Welcome to symthic forums! We would love if you'd register!
You don't have to be expert in bit baking, everyone is more than welcome to join our community.

You are not logged in.

Hey! If this is your first visit on symthic.com, also check out our weapon damage charts.
Currently we have charts for Battlefield 3, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2, Medal of Honor: Warfighter and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

Posts: 3,453

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 15

  • Send private message

61

Saturday, March 4th 2017, 8:47pm

add significant impulse shaking/part destruction to making pilots truly terrified of infantry gunning for them like chopper pilots and MANPADs/Launchers.


This right here is the main thing that needs to happen. It's also a major reason the A7V is so un-fun to fight, because on top taking so long to get all your ammo on target and not even having enough ammo to kill it anyway, it's very hard/rare to get a disable on it.

Health is a binary state, you have health and you're okay, and then you don't and you're dead. The entire reason Disables were done the way they were in BF4 was to address this fact, and let single hits actually meaningfully affect vehicles, especially air. Doing 20 damage to a plane alone isn't worth much of anything. Doing 20 damage to a Plane and also Disabling a wing, or Disabling their engine while they're diving straight towards your position for a bombing run, those would be worth something, and we would see drastically more people shooting at air once people start to learn about it.
Who Enjoys, Wins

Posts: 1,889

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

  • Send private message

62

Saturday, March 4th 2017, 9:05pm

add significant impulse shaking/part destruction to making pilots truly terrified of infantry gunning for them like chopper pilots and MANPADs/Launchers.


This right here is the main thing that needs to happen. It's also a major reason the A7V is so un-fun to fight, because on top taking so long to get all your ammo on target and not even having enough ammo to kill it anyway, it's very hard/rare to get a disable on it.

Health is a binary state, you have health and you're okay, and then you don't and you're dead. The entire reason Disables were done the way they were in BF4 was to address this fact, and let single hits actually meaningfully affect vehicles, especially air. Doing 20 damage to a plane alone isn't worth much of anything. Doing 20 damage to a Plane and also Disabling a wing, or Disabling their engine while they're diving straight towards your position for a bombing run, those would be worth something, and we would see drastically more people shooting at air once people start to learn about it.
I get disabled in an A7V way more in BF1 due to explosive spam and high dmg single hit weapons than in BF4 when I spent basically 100% of the time flooring all hits to min damage or just mashing the gas and sliding out of hits. In BF3 you could carry TWO rep monkeys with you and then you could do a triple seat jump and have your gunners vomit javs at things as well.

The problem is that people are just bad at armor mechanics.

Fighting a top tier tanker in BF3/BF4 with a quality gunner, or a repspammed littlebird with miniguns was a fucking nightmare. The only way to kill a respammed littlebird was either lucky tank shells, lucky laser guided spam reaccquired after ECM dump, or another littelbird with miniguns, repspam and stingerspam.

And lets not even stalk about rocket spamming BF3 jets and double flare attack helos.

There is really just no equivalent to that level of uphill battle in BF1 regardless of how much people can whine. I fundamentally do not understand how people can hold BF4 to a standard of vehicle balance for which to base BF1 since BF4 objectively had better armor relative to anti tank for the tier of tanker you really need to worry about.

Posts: 3,453

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 15

  • Send private message

63

Saturday, March 4th 2017, 10:03pm

Most of those specifics really aren't relevant at all, and the rest is answered with what you just quotes, that I already posted before a number of times. Engaging heavy armour and planes is not fun nor rewarding, it's as simple as that.
Who Enjoys, Wins

Oscar

Sona tank jungle

(1,925)

Posts: 7,875

Date of registration
: May 30th 2012

Platform: PS4

Location: SURROUNDED BY FUCKING MOUNTAINS

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

  • Send private message

64

Saturday, March 4th 2017, 10:14pm

wall of text

The video that you posted was an Attack Plane taking over 25 seconds of straight machine gun fire, for what you claim is a whopping 38-40 damage, while failing to take any evasive maneuvers. It's actually great that you posted that because it illustrates how long it takes to kill an incompetent pilot, compared to dealing with a flyboy who's not braindead

Quoted

Current AA range is 334m if I'm not mistaken. If you can score a kill on a AA operator from that range and dip out before dying, then kudos to you, because in my experience the 20mm cannon from the bomber front seat/Att
This is assuming that the AA has a clear line of sight directly at you and begins firing immediately from their maximum range. Believe me, it may feel like it's the case the vast majority of times but there are ways to deal with this currently in Live. Why make it even easier for all planes to completely disregard and kill their counters in a stationary AA's range where they should be writing a final will instead?

