not prudent nor possible to draw a logical conclusion that "the soldier of Napoleon's age was three or four times worse than the modern reconstructor." Tool, no offense but I have seen your responses on the post suggesting for better reload mechanics and I have not been impressed by your logic there either.

Caldwell, the video you posted has an inexperienced musket shooter with terrible trigger control not compensating for the slight drop at each distance. I suggest you read the comments for that video and you will see far more criticisms of his ability than I will say here. And yet, he achieved the following results:

~3 yard spread at 200yds
~1-2 yard spread at 100yds
<1 yard spread within 75yds

What did you try to prove with the video and these accuracy results? Confirm what I've said in regards to musket accuracy at range? As I said above, make it clear what you intend to prove. I believe it's time to move on from this ridiculous apologist mentality for the current state of ballistics and come together on how to fix it. I submitted my solution a few posts back, give it a read. I also suggest you read my original post before responding further.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CrocHunter on September 26, 2017, 12:49:57 am
I think part of the issue this game has with accuracy is comming from two major issues:
1. The point of origin is not on musket/rifle but actualy variably on at least 3 different location depending on FPS/TPS perspective and even if you are crouching, which put the origin weirdly more behind your back. This lead to not only potentional exploits as addresed in my post, but because the projectile's path starts actualy above the player, close range accuracy is all over the place.
Also given that the point of origin start behind the character and atributes a random horizontal spread immediatly at that point, you can have litteraly point blank missed even if litteraly stuck your weapon's muzzle into the enemy as for now, the muzzle and basicly the whole rifle/musket is nothing but a decorative object.

2. Randomly selected values when calculating the trajectory. While variation in the muzzle velocity seems like a neat idea to simulate potential loss of gunpowder when loading the musket/rifle, the values that are picked are not sensible and are overexagerating a marginal loss of powder. The random gravity values is just bad physics.
What is kinda sad is that there isnt a spread as would be expected around a predicatable flightpath, but first, you have from the get-go a random horizontal spread, then you have a vertical spread determined by the random pick of the muzzle velocity and gravity values. And while on the rifle the vertical spread is not as severe given that it picks values that are close to each other, the horizontal spread seems to be determined by a random pick of +-20 degrees of angle immediatly at the point of origin. Returning to a previously posted image, you can see that the vertical spread is minimal, while the horizontal is totaly random nonsense. (note that if this test would be conducted with a musket, the vertical spread would potentionaly be also all over the place)
Spoiler
[close]

Also as an oberservation. Given that the flighpath originate in the crosshair, this prevent from shooting when you are using the free-look key as the crosshair is not present at that moment.

To address the point why some peope including me are now vocal regarding the awfull handling of the shooting mechanic is that this game had closed testing for a while, with people I have known from playing NW DLC for Warband. The shooting mechanics seems to be the result of these closed testings and given that developers commented on fixing and improving melee while there were no mentions of improving the shooting mechanics (I may have missed them, please correct me if I did) I have a bad feeling that this is because everyone was saying "this is fine".

There is also a common argument I have noticed around, that it is to simulate inexperience. I will not address this point directly, but by examinating this cherry picking. If it is realy to simulate an inexperienced shooter what about melee then, melee training during that period was marginal compared to shooting, should we be happy with very bad melee implementation as it would now simulate the "lack of training"? I think no. I think that all mechanics in this game should be refined.

Leon, you cannot argue that there are no linebattles destroyed by this accuracy problem when there were hardly any linebattles conducted since the game's launch few days ago. I was invited to a linebattle but couldnt participate, but when I questioned some of the involved players the feeling they had from it was realy lackluster. Other players I know which are critical of many issues of the NW DLC for Warband said, that holdfast made them appreciate the NW DLC more and that they are beyond the 2 hours refund point anyway.

