147 réponses à ce sujet

[TazMonkey2011]

Grinch57 wrote...

Mahrac wrote...

And here I thought leading things with weapons was unnecessary once we got past the 'bows and arrows' phase

I think this is the inverse of lead aiming with weapons (which you must do for moving targets IRL, just ask any dove, duck, geese or pheasant hunter).  

The concept of lead is based on the projectile being ballistic and going on a path defined by laws of physics, once it leaves the barrel of a gun (to include things like windage, velocity, gravity, projectile stability and humidity).  Leading a moving target (e.g. a fighter aircraft shooting at another aircraft or someone on the ground, firing AAA at an aircraft) is necessary because of time of flight of the projectile.  

In this case, where the projectile goes is based on a gun barrel position 0.2 seconds prior to weapon firing, i.e. prior to the bullet (or slug or shot pellets) leaving the barrel of a gun.  So if you are going to shoot at a (stationary) target and you are moving your barrel, you need to analyze where you barrel aligns with the target and fire 0.2 seconds later.  Which is why I say this is the opposite of leading a target, it is in effect, lagging the target.  Which is both counter-intuitive and opposite to how anything should work.

right this seems more accurate i think

[llandwynwyn]

Cyonan wrote...

It appears to be showing up in single player as well.

That's sad to hear, it means it will really require a patch to fix. And since the next patch is probably mostly done...Well, thank you for testing.

Please, Bioware, make it lighter and buff the damage to compensate! :innocent:

[zRz Tyr]

If this is a bug, then Bioware needs to fix it.

[pyroboy2290]

Welp, now I finally know why the shots that I swear should hit sometimes don't and shots that I'd swear should've missed, actually hit. Perhaps with this information I will finally be able to use the crusader to its full potential.

[ctr2yellowbird]

Grinch57 wrote...

Mahrac wrote...

And here I thought leading things with weapons was unnecessary once we got past the 'bows and arrows' phase

I think this is the inverse of lead aiming with weapons (which you must do for moving targets IRL, just ask any dove, duck, geese or pheasant hunter).  

The concept of lead is based on the projectile being ballistic and going on a path defined by laws of physics, once it leaves the barrel of a gun (to include things like windage, velocity, gravity, projectile stability and humidity).  Leading a moving target (e.g. a fighter aircraft shooting at another aircraft or someone on the ground, firing AAA at an aircraft) is necessary because of time of flight of the projectile.  

In this case, where the projectile goes is based on a gun barrel position 0.2 seconds prior to weapon firing, i.e. prior to the bullet (or slug or shot pellets) leaving the barrel of a gun.  So if you are going to shoot at a (stationary) target and you are moving your barrel, you need to analyze where you barrel aligns with the target and fire 0.2 seconds later.  Which is why I say this is the opposite of leading a target, it is in effect, lagging the target.  Which is both counter-intuitive and opposite to how anything should work.

If this were the opposite of leading a target, then we would be tracking where the target was 0.2 seconds ago, firing at an old position, and damaging the target in its current position, in realtime. That's not what's happening with the Crusader. The aiming process is much the same as with true projectile weapons, except projectile travel time is eliminated, apparently. Imagine aiming a projectile weapon at a target whose distance from the player would result in a projectile travel time of exactly 0.2 seconds. Now imagine the same scenario but with the Crusader and the knowledge of its 0.2s lagged accuracy. The player's ideal leading of the target would be exactly the same with the only difference being where/when the target is hit. Also,  leading is only what we do for fast-moving, near-instant travel projectile weapons, in FPS. For everything else, the proper, catch-all term for compensating a projectile weapon's aim due to (extended) travel time or other anomalies, such as with the Crusader, is "prediction."

In fact, because the Crusader should still be a hitscan weapon (one "slug," instant travel, right? Haven't used Crusader in a long time...), then it has a hitscan weapon's inherent advantages over a projectile weapon, namely a reduced susceptibility to lag but also a range advantage (i.e., less leading required versus a projectile that would take more than 0.2 seconds to reach its target). With a projectile weapon, there's three variables that could be effected by lag: the player's position (problem with receiving damage), the enemy's position (problem with dealing damage), and the projectile itself (problem with dealing damage, usually firing blanks). However, a hitscan weapon has, in effect, no traveling projectile, resulting in an instantaneous boolean damage calculation (i.e., did it hit or miss?) that is much easier to process and, consequently, process "correctly." Furthermore, this game has marked difficulty handling the interaction between projectile weapons and ragdolled enemies (e.g., frozen, Thrown, etc.) that doesn't seem to exist, or factor as prominently, for hitscan weapons. The influence of the lagged accuracy over dealing damage should be processed only on the client's end, meaning the Crusader suffers the same latency issues as other hitscan weapons.