Quoted

Ok, fine, whatever. BF1 planes ARE NOT jets, though. Some are clearly designed to have an impact on the ground rather than being strictly relegated to fighting for air superiority.

Anyway, my point here is, why are you comparing hitting planes in BF1 with the RG to hitting Helis with RPGs? Why not compare it to jets? You already made a comparison with jets by saying that jets in previous titles didn't have much ways to impact the ground
Because BF1's "jets" are able to farm infantry with the effectiveness of a helicopter while having much faster mobility completely unmatched by Little Birds and Vipers. I'm baffled that you take time to point this out while failing to consider why I made the comparison in the first place. If you are going to have significant impact against ground troops as a plane, it's only fair that ground troops should also have a significant impact on your operating ability as well

Quoted

"if you scratch a plane for 15-20 damage and they fly off to repair" "wasting ammo to literally no effect" - Wait so did it have no effect or did the plane actually have to go and repair?
We're talking about a meaningful effect that makes solo infantry players feel like they are doing something useful, as BleedingUranium said. If you are arguing that 15-20 damage by itself to a plane is anything meaningful unless it's in a critical condition, then we are at a fundamental disagreement on what constitutes a balanced infantry vs vehicle experience.

@BleedingUranium

Ok then excuse the language but please fucking explain what's fun or rewarding for you, because you throw that shit around so much but it makes no sense to me.

Quoted

Just stop being so stuck up about planes and make an actual effort to fight them. Lrn 2 fly, lrn 2 aa, lrn 2 MG. I don't care which, but AA isn't required to fight planes.
Resorting to vehicles to counter vehicles is a garbage design philosophy, to which 95% of Symthic would agree with me. There are already ways for planes to work around AAs as is, and that's not counting the threat posed by things on the ground to stationary AA users. I completely agree that AA shouldn't be required to fight planes, and as things stand on CTE, so does DICE (in a completely negative way).

The infantry vs plane experience is complete shit and frustrating right now, and DICE has yet to do something about this while adding several nerfs to stationary AAs, buffing Trench darts, nerfing SLR damage against planes, and only throwing infantry a bone by letting them do more damage to Bombers. The choppers in BF34 could at least be harassed by a single Engineer with a MANPAD in the right place, but the average BF1 class can't do dick all about a Trench Fighter or Ground Support plane except shoot and pray that his teammates do the same, and hope that they don't catch a dozen darts or grenade icons to the face during the process

In the video I posted, I showcase incredibly shit accuracy against a fairly easy target. By the time the pilot wises up and realises he's getting torn to shreds, 60% of his health pool (give or take) is gone. He was shot at by at most 4 soldiers (myself, the random support with a bar at the start of the clip, another random sniper that fired once and one of my squadmates with a SLR).

End result is that the plane was shot down. Isn't that what you want to achieve with AA and hate so much when it's nerfed because it makes killing planes harder? My poor shooting alone would've made the pilot consider repairing, a few people shooting at the plane ended up destroying it.

I read so much about having a meaningful impact, but again, what would you consider "a meaningful impact"?

Seriously it feels to me that you people don't even put the effort to shoot at planes and just cry "OP" when you can't instakill them with a single kolibri shot. Yeah if you can only manage to deal 10 damage to the plane every time it flies close to you then it won't be impactful enough to slow down the pilot from engaging ground or similar, but saying "but it isn't meaningful damage" and just not bothing shooting is borderline retarded. I play far more as infantry than in a plane, and the times where I've seen the kind of dominance displayed by pilots you people describe can be barely counted with two hands.

I have a collective 580 kills with attack planes and this puts me in the top2% of pilots (based on kills) according to BFTracker, and 368 with fighters puts me at top3%. With PS4 being one of the most populated platforms for BF1, surely the amount of top tier infantry farm god pilots can't be that high if a few hundred kills is more kills than 95% of tracked players.

