Tighten up fire accuracy

[GoodGuyEddy]

Anyone who wants to chip in with new ones might come up with something that can be used to solve the issue.

How about when a soldier misses an adjacent enemy a notification pops out saying " Your soldier has spontainiously contracted parkinsons disease.

[HWP]

Then we just might increase shot spread cone to 360 degrees, to account for all those emo soldiers.

[ooey]

One thing I found annoying about the original UFO was that you could train a sniper up so that he would always have a 100% (or greater(!)) chance of hitting his target. Where's the fun (or risk) in that? There's always a small chance you are going to miss in any situation so the max. chance of hitting should be 90-95% at best. That was probably a small bug Julian Gollop missed though.

[GoodGuyEddy]

Then we just might increase shot spread cone to 360 degrees, to account for all those emo soldiers.

What does that have to do with anything?

[HWP]

What does that have to do with anything?

They'll be able to shoot themselves when they miss and spare you all the wanting to kill them.

[Gauddlike]

Hit chance is supposed to be capped at 95% if I remember rightly.

[MrPyro]

There have been suggestions on how to tweak the existing mechanic to make this sort of deviation less likely without making super accurate shots the norm.

Anyone who wants to chip in with new ones might come up with something that can be used to solve the issue.

Two potential ideas

1) Max deviation dependant on aim level; so snap shots can deviate by a large angle, but carefully aimed sniper rounds,even when missing, will hit close to target.

2) Minimum deviation; this is to prevent the tighter deviations causing a significantly higher hit level.

So you could have

Snap shot: min deviation 5 degrees, max deviation 35 degrees

Normal shot: min deviation 4 degrees, max deviation 25 degrees

Aimed shot: min deviation 3 degrees, max deviation 15 degrees

Very aimed shot (I can't remember what category 4 is actually called): min deviation 1 degree, max deviation 5 degrees.

Please note all example deviations above were picked out of the air.

[MrPyro]

Third potential idea: any round that "misses" (i.e. the hit value fails) but still hits a target (even if it hits the original target due to low deviation) does reduced damage*; this is to represent the fact that a deliberate hit is more likely to hit centre mass, while an accidental hit is more likely to wing the target.

*either a set reduction or random reduction

[Gorlom]

MrPyro I'm not really sure what problem your suggestion is fixing? with a <10 degree deviation your shot would still intersect the targets square resulting in a hit when you should have missed.

I guess you could possibly have a (min) deviation based on the inverse relation to the distance to the target. Meaning that the deviation for misses would be bigger the closer the you are to the target. It's not logical or realistic. but there would be less chance of really weird shots that people are complaining about.

[MrPyro]

The min deviation was intended to fix that issue, but I think you are right; without setting the minimum to quite a high value that's not going to work, and with deviation that high the long range shots will still look very strange.

That was part of the reason I suggested damage reduction for missed shots that hit something instead.

[Gorlom]

Third potential idea: any round that "misses" (i.e. the hit value fails) but still hits a target (even if it hits the original target due to low deviation) does reduced damage*; this is to represent the fact that a deliberate hit is more likely to hit centre mass, while an accidental hit is more likely to wing the target.

*either a set reduction or random reduction

Oh I didn't spot this post earlier when I responded... wouldn't a better option be to have missed shots deal no damage?

[StellarRat]

Oh I didn't spot this post earlier when I responded... wouldn't a better option be to have missed shots deal no damage?

I still don't understand why a miss just can't pass through the enemy tile and do nothing OR simply just damage any cover that was in the tile. I know it would look a little funny to some people, but if you know (i.e. it's in the manual) there is such a thing as a near miss that can pass through a tile than I don't think anyone would question it. Having bullets flying all over the place killing friend and foe alike looks a lot worse IMO opinion specially since the XCom people are supposed be highly trained professionals. I have serious doubts that even a blind person going on sound alone could miss by as much as these guys do.

It would be a cool feature if near misses caused more suppression than shots that go wide.

