Question: Why is LMG hipfire so inaccurate aka BAD?

Okay so carbines generally have pretty standard minimum damage distances. The difference is that their minimum damage is usually one tier lower than their AR or LMG counterparts. Which does matter by a difference of 1-2 shots to kill. The thing is no one has made a claim that carbines are generally made for longer distance engagements. Sure, some carbines are supposedly made for that, but it's not a general thing. Carbines have their own niche of situations though.

Ok then, let's not factor in AR's to this post. Then we can say that LMG damage models are generally more powerful than carbine damage models. That's largely true. But what's the point if it's hard to hit anything while ADS'd at the distances where the LMG damage model actually makes a big difference?

And it's not like I'm saying only one faction should get an LMG buff. I'm saying everyone's LMGs need a buff, so I'm not really being unfair. And again, it would be easy to do if say the heavy barrel for all LMGs gave like an 80% reduction in ADS CoF bloom instead of a barely noticeable 20%.

And RNG isn't some magical one-and-done calculation. "Under the hood" of MANY current computing systems that generate pseudorandom numbers, you have the following math being done:

1-Start with seed value
2-Run seed through a linear transformation
3-Run that result through a modulo operation, with the modulus being some large power of 2, usually
4-Scale the resultant number by the modulus, which is a division operation
4a-This results in a value between 0 and 1, which is the range of a standard uniform distribution
5-take the result from step 3 and use it as the next seed to generate another number

----additional step that would be for generating random shot within CoF----

6- the number from 4a has to be scaled again to match the valid angle range of the *current* CoF.


Assuming this process was just done for the horizontal component of the initial velocity vector, then it would be done again for the vertical component before the shot was fired. And additionally, this process would be repeated for subsequent shots.

Of course, for modern CPUs running at multiple GHz, this calculation doesn't take thaaaat long, but still. It's not nothing.

See this for more details
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_congruential_generator

Now I don't know who Iridar is or what he said about RNG, but I would greatly appreciate a link to what you said he talked about.

Realistic weapon balance would be nicer than made up. They could then use nice realistic balances like extra point to spawn bigger stuff with more matter involved.

Ah, we've made it to the second sentence of post #2. Deeper clips.

If you did an 80% reduction in bloom on ADS, or improved the hipfire on LMGs then Heavies would beat up everyone and take their lunch money. The forums would melt.

LOL, dude. I don't need RNG mansplained to me. I deliberately simplified something then you recomplicated it back at me. And nobody should be spinning up their own algorithm for it. Any modern language will have a variety of algorithms already available and hardware RNG is available through APIs like Intel's DRNG.

"it's RNG under the hood" is sufficient. We do not need to recreate reality, just simulate it.

PlanetSide 2 Weapon Mechanics | Iridar's Gaming Blog (knyazev.io)

Show some self awareness, man.