@BleedingUranium

Ok then please explain what is fun or rewarding to you in game, because you've thrown that "fighting vehicles isn't fun or rewarding" but it makes no fucking sense to me.
Bro of Legion, the lurker ninja mod | Tesla FTW | RNG is evil.

Quoted from "MsMuchLove"

I find majority of the complaints I hear about this game somehow never appear in my games.

Posts: 3,453

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 15

  • Send private message

65

Saturday, March 4th 2017, 10:21pm

Still doesn't address the issue of shooting at planes being unappealing no matter now potentially effective it is. Potential effectiveness is fairly meaningless in carrot-and-stick terms.
Who Enjoys, Wins

Posts: 1,889

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

  • Send private message

66

Saturday, March 4th 2017, 10:34pm

wall of text

The video that you posted was an Attack Plane taking over 25 seconds of straight machine gun fire, for what you claim is a whopping 38-40 damage, while failing to take any evasive maneuvers. It's actually great that you posted that because it illustrates how long it takes to kill an incompetent pilot, compared to dealing with a flyboy who's not braindead

Quoted

Current AA range is 334m if I'm not mistaken. If you can score a kill on a AA operator from that range and dip out before dying, then kudos to you, because in my experience the 20mm cannon from the bomber front seat/Att
This is assuming that the AA has a clear line of sight directly at you and begins firing immediately from their maximum range. Believe me, it may feel like it's the case the vast majority of times but there are ways to deal with this currently in Live. Why make it even easier for all planes to completely disregard and kill their counters in a stationary AA's range where they should be writing a final will instead?

Quoted

Ok, fine, whatever. BF1 planes ARE NOT jets, though. Some are clearly designed to have an impact on the ground rather than being strictly relegated to fighting for air superiority.
Anyway, my point here is, why are you comparing hitting planes in BF1 with the RG to hitting Helis with RPGs? Why not compare it to jets? You already made a comparison with jets by saying that jets in previous titles didn't have much ways to impact the ground
Because BF1's "jets" are able to farm infantry with the effectiveness of a helicopter while having much faster mobility completely unmatched by Little Birds and Vipers. I'm baffled that you take time to point this out while failing to consider why I made the comparison in the first place. If you are going to have significant impact against ground troops as a plane, it's only fair that ground troops should also have a significant impact on your operating ability as well

Quoted

"if you scratch a plane for 15-20 damage and they fly off to repair" "wasting ammo to literally no effect" - Wait so did it have no effect or did the plane actually have to go and repair?
We're talking about a meaningful effect that makes solo infantry players feel like they are doing something useful, as BleedingUranium said. If you are arguing that 15-20 damage by itself to a plane is anything meaningful unless it's in a critical condition, then we are at a fundamental disagreement on what constitutes a balanced infantry vs vehicle experience.

@BleedingUranium

Ok then excuse the language but please fucking explain what's fun or rewarding for you, because you throw that shit around so much but it makes no sense to me.

Quoted

Just stop being so stuck up about planes and make an actual effort to fight them. Lrn 2 fly, lrn 2 aa, lrn 2 MG. I don't care which, but AA isn't required to fight planes.
Resorting to vehicles to counter vehicles is a garbage design philosophy, to which 95% of Symthic would agree with me. There are already ways for planes to work around AAs as is, and that's not counting the threat posed by things on the ground to stationary AA users. I completely agree that AA shouldn't be required to fight planes, and as things stand on CTE, so does DICE (in a completely negative way).

The infantry vs plane experience is complete shit and frustrating right now, and DICE has yet to do something about this while adding several nerfs to stationary AAs, buffing Trench darts, nerfing SLR damage against planes, and only throwing infantry a bone by letting them do more damage to Bombers. The choppers in BF34 could at least be harassed by a single Engineer with a MANPAD in the right place, but the average BF1 class can't do dick all about a Trench Fighter or Ground Support plane except shoot and pray that his teammates do the same, and hope that they don't catch a dozen darts or grenade icons to the face during the process

In the video I posted, I showcase incredibly shit accuracy against a fairly easy target. By the time the pilot wises up and realises he's getting torn to shreds, 60% of his health pool (give or take) is gone. He was shot at by at most 4 soldiers (myself, the random support with a bar at the start of the clip, another random sniper that fired once and one of my squadmates with a SLR).