To get back to the implementation of firearms, these things are I think woth consideration.
1) Trajectory originate's in the musket (even if this would be the only thing implemented, it could improve the close range accuracy)
2) The trajectory calculation would use more consistant muzzle velocity numbers. The tighter barrel of the rifle would allow a higher muzzle velocity for the rifle leading to a longer, flatter trajectory.
3) Spread would be applied as a randomly picked degree of angle on a 360° rotation around the bore axis. A musket would have a bigger number, while a rifle's one would be smaller.
4) Weapons would be sighted to a certain distance, making marksmanship more reasonable.
5) As a potentional change to the gameplay making realoading while moving slower.
6) Ammunition selection for riflemans, where they could choose the amunition type they are currently firing and decide between loose ammunition balls for quicker reloading to use for harasment or tight ammunition balls for a precise long range fire with the downside of a longer reload.

Also for people questioning 18th century musket making, this is an old, hour long, but interesting document which shows a gunsmith using period tools and techniques to make a musket.
https://youtu.be/bAzJOULyx5c
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CptBiym on September 26, 2017, 02:24:53 am
Great post crochunter. All your points on implementing firearms properly should be considered by the developers. They are the specifics behind my suggestion to reduce horizontal and vertical spread to realistic numbers, having them increase with distance, but at a closer range than reality. A 1:2 or 1:3 scale as I put it. I will give my input on your list.

1st point: It's necessary to have the projectile originate from the musket barrel and I've come to notice this having an effect at closer ranges. This fix should also help solve the discrepancy between shooting using 1st and 3rd person.

2nd and 3rd point: Having more consistent muzzle velocities, in other words, having the projectile reach a range of expected distance traveled, is necessary for the firearm gameplay of Holdfast. Spread needs to be changed so a far tighter grouping occurs at a reasonable distance. I've suggested a 2-3 meter spread at 60m and 1/3 meter spread at 20m. At the moment the spread becomes massive VERY early on in the projectiles flight the same way the projectile drop becomes massive after only 20 or so meters. Projectiles should have tighter spreads closer to the barrel. There should be a gradual increase in the inaccuracy of firearms, not a massive spike.

Realistically and gameplay-wise the drop should begin affecting the projectile in centimeters (if we go for a 1:2 scale, Holdfast to realism) at around 30m and slightly increase to a 50 centimeter drop at 60m, and then continue on this slow descent throughout its flight. Rifles and other accurate firearms if implemented would deviate from this by having a slower projectile descent and a tighter spread.

4th point: Yes, and I've suggested for a range where negligible spread will guarantee a hit. Real muskets have this at around 50 meters with a spread of around 1/3 meters. Having a 1:2 scale would give us this spread at around 25 meters. I've suggested 20m as a good distance.

5th point: Soon I will be posting everything the developers need to get right in terms of the current combat mechanics and UI to make this game the best linebattle and napoleonic warfare game to date. It won't be an intimidating block of text and most if not all will be slight readjustments that the developers could easily implement if willing. It will detail how to turn the current arcade-esque gameplay to a truly remarkable experience. A slightly slower reload for all weapons and a much slower reload for players on the move is on that list 100%. This also goes together well with the more realistic musket accuracy and improved projectiles.

Good day
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Andee on September 26, 2017, 04:44:23 am
I feel like we're in the minority when it comes to reworking the musket accuracy. Most of the community is pretty hell bent on fixing the melee, when in reality, it is rather hard to get into melee on a public server without getting shot due to the surprising amount of teamwork in battles.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: 1stRVR Official on September 26, 2017, 03:56:46 pm
deleted, wrong account.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Charles Caldwell on September 26, 2017, 04:44:03 pm
What did you try to prove with the video and these accuracy results? Confirm what I've said in regards to musket accuracy at range? As I said above, make it clear what you intend to prove. I believe it's time to move on from this ridiculous apologist mentality for the current state of ballistics and come together on how to fix it. I submitted my solution a few posts back, give it a read. I also suggest you read my original post before responding further.

'What did you try to prove with the video?' - the video was merely countering a reenactor who 'tongue in cheek' was trying to say that "they" were superior to Musket Infantry of the period. I was merely showing differing results with different marksmen. It also shows the hit and miss nature of the combination of weapon and the shooter!

