BAR crosshair recovery -1 reply

Please wait...

Big {Daddy}

Get in!

50 XP

2nd October 2003

0 Uploads

1,708 Posts

0 Threads

#1 13 years ago

The crosshair recovers quicker than any other weapon when prone. You can dive for the deck and fire with perfect accuracy within a second. Is it supposed to be this way, or was it a coding error?




schoolkid

your mother is a beaver

50 XP

3rd June 2004

0 Uploads

1,134 Posts

0 Threads

#2 13 years ago

It's a support rifle, not a submachine gun. I think it's fine the way it is. :)




Tas

Serious business brigade

50 XP

4th September 2004

0 Uploads

7,275 Posts

0 Threads

#3 13 years ago
Big {Daddy}The crosshair recovers quicker than any other weapon when prone. You can dive for the deck and fire with perfect accuracy within a second. Is it supposed to be this way, or was it a coding error?

I was playing wake a while ago and i noticed this.. -The recovery when going prone is WAY to fast -Recoil is non-existant when firing on fast mode when prone, but on slow it bounces all over the place? Bar needs to be tweaked.. really bad.




schoolkid

your mother is a beaver

50 XP

3rd June 2004

0 Uploads

1,134 Posts

0 Threads

#4 13 years ago
-Recoil is non-existant when firing on fast mode when prone, but on slow it bounces all over the place?

Hmm, good point.




Ohioan

Not Wise Shitashi - Cheston

50 XP

6th October 2003

0 Uploads

3,604 Posts

0 Threads

#5 13 years ago

BAR was overcompensated for. It sucked hard in .65 and now its uber.

It shoudl NOT have quicker crosshair recovery then a rifle and it SHOULD bounce when firing fast full auto. This is a bug.




ftk1

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

21st December 2004

0 Uploads

12 Posts

0 Threads

#6 13 years ago

I hated the bar before but now it just mows them down. The enemy seem to fall really hard when hit. It seems to have a much better rate of fire along with being more accurate. As I think it should. Clyde Barrow didn't use it for nothing. I never even tried the slow setting. :nodding:




MR.X`

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

30th April 2004

0 Uploads

12,409 Posts

0 Threads

#7 13 years ago

Wait until .7 when they up the recoil. It was an automatic rifle, not a machine gun. As such, it did not have the sophisicated recoil reducing features of its German counterparts. That boy should bounce big when on High Full Auto.

From the sound of it though, it seems like the BAR is now a valueable AR and not a weapon to be used as a semiautomatic rifle. Good job for that devs!




terminal-strike

terminal-strike

50 XP

6th May 2004

0 Uploads

2,313 Posts

0 Threads

#8 13 years ago
OhioanBAR was overcompensated for. It sucked hard in .65 and now its uber. It shoudl NOT have quicker crosshair recovery then a rifle and it SHOULD bounce when firing fast full auto. This is a bug.

no, its fine now. More weight mean less deviation then a rifle. It has a bit longer cross closing standing or crouching which make sense it was heavier then a rifle. Being heavier then a rifle mean that the cross hair will take longer when standing or prone but with shorter after firing. The front bipod mean it will be easy to keep under control when prone ( like all the other weapons with bipods are when they are prone) THey have not overcompensated, they have gotten it right, or very close to right. The BAR was a popular weapon both in WW1 and in WW2 and it was not with out cause. The round it fired it was pretty powefull, and it weight and size mean that it was light enough to to sqeeze of some rounds off standing and with a accuracy somehwre between heavier support weapons and rifles when prone. THe weight and bipod workd for you when prone meaning a quick cross hair close and pleny of accuracy, but against you when not. IT means even full auto and burst are pretty well controled, one of the main benifit of a bipod. The BAR is very well modeled now, and the complaint about the cross har not opening on full auto is out of place because NONE of the other mgs and support weapons cross hairs do this very much. The only real problems with it are the ones the real ones had- it had a short ammo supply (check) and it was more awkward then other automatic rifle when standing or prone (check). (cross hair close is longer then regualr rifles, inaccuatre auto when standing) They team has done a great job, the not only did the later bipded one with the low and high rof, but also the early non-bipoded one with semi auto and full auto. THe bar complaints now are either mainly things also possibly 'off' with other weps in BF in general, or complaint about how good it is (akin to ppl who want the KT nerfed...). i say congratualtions FH team, wonderfull job on the bar.




Solo4114

Scoundrel Extraordinaire

50 XP

16th September 2002

0 Uploads

1,460 Posts

0 Threads

#9 13 years ago

I think the real issue is that you can close to good aim so quickly when going prone. I don't have as much of a problem with the thing's accuracy once you're prone, stabilized, and have drawn a bead on the target, but doing that should not be the near instantaneous thing it is currently. Standing and kneeling feel fine to me.

The real problems are twofold, and they apply to pretty much all infantry weapons:

1.) The crosshair system in BF1942 in general just sucks and is a silly holdover from vanilla (better to have the crosshairs locked to represent the weapon's inherent accuracy, and address everything else through barrel sway and recoil).

2.) Small arms are not scaled as they should be. Tanks are scaled, planes are scaled, small arms are not. Go figure.




terminal-strike

terminal-strike

50 XP

6th May 2004

0 Uploads

2,313 Posts

0 Threads

#10 13 years ago

THe cross hair close time is reasonable because it does not take time to setup like regualr support weapon that is heavier. This was one of the big advantages of the bar, in that it took very little time to aim and setup becuase it was lighter then other support weapons, really much more like a rifle in terms of aim time when prone like that.

1- I will agree teh cross system is wierd but, it is a decent enough way to show bot accuarcy deviaton and setup time.

2- They dont need to be scaled because they 'fit' inside the engine much more then scales aircraft and even tanks.. Aside from that im not even sure they are indeed not scaled.