End result is that the plane was shot down. Isn't that what you want to achieve with AA and hate so much when it's nerfed because it makes killing planes harder? My poor shooting alone would've made the pilot consider repairing, a few people shooting at the plane ended up destroying it.

I read so much about having a meaningful impact, but again, what would you consider "a meaningful impact"?

Seriously it feels to me that you people don't even put the effort to shoot at planes and just cry "OP" when you can't instakill them with a single kolibri shot. Yeah if you can only manage to deal 10 damage to the plane every time it flies close to you then it won't be impactful enough to slow down the pilot from engaging ground or similar, but saying "but it isn't meaningful damage" and just not bothing shooting is borderline retarded. I play far more as infantry than in a plane, and the times where I've seen the kind of dominance displayed by pilots you people describe can be barely counted with two hands.

I have a collective 580 kills with attack planes and this puts me in the top2% of pilots (based on kills) according to BFTracker, and 368 with fighters puts me at top3%. With PS4 being one of the most populated platforms for BF1, surely the amount of top tier infantry farm god pilots can't be that high if a few hundred kills is more kills than 95% of tracked players.

@BleedingUranium

Ok then please explain what is fun or rewarding to you in game, because you've thrown that "fighting vehicles isn't fun or rewarding" but it makes no fucking sense to me.
I don't find lining up two teams and throwing grenades at each other down a hallway for 30 minutes very fun or rewarding. But the popularity of metro-lockers suggests that clearly it is a lot of people's idea of "fun and rewarding".

IOW, "fun and rewarding" is a totally subjective load of poppycock.

On a points basis, throwing HE at tanks, or tossing bullets at planes is fairly rewarding. At least objectively.

You know what's really not fun? Pouring bullets into behemoths. Boring as shit. But also pretty rewarding for points.

Posts: 3,453

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 15

  • Send private message

67

Saturday, March 4th 2017, 10:54pm

@BleedingUranium

Ok then please explain what is fun or rewarding to you in game, because you've thrown that "fighting vehicles isn't fun or rewarding" but it makes no fucking sense to me.


Actually achieving a tangible result from your efforts, like a kill or a part/weapon/mobility disable. In other words, actually doing something to the enemy that interrupts/prevents what they're doing.

Let's imagine a very simplified situation for a moment. Task a pilot with flying from one end of the map to the other, and task an infantry with interfering with the pilot. To actually disrupt the plane, the infantry needs to either kill the plane, cause a disable of some sort, or knock it around with physics effects. Those disrupt what the pilot is doing. Doing damage, in and of itself, means absolutely nothing for the first 99% dealt.

I'm glad Behemoths were brought up because they actually do feel rewarding to fight, despite having so much health. Why? Because they have sections that can be destroyed to take out massive chunks of health, their engines can be knocked out, as well as all their weapon systems. On the Airship, this last one also nets you kills; it was recently suggested killing the operator should apply to weapon station disables across all Behemoths, which would be fantastic.


Think of it like this: If you read/watch a story that's pretty good, but doesn't have a very good/interesting/memorable ending, it makes the whole story feel pointless and like a waste of time.
Who Enjoys, Wins

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "BleedingUranium" (Mar 5th 2017, 12:11am) with the following reason: spelling


Posts: 1,889

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

  • Send private message

68

Saturday, March 4th 2017, 10:58pm

@BleedingUranium

Ok then please explain what is fun or rewarding to you in game, because you've thrown that "fighting vehicles isn't fun or rewarding" but it makes no fucking sense to me.


Actually achieving a tangible result from your efforts, like a kill or a part/weapon/mobility disable. In other words, actually doing something to the enemy that interrupts/prevents what they're doing.

Let's imagine a very simplified situation for a moment. Task a pilot with flying from one end of the map to the other, and task an infantry with interfering with the pilot. The actually disrupt the plane, the infantry needs to either kill the plane, causes a disable of some sort, or knock it around with physics effects. Those disrupt what the pilot is doing. Doing damage, in and of itself, means absolutely nothing for the first 99% dealt.

I'm glad Behemoths were brought up because they actually do feel rewarding to fight, despite having so much health. Why? Because they have sections that can be destroyed to take out massive chunks of health, their engines can be knocked out, as well as all their weapon systems. On the Airship, this last one also nets you kills; it was recently suggested killing the operator should apply to weapon station disables across all Behemoths, which would be fantastic.