Clearly I think at least anyway you 'Ballistic boys' are not seeing the game as I see it or dare I say others too.... This echo chamber of a thread merely shows those differing views perfectly. However you seem blinded by stats and intolerant of opposing views to your vision of the game. There I think the problem lies.

Now has Anvil Games Studio ever claimed this was a Napoleonic simulator, an accurate portrayal of the Period and warfare? Not that I've seen, but they do push the narrative of a Fun quick to learn, difficult to master FPS, set within the rich and glorious period of the Napoleonic Wars. Its never planted its flag on Accurate Ballistics, Period Warfare simulation or Battle reenactments. Its does however give us the essence of that in a contained beautiful arena. Its got it all, the smoke, yells, colours and feel of the Battles....

If you want 'Ultra Accurate Musket Ballistics' come join us in War of Rights, we'd love to have you. But this game I feel, has been designed for the masses, and if that means fudging the ballistics a little then why not. Its all about the 'feel' of the combat surely. I'm not saying combat both Musketry or Melee are perfect, they do need tweaking clearly. But does the game need players taking out other players easily at 100 yards? Are the maps big enough to allow players to manoeuvre if ranges of 100, even 200 yards are effective ranges for players?

This is what Im saying, nothing more.... ;)

I get my simulator fix with WoRs, for my get stuck in and have a laugh, Hold Fast is my fix of choice.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Spork on September 26, 2017, 05:41:52 pm
I agree that people should not be able to shoot over walls, and that the shot should originate from the musket, or at the very least a place that's not above or behind the soldier (does this lead to killing/TKing a guy behind you?).

Does the game need to be Arma NW? No. Would it be nice to have perfectly accurate ballistics? Sure. Would it be reasonable to have something that seems balanced? Absolutely.

Would it be nice to have multiple ballistics settings available to admins, like an arcade and hardcore mode? Yes. If you're going to have people doing hide behind cover or snipe and run away pub skirmishing, then you can set it to reduced range arcade mode, and if you're going to do a historical line battle at longer ranges with longer reloads, then set it to hardcore mode. The devs could make all sorts of ballistic balance options available that cater to all the different types of maps and battle scenarios. Heck, they could make a WW1 bolt action rifle / single action revolver ballistic mode with even greater firing range and accuracy and negligible reload time, if people wanted that (but let's maybe leave that sort of thing to the modders).
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CrocHunter on September 26, 2017, 05:46:04 pm
"Balistic boys", now that would be funny if it wouldnt sound so condescending. Look, I dont think anyone want exactly "Ultra Accurate Musket Ballistics", the thing we are I thing trying to get across is we want firearms to act like firearms and not wizzard wands.

And you have some problems with the stats I posted? While I used them as observation, they alone can be used as a sample for people trying to practice shooting should firearms stay as they are now.

This game doesnt exist in vacuum and players interested in this period have another similiar game that Holdfast take many inspirations from. Part of the AGS team as I understand took part in the developement of the NW DLC for Warband. If players want the feels, colors, yells, smoke of the napoleonic period they have it in the NW DLC which has shooting and melee more refined even if it is implemented in a arcadey way. And I am afraid if compared to the NW DLC the only thing that this game would offer that is not done better in the NW DLC is the sea combat, well Blackwake doest that now better.

Maybe what this game need is to decide what it wants to be, because it kinda feels its all over the place.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Cristnogol on September 26, 2017, 07:30:19 pm
The amount of bullet drop is absolutely ridiculous
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Karshaw on September 26, 2017, 07:39:41 pm
I understand having SOME variation in bullet spread due to using smooth bore muskets, but currently it's WAY to random. Why not tighten it up a fair amount, and in first person / gun sight view (if they eventually make it a real gun sight) give a fair amount of rifle sway depending on stance? In 3rd person view we could keep the reticle and maybe make it bigger giving it a fair representation of where the ball could actual travel (as in spread deviation)? What I mean by that, is that 3rd person grants better field of view and a quicker shot, but is much less accurate. Where as in first person / down the barrel view would take longer to line up shots but be better in terms of overall accuracy, making shooting a little more reliable. Please make this game more skill based rather than RNG in regards to muskets!
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CptBiym on September 26, 2017, 08:02:35 pm
Caldwell, you haven't read most of my thoughts in this thread and it shows. You also haven't submitted anything of worth, but I will respond nonetheless.