Edited October 22, 2012 by StellarRat

[Max_Caine]

StellarRat, without some kind of "NEAR MISS!" caption, if the shot intersected the tile the squaddie/alien is standing on I think it would look to someone playig it too much like a collision detection bug.

[StellarRat]

StellarRat, without some kind of "NEAR MISS!" caption, if the shot intersected the tile the squaddie/alien is standing on I think it would look to someone playig it too much like a collision detection bug.

I wouldn't be opposed to that. Maybe a marker that just has "Holy *#%$!" OR "Whew..." in it and the alien equivalent! LOL.

I just think the wild fire takes more anyway from the game visually and immersion wise than shots that pass through an occupied tile. Either that, or they need to make sure that a miss ALWAYS just passes one tile to the left or right even at close range. That would look pretty funky at close range, but at longer ranges it would be acceptable visually and you could widen it up a bit as the distance increased.

Another solution would be to make the shot hit the tile and do the dirt kicking up graphic instead of damaging the target, than you'd know you were very close, but missed.

Edited October 22, 2012 by StellarRat

[Gorlom]

Having bullets flying all over the place killing friend and foe alike looks a lot worse IMO opinion specially since the XCom people are supposed be highly trained professionals. I have serious doubts that even a blind person going on sound alone could miss by as much as these guys do.

In your opinion opinion?

As an X-com nostalgic I'd be disappointed if there weren't crazy misses involved in Xenonauts.

[StellarRat]

In your opinion opinion?

As an X-com nostalgic I'd be disappointed if there weren't crazy misses involved in Xenonauts.

Let me put it this way. I've seen blindfolded shooting before that was WAY more accurate. An occasional wild shot would be one thing, but on a regular basis it just looks wrong.

[Gorlom]

Let me put it this way. I've seen blindfolded shooting before that was WAY more accurate. An occasional wild shot would be one thing, but on a regular basis it just looks wrong.

That doesn't really change anything. (and I don't particularly think youtube videos showing off what the video maker considers to be impressive to mean anything)

Relatively crazy misses was in UFO: Enemy Uknown, I'd be disappointed if it was removed from Xenonauts.

[Gauddlike]

Shots passing clean through your target without doing any damage also looks wrong.

I really don't think that is the solution.

I had two suggestions that might help.

The first I posted in one of the previous threads.

That boils down to doing a bit of maths and taking into account the chance of a miss passing through the target square when calculating the hit chance.

Rather than a 50% chance to hit plus the miss having a chance to pass through and hurt the target both of these chances to damage the target would be part of the initial calculation.

All displayed hit chances would be higher (reflecting the true chance of hitting the target).

The second was for the hit chance to be directly related to the deviation of the shot on a miss.

If a 50% hit chance needs to roll 50 or under to hit then rolling a 1 should be dead centre on the target tile.

Rolling 50 should just hit one (random) edge of the tile.

Rolling 51 should then just miss the target tile.

Basically this system assumes that whatever the value required to hit the target represents the width of the tile.

That would allow anything under that value to hit somewhere in the tile and anything over to be a miss, with the severity of the miss being related to the hit chance as well as how unlucky the roll is.

75% chance to hit would make the tile 75 points wide so rolling 100 (worst possible shot) would miss by a third of a tile.

10% chance to hit would make the tile 10 points wide so rolling 100 (worst possible) would miss by nine tiles.

Some weapons or fire modes (maybe burst fire or a certain tier) could have a penalty to this deviation amount to represent recoil and so on if required.

*edit* forgot to add that you could also have the miss deviation scale be non linear if you wanted to keep the crazy misses on really unlucky shots.

Edited October 22, 2012 by Gauddlike

[StellarRat]

That boils down to doing a bit of maths and taking into account the chance of a miss passing through the target square when calculating the hit chance.

Rather than a 50% chance to hit plus the miss having a chance to pass through and hurt the target both of these chances to damage the target would be part of the initial calculation.

All displayed hit chances would be higher (reflecting the true chance of hitting the target).

The second was for the hit chance to be directly related to the deviation of the shot on a miss.

If a 50% hit chance needs to roll 50 or under to hit then rolling a 1 should be dead centre on the target tile.