Think of it like this: If you read/watch a story that's pretty good, but doesn't have a very good/interesting/memorable ending, it makes the whole story feel pointless and like a waste of time.
Tank gunner seats blow up if you look at them the wrong way. You are invalidating your own arguments.

Posts: 3,453

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 15

  • Send private message

69

Saturday, March 4th 2017, 11:04pm

Tank gunner seats blow up if you look at them the wrong way. You are invalidating your own arguments.


Unless you're talking about the Landship, you're not disabling anything important.

I may leave this topic here for a bit, because everyone's just talking past the real problems.
Who Enjoys, Wins

Posts: 3,277

Date of registration
: Apr 26th 2013

Platform: PS4

Location: Arizona, USA

Reputation modifier: 15

  • Send private message

70

Saturday, March 4th 2017, 11:19pm

Long Response

"Killing tanks or planes isn't fun". - What's your definition of having fun in the game? You need to kill OpFor to contest objectives. Vehicles are harder to kill than infantry (in most cases). Does this spike in difficulty make it unfun for you to fight against them?

No, killing things is fun. Not having the slightest chance to kill things isn't fun. Vehicles have always been harder to eliminate in comparison to infantry, but never has it been so damn difficult to take down a vehicle in regards to the heavily armored tanks. Like I said before Light Tanks and Artillery Trucks aren't an issue, it's the big bastards that I have a problem with. Barring any instances where communication is involved, AT coordination just doesn't happen naturally, it has to be forced more often than not. In many cases, pro heavies and even average heavies will only succumb to infantry by a sheer set of coincidences. A couple Assaults just happen to be in the same vicinity, or a Support happens to have an HE Mortar, or a couple Scouts happen to have K-Bullets on hand. For all of these or just one of these to occur is through pure chance; no coordination has taken place it's just a collection of solo players that happened to be at the right place at the right time. DICE is now tasked with balancing a feature that completely necessitates teamplay and coordination, without the use of communication, for an asset that even the most mediocre of players can do well in (pssssssst, I'm talking about multiple AT against heavy tanks). Yeah, good luck with that.

Small arms fire and vehicle mounted/stationary machine guns deter planes and can kill them if they stay in range too long

Key word: can. The reality is that infantry will only need to resort to shooting at planes if the opposing team has air superiority meaning that the infantry's team has incompetent pilots. The only time I ever think to shoot at planes is when they constantly pass over an infantry-heavy area and accrue kill after kill. If they don't get kills, then they aren't a threat and can basically be ignored. Also, when will a good pilot ever stay within a certain range too long for infantry to actually shoot him down? The answer is never. Only crap pilots would be stupid enough to allow a couple infantry to deal enough damage to incapacitate or kill him. Which is ironic because that's exactly what the video you posted depicts. Oh and you were coordinating with at least another player through communication, so there's that. Remember the saying how teamwork is 'overpowered?' Yeah, that's applicable here too.

why are you comparing hitting planes in BF1 with the RG to hitting Helis with RPGs? Why not compare it to jets? You already made a comparison with jets by saying that jets in previous titles didn't have much ways to impact the ground


Really? Really. You're going to go there, huh. Okay then, BF1 planes are significantly slower and less maneuverable than jets. RPG hits on jets didn't regularly occur because they mostly kept to higher altitudes where dumb fire rockets would be a non-factor. The forward velocity of planes seems quite similar to that of BF4's helis' forward velocity. I don't have the exact numbers because I couldn't find them in the files, but I do know that planes are much, much slower than jets so the only feasible comparison is to a heli (not hovering) moving perpendicular to the ground.

"if you scratch a plane for 15-20 damage and they fly off to repair" "wasting ammo to literally no effect" - Wait so did it have no effect or did the plane actually have to go and repair?

I touched up on this earlier in the post, but the only true need for an infantryman to shoot at planes in the first place is if the plane's team has air superiority. If they have air superiority then they need not worry about opposing pilots coming to pester them as they repair the 15-20 damage they took. One 5s repair cycle or an immediate Emergency Repair if wings were damaged is all the pilot needs to restore full HP. Good job, infantry guy. You delayed his next pass a maximum of 5s, yay...This is why there is basically no effect.