"Clearly I think at least anyway you 'Ballistic boys' are not seeing the game as I see it or dare I say others too.... "

Do you find the current firearm mechanics acceptable? If not, then we have something in common. If you do, then you are naive and inexperienced when it comes to musket games in general and are doing more harm than good by neglecting a much need d fix to this core element of Holdfast. I have explained why I feel this way many times and you didn't read and respond to my comments then and I see you still haven't done so now.

It's egocentric and ignorant of you to say "others too." I haven't taken a poll of the thousands of players who have clocked significant hours into the game and neither have you. I will tell you what we do know. There are more than a couple threads on this forum and on the steam discussion forums asking for improved musket accuracy and the overwhelming response has been positive in favor for a rehaul. The largest of these discussions is my post on steam which at the moment has over 115 replies, the vast majority agreeing that a fix is necessary. It's more likely that a person with strong feelings AGAINST a change would post than someone who simply agrees with what I and others said and moves on. With that in mind, the few people that have attempted, in futility (with baseless points that you can read for yourself), to argue against the rehaul are drowned out by players' support for this change across all posts asking for it. And in my nearly 30 hours of gametime, I have yet to finish a match in which someone DOESN'T comment on the broken firearms and musket accuracy. However, that's more personal experience than the multiple discussions which you can freely scroll through at any time, here, and on the steam forums.

"However you seem blinded by stats and intolerant of opposing views to your vision of the game."

Blinded by statistics? What statistics have you put forth and for what reason? It seems you are talking about yourself, avoiding the numbers because it would for historical and atmospheric purposes destroy an argument for the current mechanics. Gameplay-wise, you conveniently and willfully ignore the musket spread numbers (which have been confirmed by crochunter) because a rehaul, similar to what has been proposed above, would be a direct fix to an issue nearly everyone with common sense and/or critical thinking can identify.

No one is intolerant to opposing views if you can fully support them with a realistic and gameplay argument. The problem with you "non-ballistic boys" is that you first attempt to play at the realism argument for a bit. Trying to tug and pull at facts supporting real musket accuracy numbers. Then you attempt to say that perfectly real muskets would break the game. Then you say that the developers intended for the game to be an arcade. Never is there any reasonable argument in how a balance between real musket spreads and the currently abhorrent nerf guns would not be beneficial realistically or practically for Holdfast.

The developers have stated they want to find a "proper balance between realism and gameplay." There is currently no mechanic in the game that remotely leans to the realism side. At the moment, Holdfast is, for all practical purposes, an mini arcade game with napoleonic warfare inspiration. They also stated they were looking to work with the community in early access to find that ideal balance. And here we are, the "ballistic boys" trying to get it right and suggest ideas to fix the problem the useless alpha testers were too blinded and inexperienced to notice. In contrast, you are here offering no valuable input and merely complaining about us using the forums and discussion boards as they should be used, to help the developers understand what they got wrong, why, and how they can fix it.

I have already answered others that foolishly use extremes as a way to argue. No one here wants perfect precision at 100m, 200m as you say. Have you bothered to read any of my previous posts? I believe I said negligible spread at 20m, few meter spread at 50-60m and a gradual increase to 100m and beyond. I also answered how it would affect gameplay. It seems you don't read what doesn't suit you, which is very sad considering you ignore potential points that we may agree on and that may prove beneficial to discuss. The better ballistics would make "quick to learn, difficult to master," a reality, because more realistic, tighter spreads would have players adjusting their aim at each distance according to the spread and drop to increase their chance of scoring a hit. They can practice this because aiming would be more skill reliant and less pure luck past 8 meters. Leading your targets becomes feasible. I am repeating myself at this point. You can scroll up and see that I've already made this case a few responses back, and you simply chose to ignore it.

