[QUOTE=Bittermetal;347642]Sounds a like a man raised on CS AK 47 play. I could be wrong but you my friend have the right idea.
So let me ask you… How do you feel about the changes in BRINK’s latest patch. Sorry if I missed this in your previous posts.[/QUOTE]
Burst fire doesn’t help as this shows and hahaha you do realize that guy is nothing more than a console troll, right? He just glides over points people make and blindly accepts anything SD does.
[QUOTE=zenstar;347641]Various firearms have different accuracy for different ranges. This statement is terrible and incorrect.
SMGs (especially older models) are notoriously inaccurate but excel at close quater combat due to their high throughput.
Just search for some gun forums and see how they compare and discuss accuracy. If every gun hit where you aim it there would be no concept of accuracy of a weapon.
Stick to arguing over whether or not accuracy is a desirable concept in a game, because in reality randomness is a fact of life.[/QUOTE]
It’s obvious you’re not an experienced shooter. Because the guns DO respond nearly same way every time they are fired with barely any deviation in pattern… which is why people sight their own guns. That is not the case in Brink there is nothing reliable about guns in Brink.
[QUOTE=Smooth;347592]The circle isn’t entirely random, there’s a weighted distribution so bullets are more likely to hit towards the middle of the circle.
This weighting varies from gun to gun and does degrade over time to a more even distribution during sustained fire.[/QUOTE]
Is the Stability rating in game a measure of this weighting?
If so, is there any way to access this data using debug codes?
Regards,
Nexo
I just watched that video. Wow that sucks for that guy. Not my experience with the new patch at all. But I stopped using the Carb-9 before the patch. I use Bulpdaun, with no scope. Great.
That is a rather long distance for an SMG anyway. But it does make a good case for how ineffective burst fire is with the Carb-9.
again, that is nowhere close to my experience post-patch. I think you may want to switch weapons if you are planning on staying at that distance.
[QUOTE=Bittermetal;347656]I just watched that video. Wow that sucks for that guy. Not my experience with the new patch at all. But I stopped using the Carb-9 before the patch. I use Bulpdaun, with no scope. Great.
That is a rather long distance for an SMG anyway. But it does make a good case for how ineffective burst fire is with the Carb-9.
again, that is nowhere close to my experience post-patch. I think you may want to switch weapons if you are planning on staying at that distance.[/QUOTE]
That range looks to be more like AR or longer weapon range anyway. Far enough that the SMG really shouldn’t be that accurate.
Again I totally agree about tightening the spread and making aiming count, but this video in particular is a bad example. That doesn’t mean it couldn’t be done over at closer range or with a different weapon and show similar results though.
[QUOTE=nephandys;347659]That range looks to be more like AR or longer weapon range anyway. Far enough that the SMG really shouldn’t be that accurate.
Again I totally agree about tightening the spread and making aiming count, but this video in particular is a bad example. That doesn’t mean it couldn’t be done over at closer range or with a different weapon and show similar results though.[/QUOTE]
Yup! Agreed +1
It probably looks further than it is, I think TeoH plays at fov 110… at default fov (70) the actual distance is more than likely closer than it appears.
Possibly. I play at 101. So not a huge difference. Like I said… Not my experience.
I have some complaints but they more revolve around abilities and the lack thereof for Operative, intricacies of ability use and so on… I aired them in the Unused Abilities thread http://www.splashdamage.com/forums/showthread.php?p=346513#post346513
My biggest gripes are the lack of stats for PC so far and no real marketing happening for the DLC
He actually isn’t that far away, like DarkAngel said his FOV is really high. You could get the actual distance if you loaded up Aquarium, but it doesn’t really matter to me as I know how inaccurate everything is, lol.
[quote=Nexolate;347650]Is the Stability rating in game a measure of this weighting?
If so, is there any way to access this data using debug codes?
Regards,
Nexo[/quote]
The stability rating bar is derived from a combination of accuracy values.
Each gun has 97 values (around a dozen core values with a different one for each stance) which purely define bullet accuracy. This gives us a vast amount of control, but also makes it very difficult to communicate those values using only a couple of stats bars.
The continued fun I have speaks volumes. And for $35 bucks!??! It’s money going well beyond well-spent!
Game gets a ton more Play than Crysis 2 or BLOPS at this point on my box.
To make it easy for people to judge, the bot is standing in the spawn position for Resistance on the Aquarium first objective, and i’m standing just to the right of the command post. If you load Aquarium as Resistance, walk to the right of the command post and turn around, you’ll see the distance.
You didn’t say before that you were looking for ways to help your team, you said that at the end of a map you were being shown nothing for your effort which is an entirely different proposition:
As I previously indicated, at the end of a map all that “matters” (apart from having fun really, regardless of the outcome) is that your team wins - that most certainly should be sufficient at that point, especially given that we know a PC stats site is coming (if you can’t enjoy the game without the stats site then you’re taking it way too seriously).