"You'd have to triple, quadruple, or boost the damage of small arms higher than that"
video
Look at this clip. If you can't be bothered by counting the damage I dealt to the plane with my MG, it's around 38-40 points of damage. Tripling damage would've allowed to to outight kill that plane with no addiitonal firepower from my team. Even doubling it would've made it so I almost took down a plane with very subpar accuracy.

I even know that' tripling or quadrupling' was an exaggeration. Come on, maaaaaan! If I dump an entire MG magazine into a plane I expect to do more than just damage it; wing and engine disables need to have a lower threshold for infantry weapons, so that when AAs are ineffective, destroyed, or not in the vicinity that a reliable counter exists and actually does something meaningful to make the pilot fear infantry. Right now, they just don't because they have nothing to fear except for the AAs that often go unused. Also you were, as I said before, communicating with at least one other person and that idiot pilot stayed within your line of sight for about 30s. You're lucky one or two of you didn't catch a few sniper rounds to the dome. Oh, plus you were on SINAI DESERT, ha! Good friggen' luck doing that same exact thing on Monte Grappa, Ballroom Blitz, Empire's Edge, or even Giant's Shadow. Sinai, along with the other wide open maps that have very wide and unobstructed lines of sight, is a terrible example to prove that a couple infantry can shoot down a cruddy pilot.
To Aim Assist or not to Aim Assist, that is the question.

Nope. Aim Assist or bust; here's why:

Default Aim Assist Data

Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
    AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
    AccelerationDamping 4.0
    AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
    SquaredAcceleration 0.0
    MaxAcceleration::Vec2
        x 2.0
        y 2.0
    YawSpeedStrength 1.0
    PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
    AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
        x 1.0
        y 1.2
    AttractSoftZone 0.75
    AttractUserInputMultiplier 0.45
    AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom 0.5
    AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
    AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.85
    AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
    AttractStartInputThreshold 0.1
    AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
    AttractYawStrength 1.0
    AttractPitchStrength 0.34
    MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
    MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
    ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
    SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
    SnapZoomTime 0.2
    SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.2
    SnapZoomPostTime 0.2
    SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
    SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
    SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput 0.2
    SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
    SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
    SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 1.2
    SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
    CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0

No Slowdown Data

Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
    AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
    AccelerationDamping 4.0
    AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
    SquaredAcceleration 0.0
    MaxAcceleration::Vec2
        x 2.0
        y 2.0
    YawSpeedStrength 1.0
    PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
    AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
        x 1.0
        y 1.2
    AttractSoftZone 0.0
    AttractUserInputMultiplier 1.0
    AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom -1.0
    AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
    AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.0
    AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
    AttractStartInputThreshold 0.0
    AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
    AttractYawStrength 0.0
    AttractPitchStrength 0.0
    MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
    MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
    ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
    SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
    SnapZoomTime 0.2
    SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.0
    SnapZoomPostTime 0.0
    SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
    SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
    SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput -1.0
    SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
    SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
    SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 0.5
    SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
    CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0
    DisableForcedTargetRecalcDistance 7.0


No Auto Rotation Data

Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
 AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
    AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
    AccelerationDamping 4.0
    AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
    SquaredAcceleration 0.0
    MaxAcceleration::Vec2
        x 2.0
        y 2.0
    YawSpeedStrength 1.0
    PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
    AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
        x 1.0
        y 1.2
    AttractSoftZone 0.75
    AttractUserInputMultiplier 0.45
    AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom 0.5
    AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
    AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.85
    AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
    AttractStartInputThreshold 0.1
    AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
    AttractYawStrength 1.0
    AttractPitchStrength 0.34
    MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
    MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
    ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
    SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
    SnapZoomTime 0.2
    SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.0
    SnapZoomPostTime 0.0
    SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
    SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
    SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput -1.0
    SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
    SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
    SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 0.5
    SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
    CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0
    DisableForcedTargetRecalcDistance 7.0

Prepare your laughbox

the Sebstalder is quiet good since it can 3hit kill at any distanc ,but In my opinion i actually thikn the sweeper is better, its got a really really fast firerate that can beat alll those Noobmaticos, Helregall adn shitguns in close quarters , and its also really accurate out to like l;ong range,. overall great allround gun, jsut my 2$ tho