- User Since
- Mar 7 2013, 12:23 AM (480 w, 19 h)
May 9 2016
Exactly. It seems as though some confusion is abound between running and sprinting.
As I mentioned, I find the tactical pace best for suppressive fire while moving or extremely close quarters. Due to the speed though, I found it difficult to maintain a level of precision that I am comfortable enough with in CQB. I much prefer slower walking when actually trying to hit anything remotely accurately.
In my opinion, I feel that there may be some confusion between sprinting, running, tactical pace running, tactical pace walking, and standing still.
I personally find that the new tactical pace is a bit too fast for my tastes in a CQB environment, therefore I use tactical pace walking (just like weapon-ready walking in A2). TP running is adequate for suppressive type fire, but TP walking is of course going to be more accurate for CQB type of work.
I don't particularly have a problem with running and shooting wildly. I agree with Iratus as to forcing a stand still as an adequate fix to this and the other reported issue of running while shooting and still hold that full out sprinting and shooting shouldn't be supported.
It seems to me that tactical pace running may potentially suite the OP's original concerns as to "run and shoot"; seems as though everyone thinks the OP is referring to sprinting and shooting, where he is actually referring to running and shooting; and the anims can be fixed with either Iratus's idea or letting the player run and shoot wildly.
Just my $.02
I've noticed this same problem with my Saitek x52 (non-pro).
I had Z- mapped to "Collective Increase (Analog)" and Z+ to "Collective Decrease (Analog)". While this seems strange, for whatever reason Saitek designed this stick to be at a value of 255/255 when in the 0% throttle position and 0/255 when at the 100% throttle position.
While in this configuration, 50 percent was neutral (gravity caused decrease in altitude), 25% started decrease in collective, and 75% started increase in collective. From 25% throttle to 75% throttle it was neutral and no increase or decrease in collective was observed (gravity naturally caused slight descent).
I applied the fix above to map both Z- and Z+ to "Collective Increase (Analog)" and found this to function as expected with 0% being 0% throttle applied, 50% throttle being 50% throttle applied, and 100% being 100% throttle applied. However at first configuration, something strange happened.
When you map Z+ above Z- in the keybinds for "Collective Increase (Analog)", the throttle behavior is reversed (0% throttle is 100% throttle being applied and vice-versa). When I switched the two keybind positions (Z- being atop), the throttle functioned as expected. I'm not sure why this is. If anything, I would have expected that there was throttle applied at 100% all the time or that a deadspot would be present around 50%.
Thanks for the workaround, definitely upvoted.
Just thought I'd provide some food for thought...