Ah, the ad hominem attack. Right, because you were so spot on with judging my motives/opinion on the whole demo/recording issue… :rolleyes:
Enjoy Brink - regardless how you choose to play it.
Have you made experiment with another gun than carb9? I think Kross would give wayyy better results.
I tried to setup something like you did last night, ended up simply shooting at walls seeing spread in various situations (but without factual numbers like you do). I’m lacking the way to add a bot, making him stop, debug , etc…
anyway, the Carb is now simply the shotgun of the SMG, nothing more. If you need a bit of range and accuracy, use another SMG, Kross or Bulpdaun (well, I guess you have figured it out already 
)
Which means we would need the same factual numbers, but for all weapons and various situations
From what I saw last night, Kross is on par with nearly all AR in terms of spread while bursting.
Where AR shines is when you use ADS, there’s basically no spread when bursting in ADS.
Which leads me to conclude that yes, SD is advocating static fighting in Brink
[QUOTE=Smooth;347687]The stability rating bar is derived from a combination of accuracy values.
Each gun has 97 values (around a dozen core values with a different one for each stance) which purely define bullet accuracy. This gives us a vast amount of control, but also makes it very difficult to communicate those values using only a couple of stats bars.[/QUOTE]
I had a feeling it’d be something like that. Thanks for your time.
Regards,
Nexo
Actually used to work in a gunstore when I was a kid and did plenty of shooting. Would probably still be shooting as a hobbyist if I didn’t live in London.
Different models of gun respond differently. Slight imperfections in the same model of guns result in an individual gun responding differently to another gun of the same make and model. Wear and tear make a gun respond differently over time. Different ammunition will cause the gun to react differently. An experienced shooter knows this and is why a competition shooter will do his upmost to minimise and counteract as many of these factors as possible (reloading his own ammo, custom grips, practiced stance, etc) and even then something as simple as “feeling off on the day” can be the difference between a perfect score and a loss.
These things are all sources of randomness.
You yourself say “…nearly same way every time…” which means that there is some difference every time you fire. This is caused by a million different things from the slight difference in powder load in each bullet to the wind, the stance you’re in when you fire to the distance to your target. All of this is effectively randomness.
Also remember that you generally sight your gun to a certain distance and if you’re shooting further or closer you have manually adjust your aim to what you expect it to be. And that adjustment is guesswork with a degree of error. Add to that “combat conditions” of running and gunning and you have massive amounts of variance.
[QUOTE=Smooth;347592]The circle isn’t entirely random, there’s a weighted distribution so bullets are more likely to hit towards the middle of the circle.
This weighting varies from gun to gun and does degrade over time to a more even distribution during sustained fire.[/QUOTE]
Awesome … thanks for the response!
:stroggtapir:
[QUOTE=Smooth;347687]The stability rating bar is derived from a combination of accuracy values.
Each gun has 97 values (around a dozen core values with a different one for each stance) which purely define bullet accuracy. This gives us a vast amount of control, but also makes it very difficult to communicate those values using only a couple of stats bars.[/QUOTE]
someday Id like to see some documentation on these since apparently the stats bars dont tell us the true story. I can dream right?
[QUOTE=zenstar;348059]Actually used to work in a gunstore when I was a kid and did plenty of shooting. Would probably still be shooting as a hobbyist if I didn’t live in London.
Different models of gun respond differently. Slight imperfections in the same model of guns result in an individual gun responding differently to another gun of the same make and model. Wear and tear make a gun respond differently over time. Different ammunition will cause the gun to react differently. An experienced shooter knows this and is why a competition shooter will do his upmost to minimise and counteract as many of these factors as possible (reloading his own ammo, custom grips, practiced stance, etc) and even then something as simple as “feeling off on the day” can be the difference between a perfect score and a loss.
These things are all sources of randomness.
You yourself say “…nearly same way every time…” which means that there is some difference every time you fire. This is caused by a million different things from the slight difference in powder load in each bullet to the wind, the stance you’re in when you fire to the distance to your target. All of this is effectively randomness.
Also remember that you generally sight your gun to a certain distance and if you’re shooting further or closer you have manually adjust your aim to what you expect it to be. And that adjustment is guesswork with a degree of error. Add to that “combat conditions” of running and gunning and you have massive amounts of variance.[/QUOTE]
Are you really mixing reality with video games?
No. Someone asked who would make a gun that doesn’t shoot exactly where it was aimed (or something like that) and then who would try to put that gun into a video game.
Basically arguing that there should be no spread in Brink.
I replied saying IRL guns have differering accuracies and we should stick to arguing whether or not the randomness works in the game. (paraphrasing… you can look the stuff up if you want to).
Then someone told me I’m oviously not an experienced shooter because blaha blahblah and so I responded to that.
That’s all