Feedback - Infantry Aim Pop Up and Combat Stance

[jwilly]

Certainly a choice betwen "pop up aim" and "no pop up aim" represented as a toggle would be ideal.

If that approach isn't practical, perhaps it might work to allow the Infantry Prone position to have a position-adjust movement capability. Only the forward/back/lateral movement controls would be active, and the movement rate would be say 0.1 meter/second. This slow rate would be a simulation of squirming into exactly the position you need after you go prone.

The problem of course can exist with all fighting positions when a view obstruction exists above your sightline, but IMO it's most problematic for prone, so perhaps the above might be an adequate fix.

Edited April 8, 2010 by jwilly

[mpathy42]

Some other games have a feature where you raise your view when you aim and you're behind and very close to some form of cover. It would represent how you'd raise your upper body and lay the rifle on a log you are behind, for example.

Or perhaps it could be implemented so that you have the option to actually peek over something without having to aim. You'd press the space bar, the view would be raised and then you'd aim and fire while holding down space.

[adoniram]

Not fully related, but I have the same problem with ATGs and Pz where either the commander or the gunner has his view obscured by foilage. Especially when it comes to ATGs I would like to be able to "move" the commander a couple of meters from his fixed position...

[czpetr]

I found it good (pop up) to fire from laying position in grass, so you actually can see and aim above grass level. But it is totaly useless (and annoying) when firing from standing or prone positions and laying from bushes.

[mr338]

The pop-up aim is a good thing to have for grass and other forms of concealment you would not be able to peek over. Same for cover, of course.

However, most buildings do not support the idea of the new aim feature. The windows, as far as I found out all of them, are way to low. You would expose yourself even more with the new stance than before, because your torso is already above cover.

It would only make sense to change the buildings appropriately. Maybe it is an architectural phenomenon in WW2 to build windows that do not fit to the size of a human being.

Normally a soldier would take cover below a window, crouched, waiting for either a tank to pass by or a soldier to be audible and only then pop up, revealing the head and the rifle to engage the enemy. Would also work with LMGs and ATG being pre-deployed to await the enemy ready to fire the moment he comes around the corner or onto the alley/street.

As it is now, the soldier can be seen while crouching at the window, taking aim increases the visible silhouette even more with no advantage whatsoever.

I found out those round, white bunkers, I think it was in Vireaux(sp?), reduce the sight picutre while you try to aim from the inside, because the slits are too low for the size of a soldier. One would think they were build for small children and not for the purpose to cover the soldier inside so he can "safely" shoot incoming attackers without revealing his chest to enemy rounds.

I hope my text makes any sense.

[lutorm]

Some other games have a feature where you raise your view when you aim and you're behind and very close to some form of cover. It would represent how you'd raise your upper body and lay the rifle on a log you are behind, for example.

Or perhaps it could be implemented so that you have the option to actually peek over something without having to aim. You'd press the space bar, the view would be raised and then you'd aim and fire while holding down space.

Sounds great, let's throw that in with 6DOF TrackIR control too.

[popeye0]

Certainly a choice betwen "pop up aim" and "no pop up aim" represented as a toggle would be ideal. Until we have more discussion with the code and art departments we don't know how that will fly in the immediate sense. We will be having that discussion.

I like the pop up idea, however as it it now it is only useful in certain areas.

Keep the feature but make it controllable by the player and also make it so that if a player "pops up" to see anything he exposes his head and potentially his position to others. Something like the lean fesature.

[kagetora]

It is very off putting and any benefits very situational. Having to constantly look, aim, re-adjust, aim etc. before firing is really very poor. I agree that its only worth would be as an "optional" feature.

[GOPHUR]

So there are a lot of eye height adjustments in 1.31. For a LOT of things. New INF bunker, new wall heights etc.

You guys need to spend more offline getting informed opinions. Look at the combat stance and eye heights.

There was a lot of work done in the beta and some of that might be useful over here *wink*.

So I get the bushes kinda suck. I also get that peeking over things like the A wall is very cool.