At this point you are doing more harm than good if you simply justify, without reason, the current firearm mechanics by pointing to the developers who, have stated themselves, are actually looking for feedback on achieving a good gameplay-realism balance. I suggest you read the last 10 or so posts before replying to understand why, to me, you seem so foolish in your posts.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: TooL69 on September 26, 2017, 08:57:19 pm
CptBiym, I was referring to the fact that soldiers of the Napoleonic era had very poor training in terms of accuracy of fire. This is an indisputable fact! An ordinary soldier could count (at best) on 10 rounds per year for training accuracy of shooting! Practically all the time of training was given to practice the skill of quick reloading the musket.

By the way, at the expense of reloading on the move, I will demonstrate another video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRW2nL4YyOc (5:35)

There are two options for the gameplay of the game:
1) A soldier can run at normal speed, but reloading a musket is slow.
2) reloading the musket a little slower than the standard, but the soldier can not escape.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Charles Caldwell on September 26, 2017, 09:31:24 pm
lol CptBiym, I'm guessing you find most people who have a different point of view to yours foolish :)

Do you find the current firearm mechanics acceptable? If not, then we have something in common.

Who's now not reading my posts. I've said in every one of mine that the system needs improving, and on other posts too. I think I say 'Tweaked' more than once. And I think I've said I'd back you 100% in WoRs also with your ballistic views. But I stand by the fact that this game does not pretend to be a simulation. We both agree that it feels arcady thats clear, but I never said the Devs intended it to be that way, I just stated their marketing statement 'Easy to learn, difficult to master'.

The contrast from playing WoRs to this is huge. However it doesn't in anyway detract from my enjoyment of both.

My fear is that your ballistic model, despite your assumed assurances... will impact greatly on Gameplay (thats my beef). I think we both have to sit back and watch what the Devs come up with that balances both our views.  I'm sure accuracy will increase and the grouping will be tighter (it needs it) but ranges hmmmmm thats my biggest fear. I just dont think the battlefield is big enough to accommodate your model. We can already shell the enemy spawn with cannon, it'll be a short charge with Cavalry... and perhaps with ranges of 100+ yards well within range of quickly advancing troops too.

We wait with bated breath......
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CptBiym on September 26, 2017, 09:52:43 pm
Tool69, what you've said about napoleonic era soldiers having poor training is dependent on many factors and certainly not indisputable. What is common knowledge is that regular line infantry had a limited amount (depending on the nation) of live rounds afforded to them yearly for practice on targets and a higher number of blank shots given for reload practice. This doesn't change the effectiveness of a brown bess or other musket of the era when pointed properly at a target within its range.

I called you out on the pure nonsense of your statement that "it is possible to draw a LOGICAL conclusion that the soldier of Napoleon's age was three or four times worse than the modern reconstructor." No it's not possible. Perhaps they can place shots on target at a distance slightly better than soldiers of the past after months of practice but even amateur shooters with minimal musket experience can hit the numbers and spread patterns that I mentioned earlier with even less time spent conducting accuracy training than soldiers of the 18th century. Now, in your attempt to state that they had poor training and therefore "poor accuracy," what are you trying to prove that would make an argument for keeping or changing Holdfast's projectiles? Please remember the purpose of this thread or you may end up wasting our time.

I will also not risk diverting the purpose of this thread, which is to address the musket inaccuracy and broken projectiles, to talk at length about the current reload of firearms and how it should be changed. All I will say is that the video you posted was a waste of my time and that the two solutions you suggest with much certainty are neither possible fixes realistically or gameplay-wise. A better solution would be a slightly longer reload time, 11 seconds to around 13-15 while standing still and slower movement or slower reload speed when reloading on the move. No running nonsense or removing reload on the move altogether as you stated. I won't give this topic much attention on this thread and I urge you to go post reload suggestions in the reload-related post that you were previously commenting in.