So really, the situation with the Crusader's lagged accuracy isn't much worse than normal hitscan weapons, especially when compared against projectile weapons. Knowledge, or awareness, is the key.

[Cyonan]

ctr2yellowbird wrote...
If this were the opposite of leading a target, then we would be tracking where the target was 0.2 seconds ago, firing at an old position, and damaging the target in its current position, in realtime. That's not what's happening with the Crusader. The aiming process is much the same as with true projectile weapons, except projectile travel time is eliminated, apparently. Imagine aiming a projectile weapon at a target whose distance from the player would result in a projectile travel time of exactly 0.2 seconds. Now imagine the same scenario but with the Crusader and the knowledge of its 0.2s lagged accuracy. The player's ideal leading of the target would be exactly the same with the only difference being where/when the target is hit. Also,  leading is only what we do for fast-moving, near-instant travel projectile weapons, in FPS. For everything else, the proper, catch-all term for compensating a projectile weapon's aim due to (extended) travel time or other anomalies, such as with the Crusader, is "prediction."

In fact, because the Crusader should still be a hitscan weapon (one "slug," instant travel, right? Haven't used Crusader in a long time...), then it has a hitscan weapon's inherent advantages over a projectile weapon, namely a reduced susceptibility to lag but also a range advantage (i.e., less leading required versus a projectile that would take more than 0.2 seconds to reach its target). With a projectile weapon, there's three variables that could be effected by lag: the player's position (problem with receiving damage), the enemy's position (problem with dealing damage), and the projectile itself (problem with dealing damage, usually firing blanks). However, a hitscan weapon has, in effect, no traveling projectile, resulting in an instantaneous boolean damage calculation (i.e., did it hit or miss?) that is much easier to process and, consequently, process "correctly." Furthermore, this game has marked difficulty handling the interaction between projectile weapons and ragdolled enemies (e.g., frozen, Thrown, etc.) that doesn't seem to exist, or factor as prominently, for hitscan weapons. The influence of the lagged accuracy over dealing damage should be processed only on the client's end, meaning the Crusader suffers the same latency issues as other hitscan weapons.

So really, the situation with the Crusader's lagged accuracy isn't much worse than normal hitscan weapons, especially when compared against projectile weapons. Knowledge, or awareness, is the key.

I agree that it's leading the target rather than lagging it.

You can host with a projectile weapon and it helps it immensely to the point where people say it's required for some of the worse ones. The Crusader however is just bad regardless of hosting or not hosting, and the delay of 0.2 seconds I've noticed to be much worse than the other projectile weapons I tested while being host: the Graal and Kishock. Weapons like the Falcon and GPS have limited target tracking(Or not so limited in the case of the Falcon) which helps with being able to hit things a great deal.

There is also the fact that it hits where you used to be aiming rather than hitting where you are aiming a fraction of a second later. You can miss at point blank range with the Crusader while the crosshair is over your target's head, while projectile weapons will hit every single time in that case. The opposite is also true: You can hit a target you are no longer aiming at while you'd miss every single time with a projectile weapon.

Then again, another major issue was probably that the Crusader doesn't advertise that it does this and it looks like it would behave like any other hitscan gun that shoots on target every time, only it doesn't do that. Now that I've figured out exactly how it's behaving I'll be able to compensate for it.

[Pho Kadat]

I would just like to thank you for discovering this nuance. I have already achieved vastly improved results simply by knowing that I need to lead my targets by a hair when the reticle is moving laterally.

[sy7ar]

guess not gonna touch it for awhile.

[Jasana]

Thank you... not only does this explain why I hate the thing, perhaps I can even learn to love my Crusader (seeing as how it's what I keep getting every two weeks, this is very helpful).

[Vigilante1024]

I wanted to like the Crusader (largely because I'm stuck with one at level IV), but it immediately and persistently felt "wrong." And by wrong I mean the same kind of feeling you get when trying to read architectural drawings of R'lyeh.