Rolling 50 should just hit one (random) edge of the tile.

Rolling 51 should then just miss the target tile.

Basically this system assumes that whatever the value required to hit the target represents the width of the tile.

That would allow anything under that value to hit somewhere in the tile and anything over to be a miss, with the severity of the miss being related to the hit chance as well as how unlucky the roll is.

75% chance to hit would make the tile 75 points wide so rolling 100 (worst possible shot) would miss by a third of a tile.

10% chance to hit would make the tile 10 points wide so rolling 100 (worst possible) would miss by nine tiles.

Some weapons or fire modes (maybe burst fire or a certain tier) could have a penalty to this deviation amount to represent recoil and so on if required.

The deviation thing works OK until you get close to the target then it gets funky because hit the tile on either side starts to look like a pretty wild shot. At one tile away when you miss your miss angle is at least 45 degrees off target.

[Gauddlike]

That would depend entirely on what your chance to hit was.

If you had 90% chance to hit then the absolute worst shot you could make (using the second suggestion) would miss by one tenth of a tile.

Take a look at the size of the tiles in the game and see just how small a margin that is.

[StellarRat]

That would depend entirely on what your chance to hit was.

If you had 90% chance to hit then the absolute worst shot you could make (using the second suggestion) would miss by one tenth of a tile.

Take a look at the size of the tiles in the game and see just how small a margin that is.

Maybe I'm wrong, but thought we were trying to avoid drawing anything going through an occupied tile unless it's a hit?? So, how can you miss by a tenth of a tile? Maybe I'm confused now. If you actually can draw stuff going through tiles but not hitting the target than I'm in totally agreement with your method. In fact, that's how I would have done it if I was doing the programming and graphics.

[Gauddlike]

My suggestions don't have missed shots going through occupied tiles.

If you miss the tile you are aiming for then your shot would pass through the space either side of it.

In the example you mention they would pass through the nearest tenth of the tile beside the one that was missed.

Any closer to the actual targeted tile would be a hit.

1-90 the shot passes through the targeted tile, 91-100 the shot passes through the tile beside it.

If I get a chance I will knock up a diagram, that might help.

[StellarRat]

My suggestions don't have missed shots going through occupied tiles.

If you miss the tile you are aiming for then your shot would pass through the space either side of it.

In the example you mention they would pass through the nearest tenth of the tile beside the one that was missed.

Any closer to the actual targeted tile would be a hit.

1-90 the shot passes through the targeted tile, 91-100 the shot passes through the tile beside it.

If I get a chance I will knock up a diagram, that might help.

I think I understand now, but I'd have to see a near miss at point blank range to see if I liked it.

[svidangel]

Actually, on this topic, burst fire is VERY strange looking. Having one part of a burst fire go straight at and kill the target, while another goes off at a 45 degree angle is... not only unrealistic but I'm pretty sure nothing like that happened in the original xcom.

Anyway, I definitely agree that the wide angle missed look ridiculous and are in no way credible (even revolutionary war antiques would have trouble making those angles), but as to whether there is a reasonably simple solution while not near guaranteeing certain hits... not so sure.

[Gazz]

Why not ignore the 3D environment and use the classic MMO approach?

The graphics are just pretty graphics. The only thing that matters is if your attack roll resulted in a hit.

This works well for shooting at aliens or other targets that don't completely fill the entire volume of a tile.

"Hitting" rounds home right in on the alien with minor deviation for looks, misses show a small and believable deviation.

Even if the missing round intersects with the alien target, it wouldn't be counted as a hit.

Missing rounds:

If missing rounds intersect with a tile that another alien occupies, a to-hit calculation is done as if the soldier had aimed at that alien instead.

This is the chance of doing damage to that alien instead of passing through it.

This prevents abuse to the simple tile-collision system.

UFO:ET had an approach where a shot would miss by a max deviation in tiles.

If a point blank shot would miss by 3 tiles then a long range shot would also miss by 3 tiles.

If you aimed a long way behind the alien, your rookies could "accidentally hit" their target all the time.