Caldwell, you need to choose a point of view and stick with it as I have. Please don't mention WoR as it serves no purpose to this discussion. I never said simulation, I said the game must strike a balance between gameplay and realism. The developers said the exact same thing in one of their posts. At the moment, the game couldn't be farther from "easy to learn and hard to master" because the ballistic system punishes players who attempt to learn shooting spreads and adjust for drop and lead due to the massive variation of shots. We agree then that it needs a tweak but you are still unsure about its effect on gameplay. Read my posts further back on how a better ballistics model would affect gameplay and then reply, similarly to how I put forth my points, on how it may be detrimental. To give answer for the 3rd time on the distances and map size issue, I will say it again that engagement distances would just increase because of better accuracy. Instead of running up and firing from 25m away, players can begin to exchange fire at 40-50m. The maps currently support this. This also helps with the cannon issue where infantry are largely useless against and very vulnerable to cannons unless right on top of them.

Good day
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Charles Caldwell on September 26, 2017, 11:08:09 pm
Caldwell, you need to choose a point of view and stick with it as I have.

I have, yes tweak muskets but not at the expense of gameplay, simple, have you not been reading my posts! ;)

Its going to be difficult for the Devs to balance, but currently its fun not knowing if this shot is going to be a kill or miss.

Clearly the mechanics of the muskets and rifles in this game needs looking at, however the overall accuracy of the weapon perhaps should not be overly tweaked...

Look I'm sure the ballistics in Alpha will be constantly be tweaked and for the better, and we as players will adapt with every change...

I'm not saying combat both Musketry or Melee are perfect, they do need tweaking clearly.


My fear is that your ballistic model, despite your assumed assurances... will impact greatly on Gameplay (thats my beef).

Oh and I'll mention WoRs when and how I like, please dont presume to tell me otherwise. For me its a good benchmark with regard to map sizes, game mechanics and ballistic realism in the genre of musketry. Whats your benchmark, M&B NW or something else?
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CptBiym on September 26, 2017, 11:44:21 pm
WoR and NW mod are completely different musket games in regards to each other and in regards to Holdfast. They all have different scale and unique mechanics and for this reason I have limited my mention of other musket games and how they compare to this game. I am making suggestions for this game, with its current limitations, to become the best it can be. Not in comparison to NW mod, or BG2 mod, or WoR, but to its current, early access version. I will say it again, do not mention WoR here because it helps no one. You may continue to do so of course but the tiny bit of sense you are trying to make fades into obscurity when you bring that topic up.

This is what you said:
"The random element of the ball is not only realistic but adds to gameplay imo. As mentioned, if we tinker too much with the accuracy then games will end quicker and we'll also end up with 125 snipers camping"

I quickly called you out on the stupidity of what you had just said and you later responded:
"Clearly the mechanics of the muskets and rifles in this game needs looking at, however the overall accuracy of the weapon perhaps should not be overly tweaked..."

A few posts later you then said this:
"But this game I feel, has been designed for the masses, and if that means fudging the ballistics a little then why not."

There's not much I can add because your quotes obviously speak for themselves. I asked you to make up your mind because you obviously have many contradictions and are having trouble comprehending the discussion. Every time you did mention that the game needs some tweaking (but was overall meant to be this way) you failed to mention in what way would you change what's broken and failed to justify the parts that you believe are working as intended. And you clearly have flip flopped on your opinions and with little sense other than what you may be "feeling."

This exchange has become trivial and unfruitful for purpose of my post, which was to suggest an improvement to firearms and musket accuracy. I see you don't care, but I will be reserving my time for discussion on how to improve the game and not for posts such as yours that do nothing but detract from this intent.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Hughes on September 27, 2017, 03:16:47 am

The overriding consideration is: Both sides face the same handicaps.
I'll trust the Devs to fine-tune accuracy.

I'd like to see Light Infantry buffed a bit.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Charles Caldwell on September 27, 2017, 10:56:07 am
I did that a quick look at your Steam thread, and I see the standard format of some agreement on your ideas, some views that a compromise is needed and some views of keep the current system (much to your disdain). You know my views by now but Im guessing you and forums have never been comfortable friends. Forums are where people post their view and others can freely criticise, agree or give their views.... I think thats where your love affair with forums end. I see the same contempt & condescending responses to posters who do not follow your party line and by the looks if it wasn't for the naysayers your posts would fade into the background, as you are the most active on them all.