Now that the mystery has been solved, it's somehow even more insane.

Modifié par Vigilante1024, 26 septembre 2012 - 02:05 .

[Grinch57]

Cyonan wrote...

ctr2yellowbird wrote...
If this were the opposite of leading a target, then we would be tracking where the target was 0.2 seconds ago, firing at an old position, and damaging the target in its current position, in realtime. That's not what's happening with the Crusader. The aiming process is much the same as with true projectile weapons, except projectile travel time is eliminated, apparently. Imagine aiming a projectile weapon at a target whose distance from the player would result in a projectile travel time of exactly 0.2 seconds. Now imagine the same scenario but with the Crusader and the knowledge of its 0.2s lagged accuracy. The player's ideal leading of the target would be exactly the same with the only difference being where/when the target is hit. Also,  leading is only what we do for fast-moving, near-instant travel projectile weapons, in FPS. For everything else, the proper, catch-all term for compensating a projectile weapon's aim due to (extended) travel time or other anomalies, such as with the Crusader, is "prediction."

In fact, because the Crusader should still be a hitscan weapon (one "slug," instant travel, right? Haven't used Crusader in a long time...), then it has a hitscan weapon's inherent advantages over a projectile weapon, namely a reduced susceptibility to lag but also a range advantage (i.e., less leading required versus a projectile that would take more than 0.2 seconds to reach its target). With a projectile weapon, there's three variables that could be effected by lag: the player's position (problem with receiving damage), the enemy's position (problem with dealing damage), and the projectile itself (problem with dealing damage, usually firing blanks). However, a hitscan weapon has, in effect, no traveling projectile, resulting in an instantaneous boolean damage calculation (i.e., did it hit or miss?) that is much easier to process and, consequently, process "correctly." Furthermore, this game has marked difficulty handling the interaction between projectile weapons and ragdolled enemies (e.g., frozen, Thrown, etc.) that doesn't seem to exist, or factor as prominently, for hitscan weapons. The influence of the lagged accuracy over dealing damage should be processed only on the client's end, meaning the Crusader suffers the same latency issues as other hitscan weapons.

So really, the situation with the Crusader's lagged accuracy isn't much worse than normal hitscan weapons, especially when compared against projectile weapons. Knowledge, or awareness, is the key.

I agree that it's leading the target rather than lagging it.

You can host with a projectile weapon and it helps it immensely to the point where people say it's required for some of the worse ones. The Crusader however is just bad regardless of hosting or not hosting, and the delay of 0.2 seconds I've noticed to be much worse than the other projectile weapons I tested while being host: the Graal and Kishock. Weapons like the Falcon and GPS have limited target tracking(Or not so limited in the case of the Falcon) which helps with being able to hit things a great deal.

There is also the fact that it hits where you used to be aiming rather than hitting where you are aiming a fraction of a second later. You can miss at point blank range with the Crusader while the crosshair is over your target's head, while projectile weapons will hit every single time in that case. The opposite is also true: You can hit a target you are no longer aiming at while you'd miss every single time with a projectile weapon.

Then again, another major issue was probably that the Crusader doesn't advertise that it does this and it looks like it would behave like any other hitscan gun that shoots on target every time, only it doesn't do that. Now that I've figured out exactly how it's behaving I'll be able to compensate for it.

OP, respectfully (I've read your work on weapons, this is not sarcasm or a casual use of the word), I don't think it is lead.  

This is how I understand what you were saying.  Take your example of a stationary target, you are moving the barrel of the weapon to the target.  If you stop on the target and immediately fire, you will miss, because the weapon will shoot at what it was aiming at 0.2 seconds prior.  If instead, you pause after lining up with the target, then fire 0.2 seconds later, then you will hit the target.  

There is no leading the target, it's stationary (or moving along an axis perpendicular to you, so no change in azimuth).  If you move past the target and fire, that works because you are providing a 0.2 second time delay before firing, not because you are "leading" a stationary target.  

Confusing correlation with causation.  Again, stopping barrel movement for 0.2 seonds or moving the barrel for 0.2 seconds past the target has the same effect, both correlate to a successful hit, but neither is the cause, both are compensation for the 0.2 second lag between barrel position you perceive and barrel position the game perceives, specific to this weapon.