With pop up you actually have more cover in a lot of places.

Without pop up you get your eye height adjusted to normal height in first person but in third person you are crouched a little lower.

Spend a little time playing around with this as clones offline.

I can adjust or change any of this and we want it right for release.

Also check eyeheights versus deployed weapons on lots of things including AB walls and crates and the new INF bunker.

Taking it off of prone or making the default the same as the current pop up is easy peasy but there is a LOT more too this.

Informed opinions are what I need guys.

[GOPHUR]

We don't have the option at present to morph this into a toggle options. Off the table. What we have is set eye heights for each stance, like prone or prone aim.

[snailtrail]

I like it because it helps with your ability to use cover more effectively. Moving around to look around leaves is a minor inconvenience for living longer.

BTW... is it possible to lower the crouch eye level when in aim? Lower the head 6 inches so you are looking from behind the gun rather than from above? Lowering the crouch head level while aiming would be a big plus when in windows and other objects. Currently when crouching in a window your head sticks up and makes a big juicy target even though the gun is at the right height.

Edited April 9, 2010 by snailtrail

[romzburg]

My opinion is extremely informed.

It's how I know that aiming through a window is quite often impossible.

It's how I know aiming from a bush is quite often impossible.

Sure, it's fine for getting above the clutter that you have forced on everyone that no one ever used before because it was obstructive and hurt framerates. And you want to force it on to make the game look better. Because the game need to look better to attract many new customers.

But if the clutter was not obstructive there'd be no need for popping up the head in that situation.

It's fine for shooting over AB walls and over fallen logs.

But any player who plays infantry most of the time could have told you he spends WAAAAAAAY more time in bushes/grass/prone in & behind berms, in buildings, etc than shooting over AB walls.

I don't know why you think any of the opinions here are not well informed.

I don't like it.

I don't like when I am crouched and moving around my eye height changes. I just got up from my desk, took one of my SKS rifles and crouched and walked out into the hall and into my dining room and kitchen. I looked through the front door and took aim at my neighbor's car.

My head did not bob up and down every time I moved. when I aimed my head height didn't change.

I was in control of my head the whole time.

I understand you guys put a ton of effort into this.

I wish you had left it alone and put that effort into making the No Fire Zone simply a safe place to spawn, rather than doing the quick & easy thing you did there.

Because I remember people complaining about getting killed when they spawn.

But I don't remember people complaining that they wanted to crouch more and pop their heads up over the AB wall.

I do remember TONS of complaints about how to see out of a bush you had to crawl out so far that half your body was outside before your eyes were outside.

Now we have another system that makes you exit a bush so you can see.

I don't like it, and don't want it.

I am extremely well informed.

________________

Ya know, at first Romsburg, you rubbed me the wrong way and I wasn't a fan. But over the past 12 months, you have really grown on me. You're precise, well spoken and although you are sometimes a little harsh, you are most often correct and in proper context with your responses.

indeed he's one of the few voices of common sense on these forums

I can't say [any]thing else [than] that the ban was justified considering that you have an 'impressive' TOS history....

The only thing worse than being talked about is *not* being talked about.

Edited April 9, 2010 by romzburg

[mr338]

That is not really constructive criticism, romzburg.

I can understand the idea behind the pop up aim. It's been implemented in several great games before, but with a different approach.

In one of these games you could take cover behind a rock or wall and if you press your aim key the character would bring up his (iron) sights and pop up behind his cover to engage Charlie. However, if he was standing in the open he simply brought up the sights, no viewpoint change.

So my humble suggestion, if possible at all, would be to change the stance of the soldier without the pop up aim.

Lying prone would mean to be above the grass with the sight (eyes), using the elbows to support the rifle

Forgive me for posting "modern" weaponry, but it's the same for the old rifles.

If the soldier is not aiming over his sights, he would actually lift his head, take a peak, look around, dream of sheep. Or you could lower the rifle, but won't be ready to fire in that case.

In the kneeling unsupported position, it's nearly the same.