It follows a pattern when people give their views: "Yadda yadda your stupid... yadda yadda for these reasons... yadda yadda I refer you to my original post!"

Anyway back to the 'discussion' and despite your preening response that this thread you deem trivial and unfruitful. You'll be back, you cant resist! ;)

I want to hear your views in more detail and how you came to the conclusion on how extended realistic effective ranges will improve gameplay, without using a point of reference and after only 30 hours of actual play time. From what I understand of the pre release Alpha a number of experienced NW players and youtubes were invited to playtest the mechanics. Why do you feel that these veterans and devs have overlooked what you feel is an obvious oversight? Why without extended playtesting do you think your vision will play out, as you assume? Perhaps the Devs could have saved a lot of time and effort and just consulted you...  ;)

Quote from: AGS
This overhaul came into effect after consulting the community. We invited some of the current closed testers who have been very involved in related competitive scenes (and possess a depth of knowledge in this period) with direct feedback. Together we have spent many hours engaged in a discussion on firearm mechanics and directly adjusting values for each and every firearm in the game.

Are they stupid like the rest of us plebes?  :P

We do agree however on these points I feel:

I think for me and after discussing with other players in game, we all agree that a tighter grouping or cone, as someone said, at 20m would help a lot. Currently it seems the spread favours bottom left or right outside of the reticle at 30m-50m. I however dispute the claim you have to raise the sight by a reticle every 15m with the current bullet drop... I've not found this through gaming. My average range at hitting players in around 30-50m with the adjustments mentioned and very little elevation.

Muskets had around a 1/3 meter grouping at 50 meters meaning that a shot at an enemy 50 meters away nearly always delivered a hit. Beyond this distance, the grouping increases slightly and at 100m a soldier could still expect his shots to land within 1-3m of one another.

On to map sizes, you say that you'd only slightly adjust the spread at 100m to a 1-3m cone. You also say that current maps accommodate your increase accuracy and ranges. Thats what concerns me a little! I think its called 'Spanish Farm' a short stroll to either left or right, up to the wall shows the enemy 'French' artillery emplacements on the hill. Just beyond that the French Spawn. I assume the distance of that is slightly beyond the 130-150m mark, could be more (forgive the fact I've not provided FACTS). Could this prove a problem for gameplay with your mechanics? Its seems that it would only need a small advance to the cornfield for the emerging French to be in range of vastly improved accuracy/range mechanic. For me and some of the other players I note in your steam thread and here on these boards, the get up close and dirty combat is actually a strength of Hold Fast: NaW not a weakness.

... I'll repeat, it needs improving clearly but perhaps not to your extreme (In my view that is).

 
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Chadman on September 27, 2017, 11:29:57 am
FYI, there is a mode on the server where the devs can turn on showing bullet drop for all weapons.

Too much firing and it looks like a scene from Star Wars :)

If the devs are willing, I could look at recording a video showing the bullet drops in detail for you guys to see the actual trajectories?
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Charles Caldwell on September 27, 2017, 01:28:52 pm
I'll get in before you are 'Biym Slapped'. ;)

Thanks Chadman but I think Crochunter already purchased a server and highlighted this himself on page 4.

Cheers anyway.
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: Chadman on September 27, 2017, 02:04:22 pm
I'll get in before you are 'Biym Slapped'. ;)

Thanks Chadman but I think Crochunter already purchased a server and highlighted this himself on page 4.

Cheers anyway.

doh, no worries :)
Title: Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
Post by: CrocHunter on September 27, 2017, 04:07:49 pm
Chadman, Charles Caldwell: Actualy there is no need to buy or rent a server if you want to test features. The server documentation provided by the developers has enough info on how to set up a server. Link to this forum's thread containing the documentation (http://www.holdfastgame.com/forum/index.php?topic=1975.0).

Also would be nice if people resorted to stop with the brush painting of each side of the argument with various names.