Not to get too much into real world vs video game, but it would not be a "sighting error" either since that would be a constant and you would adjust your aim to compensate (for example, always aim to the left of a stationary target).

Instead, this seems to be based on motion of the barrel (not the target), the computation of when the "fire" signal from mouse or controller and what the game thinks the barrel position is at that time.  From your tests, it seems to think the barrel's position is 0.2 seconds behind the actual.  Which would fade to zero azimuth error if you held the barrel steady for that amount of time before firing.  Again, that is not leading a stationary target.  Because of that, I question whether it is really a hitscan issue (latency) or is instead a bad calculation (model) that is specific to this weapon, which may classify as a prediction issue.

But as both you and ctr2yellowbird said, knowledge is key here, knowing about it's accuracy issue, you can take measures to compensate.

[mykejm]

Grinch57 wrote...
This is how I understand what you were saying.  Take your example of a stationary target, you are moving the barrel of the weapon to the target.  If you stop on the target and immediately fire, you will miss, because the weapon will shoot at what it was aiming at 0.2 seconds prior.  If instead, you pause after lining up with the target, then fire 0.2 seconds later, then you will hit the target.  

There is no leading the target, it's stationary (or moving along an axis perpendicular to you, so no change in azimuth).  If you move past the target and fire, that works because you are providing a 0.2 second time delay before firing, not because you are "leading" a stationary target.  

Confusing correlation with causation.  Again, stopping barrel movement for 0.2 seonds or moving the barrel for 0.2 seconds past the target has the same effect, both correlate to a successful hit, but neither is the cause, both are compensation for the 0.2 second lag between barrel position you perceive and barrel position the game perceives, specific to this weapon.

Not to get too much into real world vs video game, but it would not be a "sighting error" either since that would be a constant and you would adjust your aim to compensate (for example, always aim to the left of a stationary target).

Instead, this seems to be based on motion of the barrel (not the target), the computation of when the "fire" signal from mouse or controller and what the game thinks the barrel position is at that time.  From your tests, it seems to think the barrel's position is 0.2 seconds behind the actual.  Which would fade to zero azimuth error if you held the barrel steady for that amount of time before firing.  Again, that is not leading a stationary target.  Because of that, I question whether it is really a hitscan issue (latency) or is instead a bad calculation (model) that is specific to this weapon, which may classify as a prediction issue.

But as both you and ctr2yellowbird said, knowledge is key here, knowing about it's accuracy issue, you can take measures to compensate.

Bravo for explaining this in a way that makes sense.  

[ABjerre]

I wonder how many weapons this actually happens on. On an SMG or AR you would never notice, the same with shotguns that have some degree of spread, pistols aren't known for pinpoint accuracy either, so again - some degree of inaccuracy would probably be accepted and the bug goes unnoticed.

[Ogrinash]

Hits on the cross-hair every time for me.

It's only a bit of a bother to hit heads on "large" maps because the cross-hair is bigger than the head of the target (meaning: the round can miss easily).

[sirjimmus86]

I find this affects me when not hosting, otherwise its as easy to use as any other gun.

Similar, but not quite the same, as the Kishook

[Arveragus]

I have never had any problems using the Crusader. In fact, I can shoot Guardians through their mail-slot from enormous distances with it.

Is this a problem that is exclusive to consoles or something?

Modifié par Arveragus, 26 septembre 2012 - 09:48 .

[Zero132132]

Arveragus wrote...

I have never had any problems using the Crusader. In fact, I can shoot Guardians through their mail-slot from enormous distances with it.

Is this a problem that is exclusive to consoles or something?

Guardians move very slowly. It would be easy for their head to be exactly where it was 0.2 seconds ago on your screen. With their shields up, they generally walk straight at you. Does it work as well with moving targets?

[Phase Disruptor]

And to think, I blamed my poor accuracy.

[Kristen Schanche]

Hey folks,

I had a look at this issue, and here's what is happening with the Crusader. This gun does have a very small delay between when the trigger is pulled, and when the shot is fired, however, the shot goes to the point that the crosshair was on when the trigger was pulled.

Basically, crosshair is at point X, the player pulls the trigger and simultaneously begins moving the crosshair to point Y, reaching it approximately 0.02 seconds later. The shot now goes off, even though the user is now pointing at point Y, the shot still hits the point it was aiming at when the trigger is pulled, point X.