See how is head is welded to the stock to get a proper sight picture? He would lift his head from the stock when he is not aiming, resulting in a straight neck and less muscle tention.

Standing, to make it complete, looks like that:

BUT: not with that chicken wing. Elbow tucked in, less silhuette, less holes and pain in the arm if shot at.

To get a transition from looking around to aimed stance, all the soldier does is raise his rifle, get a proper cheek weld and fire at those pesky AHCs.

There is no pop up for aiming, quite the opposite is the case.

If you spot a running enemy in your recently captured CP, you'd probably go Rambo on his sorry butt.

But the architecture should help the soldier to get behind cover, just exposing his head and rifle. With the pop up, the target will even get bigger, overexposing the soldier without any advantage.

[romzburg]

That is not really constructive criticism, romzburg.

Yes it is.

All my criticisms are always constructive, and this one is no different.

It all boils down to exactly one thing:

If this feature sometimes makes aiming more difficult or impossible, it is not good.

Period.

It's been said by almost 100% of respondents, and we all are informed. We don't like our aim being blocked, and we know this because we tested it. We are informed with our feedback and are informing CRS about our experience and dissatisfaction with that experience.

______________

Ya know, at first Romsburg, you rubbed me the wrong way and I wasn't a fan. But over the past 12 months, you have really grown on me. You're precise, well spoken and although you are sometimes a little harsh, you are most often correct and in proper context with your responses.

indeed he's one of the few voices of common sense on these forums

I can't say [any]thing else [than] that the ban was justified considering that you have an 'impressive' TOS history....

The only thing worse than being talked about is *not* being talked about.

[frantish]

What do people think of this:

Running: Raise in hight

Standing: Looking and aiming the same. Stance is lower then running, representing a slight "head low" due to possible hostiles nearby.

Crotch: Raise when aiming. This is a position where you want mobility in sneaking around hostile area, head low.

Prone: Looking and Aiming the same. Mr338 pointed out quite well you likely do not have much room to lower you head with weapon in way.

[romzburg]

What do people think of this:

Crotch: Raise when aiming.

Well, this is the way my crotch works in real life....

_____________

Ya know, at first Romsburg, you rubbed me the wrong way and I wasn't a fan. But over the past 12 months, you have really grown on me. You're precise, well spoken and although you are sometimes a little harsh, you are most often correct and in proper context with your responses.

indeed he's one of the few voices of common sense on these forums

I can't say [any]thing else [than] that the ban was justified considering that you have an 'impressive' TOS history....

The only thing worse than being talked about is *not* being talked about.

[frantish]

Well, this is the way my crotch works in real life....

Quick on the draw, aren't we.

(damm spell checker)

[fillmore]

We don't have the option at present to morph this into a toggle options. Off the table. What we have is set eye heights for each stance' date=' like prone or prone aim.[/quote']

As a work-around to the toggle can you just add more stances?

prone

prone aim

prone aim alt

etc.

essentially the same functionality as a toggle; if I aim with one key it is normal (current) aim, but if I use an alternate key to aim with it is the elevated aim stance.

[GOPHUR]

As a work-around to the toggle can you just add more stances?

prone

prone aim

prone aim alt

etc.

essentially the same functionality as a toggle; if I aim with one key it is normal (current) aim, but if I use an alternate key to aim with it is the elevated aim stance.

No.

The only option here is adjusting first person eye heights per stance. They are currently matched to third person, including combat stance.

[romzburg]

No.

The only option here is adjusting first person eye heights per stance. They are currently matched to third person, including combat stance.

I'm not sure I completely understand, but if so, I'd have to suggest putting the view where the eyes would be if the avatar was in pop-up position, whether the avatar is popped-up or not.

Which means we'd be able to see over the wall even though our avatar was in the pre-pop-up position, but when we aimed our avatar would rise and then the eyes would match our sight.

Or, keep our sight where it is pre-pop-up even when our avatar pops-up. But would we be able to see over the AB wall, or a downed tree, or clutter when prone?

