Shaking reduction incoming

https://twitter.com/mhigby/status/304454444664385537
Hopefully we'll be able to fire our weapon without some unrelated nearby explosion gimping us for no reason.

I don't understand why this feature was brought in in the first place

I think it's something from a BF game?

I can understand why it's in, I just hate it. Considering how much BF3 players seem to enjoy the suppression mechanic(not at all), you would think stuff like this wouldn't get added. Oh well.

good news. thx for sharing

I don't know. I kind of like my sniping to be suddenly cut short by a tank shell landing nearby. I agree they could tune it down a bit but not remove it entirely. It adds immersion in my opinion.

I heavily dislike "immersion" randomly stopping me from playing the game, and that often. I'm playing a game, not trying to pretend I actually fight a war, I'm more in the "how can I do this? Can I succeed?" than "I'm a soldier in a huge war" thing. Being randomly penalized doesn't make sense to me

Hmm. Maybe it's just me but it doesn't happen that often for me.

Oh good. I was getting tired of this Harlem Shake BS!

Yay for Higby!

The fact you mentioned sniping may be a hint
In the heat of the fight on contested area, you have a nearby explosion every 5 seconds.

I like having that shake, but often it's too intense and annoying.
If a tank shell lands 5 meters from me, it's normal that my screen gets all wobbly, but if a grenade lands 30 meters away i shouldn't start dancing all over the screen... In that case i'd prefer if the screen shakes but the aim remains steady. I can't count the times i missed a shot with my TSAR because a random explosion happened nearby and threw my aim all over the place.

Screen shake is annoying, but it doesn't hold a candle to flinch. Mitigate/remove flinch and then we'll be in business.

It should never be removed, but I wouldn't mint it being toned down a bit. It should only happen when the explosion is very close (<10m or so).

Could the intensity of the shaking a player experiences be related to their FoV and/or monitor size? I have a pretty standard 24" monitor, use the max FoV - 75 - and don't really notice the shaking or at least it doesn't bother me. It doesn't feel very intense and I like it for the little bit of immersion it brings.

i don't think i'd mind if the shell exploded really closeby as in only just missed, but screen shake when something lands 100 meters away is silly

i wouldnt mind if they keep it in close proximity but currently its just toooooooooo much...

Screen shaking should stay, even if muted. People need better situational awareness and just including the "sound of something happening" isn't as good as actually inconveniencing the player visually. We already mute sound when a player uses a voice chat channel, and asides from Infiltrators and spotting, I do not believe people use their ears that much to keep track of the enemy in this game. That means "inconveniencing" their auditory perception wouldn't give the same trade off as inconveniencing their visual perception.

People complaining about flinching forget the fact that, if they're getting shot at first, and consistently, they're probably going to die first if it continues. The proper response to getting shot at (from a direction) is to try and conceal yourself, even with the risk of netcode latency, not to draw a bead on what is still landing shoots on you. If you're caught out in the open when that happens, trying to aim before getting cover is fine, but you're probably still going to die first.

The main issue with flinch is that it gives a distinctive advantage to one type of weapons, those with high ROF.

Generally speaking, removing or toning down flinching will be a direct buff on all things NC. Pre CU2 I would agree. Now though ... not sure if it's needed any more.

Nice I've been hoping for that for a while. Screw realistic stuff anyway the game physics are already lame.

You just gave me a very very wrong image of a sniper aiming and just as that harlem shake music hits a tank shell shakes his screen...

Great news, now I hope they reduce the flinching next.

The problem isn't exactly RoF in my opinion but rather damage per shot. NC and TR guns have similar bullet velocities and damage calculations. The former is fine and indicates that both side should get hit at the same time if they both start at the same time, but the latter is a problem because of the difference in RoF. Using the TR for comparison: when the difference in RoF is ~100 over the NC, the TR and the NC have some weapons with similar damage values per shot (~143) and some boosted damage values (~167); when the difference in RoF is ~200 over the NC, the NC get one level of damage bonus (~167) on some weapons and a second bonus for others (~200). The boosts, however, are too little too late for the decrease in RoF and the distribution of the damage groups compared to the RoF groups is not consistent.

Spreadsheet.

I am assuming that both sides feel the effects of flinch the exact same way if they are shot; based on my experiences, that's something of an accurate statement, and I cite some people who want damage sustained per shot to influence flinch severity. (I am not considering flinch recovery time because flinching never moves one's aim large distances off the target; it's not a rule that any flinch must lose an existing bead on a target.)

If my assumptions are somewhat wrongheaded ...