The long and short of this however is, while this does slightly change the presentation feel of the gun, the bullet for the crusader still hits the point you were aimed at when you pull the trigger, meaning it remains as accurate and without delay in actual ability to hit targets as any pistol, sniper rifle, etc.

As long is the trigger is pulled when your crosshair is on the target, regardless of the delay you will hit a still target.

This does mean that yes, a small bit of lead should be considered if trying to hit a rapidly moving target, but the delay is small enough that most enemies outside of a few like the Nemesis will not be able to get out of the impact point in time.

Let me know if you have any more questions on this issue, but hopefully this clears up the way the gun is acting a bit.

Modifié par Chris Schanche, 26 septembre 2012 - 05:17 .

[UpirNoir]

Thanks for the clarification. Is the gun designed that way on purpuse, or is this something that could/will be fixed ?

[YapperFlapper]

Chris Schanche wrote...

Hey folks,

I had a look at this issue, and here's what is happening with the Crusader. This gun does have a very small delay between when the trigger is pulled, and when the shot is fired, however, the shot goes to the point that the crosshair was on when the trigger was pulled.

Basically, crosshair is at point X, the player pulls the trigger and simultaneously begins moving the crosshair to point Y, reaching it approximately 0.02 seconds later. The shot now goes off, even though the user is now pointing at point Y, the shot still hits the point it was aiming at when the trigger is pulled, point X.

The long and short of this however is, while this does slightly change the presentation feel of the gun, the bullet for the crusader still hits the point you were aimed at when you pull the trigger, meaning it remains as accurate and without delay in actual ability to hit targets as any pistol, sniper rifle, etc.

As long is the trigger is pulled when your crosshair is on the target, regardless of the delay you will hit a still target.

This does mean that yes, a small bit of lead should be considered if trying to hit a rapidly moving target, but the delay is small enough that most enemies outside of a few like the Nemesis will not be able to get out of the impact point in time.

Let me know if you have any more questions on this issue, but hopefully this clears up the way the gun is acting a bit.

Thanks for the explanation.  Is this behaviour by design, and are there any other guns like this?

[DarkseidXIII]

I like it. Deosnt need fix. Learn to shoot. P.s. you disgust me.

[Eriseley]

I wonder if the Disciple has similar mechanics. I haven't used it in forever, but it seemed to have a similar delay. Was this mechanic utilized to simulate travel time for hit-scan weapons?

[Najarati]

Chris Schanche wrote...

Hey folks,

I had a look at this issue, and here's what is happening with the Crusader. This gun does have a very small delay between when the trigger is pulled, and when the shot is fired, however, the shot goes to the point that the crosshair was on when the trigger was pulled.

Basically, crosshair is at point X, the player pulls the trigger and simultaneously begins moving the crosshair to point Y, reaching it approximately 0.02 seconds later. The shot now goes off, even though the user is now pointing at point Y, the shot still hits the point it was aiming at when the trigger is pulled, point X.

The long and short of this however is, while this does slightly change the presentation feel of the gun, the bullet for the crusader still hits the point you were aimed at when you pull the trigger, meaning it remains as accurate and without delay in actual ability to hit targets as any pistol, sniper rifle, etc.

As long is the trigger is pulled when your crosshair is on the target, regardless of the delay you will hit a still target.

This does mean that yes, a small bit of lead should be considered if trying to hit a rapidly moving target, but the delay is small enough that most enemies outside of a few like the Nemesis will not be able to get out of the impact point in time.

Let me know if you have any more questions on this issue, but hopefully this clears up the way the gun is acting a bit.

Thanks for the clarification, Chris.

However, I've had many cases (almost all of them are when a target is ducked behind cover) where I've the crosshairs hovered directly over the head of an enemy, I pull the trigger, and the enemy takes no damage.  My follow-up shots will do the same thing when they should clearly hit the target's dome.  This isn't from great distances, either, but rather several yards away in most instances and even happens when I'm in an elevated position firing down.  Interestingly enough, it seems to occur mostly with geth.

Also, I almost always host so the impacts of lag are usually minimal.

[Kristen Schanche]

No problem. In response to the questions that have come up, this behavior is fairly unique the the Crusader. Other shotguns do have a minor though less noticeable delay, but the Crusader is the most visible of the guns with a behavior like this.

I will have a look at your concern Najarati, and see what I can turn up.