The *RIGHT* way to do this is player-option-toggle. A real person has control of his body to the point that he can crouch a little lower, or straighten up a bit higher.

If that can't be done, then I don't know what you're going to do about this.

Right now in 1.30, I can see it, aim at it, and shoot it.

You can't just take that ability away in certain situations, because those certain situations might be the favorite way to play for some people, so it affects them a LOT of the time, while others don't care because they never play that way.

Shoulda, coulda, woulda been optional all along.

Good luck figuring this one out.

Maybe delay 1.31 an extra month or two?

________________

Ya know, at first Romsburg, you rubbed me the wrong way and I wasn't a fan. But over the past 12 months, you have really grown on me. You're precise, well spoken and although you are sometimes a little harsh, you are most often correct and in proper context with your responses.

indeed he's one of the few voices of common sense on these forums

I can't say [any]thing else [than] that the ban was justified considering that you have an 'impressive' TOS history....

The only thing worse than being talked about is *not* being talked about.

[dekard]

wall of text

________________

problem is then there's issues with the 'combat stance' as it pops down it gives the player in the combat stance an advantage because he can no longer be seen if he's view point is still at the 'aimed' perspective but his head is not over the wall and cannot be shot but he can see and shoot. So, this is the dilemma, which will go back and forth a little more just wanted to make sure folks know the drawbacks for both.

[romzburg]

problem is then there's issues with the 'combat stance' as it pops down it gives the player in the combat stance an advantage because he can no longer be seen if he's view point is still at the 'aimed' perspective but his head is not over the wall and cannot be shot but he can see and shoot. So' date=' this is the dilemma, which will go back and forth a little more just wanted to make sure folks know the drawbacks for both.[/quote']

We'll figure out how to deal with it, so long as our view isn't changing.

That's the biggest and worst issue, you try to aim and your eyes change.

So if it stays low, or stays high, we'll be ok since we can shoot what we can see.

If a guy can see over a wall but he isn't showing enough for me to shoot him, that's also ok, so long as he can't shoot at that height. But when he goes to aim, his avatar will pop-up a bit and now I can see him enough to shoot him.

That actually sounds like a good thing to me, makes it easier to peek over stuff, since now infantry don't blend with the environment like in real life, and so we kind of stick out like sore thumbs too much.

So keep the viewpoint in the high position even when the avatar isn't, and when aiming, bring the avatar height up to match.

There.

What's next?

________________

Ya know, at first Romsburg, you rubbed me the wrong way and I wasn't a fan. But over the past 12 months, you have really grown on me. You're precise, well spoken and although you are sometimes a little harsh, you are most often correct and in proper context with your responses.

indeed he's one of the few voices of common sense on these forums

I can't say [any]thing else [than] that the ban was justified considering that you have an 'impressive' TOS history....

The only thing worse than being talked about is *not* being talked about.

[smedley]

I only tried the new infantry aim for the first time today, and I have to agree with the consensus here. It's really frustrating having a clean view of a target, and then have it obstructed when you bring your weapon to bear.

On a side note, I'm no fan of the radial clutter either. I understand it's supposed to add to the immersion factor but, to be honest, watching the grass spring up around you as you run is more distracting than anything else. And of course the added obstruction to your viewing when prone isn't much fun either.

Even if "popping up" raises the player above the clutter enough to look around, the fact that the clutter is only visible locally makes lying in this eye candy grass fairly useless. The permanent grass in game still blocks your vision in the prone position, so there is no need to pop up over that.

I'll play around some more this evening to become more informed, but my first impression is fairly negative.

[sasquach]

IMO it's both good and bad (good when wanting to aim over objects, and bad that it forces you to raise head). I understand what the objective is but think it doesn't quite address the problem. In real life one has the ability to adjust his line of sight, but in the game he has but three choices. I suggest a key command that will allow a player to raise or lower his line of sight as needed. This would help with the overall problem and prevent forcing the pop up on people.

Sasquach

[GOPHUR]

For the next release I've changed the prone heights to all be the same and the standing heights too. I might out a little variation in them for moving but still experimenting.