Turning and moving

[StellarRat]

The soldier spots as he is moving, so, there is no chance for him to walk into an ambush. And there is the extra TUs spending when turning while moving that did not exist in the OG. These are the 2 differences.

OK, so I was remembering correctly. I like the auto spotting because in the OG I just moved one square at a time with my point men. That accomplished the same thing. This way I can complete my turns quicker. As far as turning goes....are you sure there wasn't a pivot cost? I seem to remember these was one. Either way, pivoting should cost TU in my book.

[ThunderGr]

OK, so I was remembering correctly. I like the auto spotting because in the OG I just moved one square at a time with my point men. That accomplished the same thing. This way I can complete my turns quicker.

Understood. It is just that you have no penalties for rushing into position.

As far as turning goes....are you sure there wasn't a pivot cost? I seem to remember these was one. Either way, pivoting should cost TU in my book.

There was a pivoting cost when you were standing, not when you were moving.

[StellarRat]

Understood. It is just that you have no penalties for rushing into position.

There was a pivoting cost when you were standing, not when you were moving.

Well, changing directions while your moving will definitely slow you down specially if you're running.

[ThunderGr]

Well, changing directions while your moving will definitely slow you down specially if you're running.

Hardly, unless you turn 180 degrees. You can try it, I have. For a trained person is nothing to turn to any direction while running without slowing down. It is only about foot placement. We had relevant training in the Army. It is not like you are running like an 100m dash runner.

[StellarRat]

Hardly, unless you turn 180 degrees. You can try it, I have. For a trained person is nothing to turn to any direction while running without slowing down. It is only about foot placement. We had relevant training in the Army. It is not like you are running like an 100m dash runner.

Well, I agree that the pivoting costs may be too high, but changing directions always slows any object in motion down. Maybe the pivot should only cost 1 or 2 TUs per facing change, but there should still be a cost. Someone moving in a straight line is going to get to their destination before someone that is zig-zagging every time (assuming the same top speed for both.) I think the Xenonauts assumes that changing direction includes pointing your weapon and spotting in that direction all rolled into one cost.

[smoitessier]

The soldier spots as he is moving, so, there is no chance for him to walk into an ambush.

I've had soldiers continue to walk after spotting an alien, I wonder if it's based on their reflex score?

[smoitessier]

Then again you might run into another set of problems. Solder that does not move should have steadier hand and better aim than the one, which moved. Also when being fired you most likely would have to take into account how much has he traveled in particular turn (moving targets are harder to hit).

I don't know about changing the calculation of the to-hit chance of a moving target, sounds complicated.

But as far as your own movement, it could be quite simple, i.e. for each tile you move you loose 1% accuracy.

[ThunderGr]

I've had soldiers continue to walk after spotting an alien, I wonder if it's based on their reflex score?

This sounds very interesting! It would be quite nice .

[StellarRat]

I don't know about changing the calculation of the to-hit chance of a moving target, sounds complicated.

But as far as your own movement, it could be quite simple, i.e. for each tile you move you loose 1% accuracy.

Cost to stop and take the shot is included in the firing TU costs. So how fast your moving isn't relavent in the current game mechanics. However, I suppose you could have a special shot type that costs very little TU and is bascially a spray and prey type thing "moving fire". Seems like an unnecessary addition to the game mechanics though. I could see giving a penalty to shoot at a moving target though. That actually makes a lot of sense. So, in essence, your fire accuracy would be decreased by the number of tiles the target moved during it's turn. Of course, then you have to start worrying about the angle of target movement relative to the shooter, as targets moving across the battlefield are harder to hit than targets moving straight toward or away from the shooter are. But, that would require a substantial change to how the calculations are done and additional fields in the targets data. Also, if you wanted to show that there was a certain penalty because of movement that would require UI changes. Edited June 21, 2013 by StellarRat

[Kurruk]

Cost to stop and take the shot is included in the firing TU costs.

Is it? Because I haven't really noticed change in TUs to take a shot if I'm stationary or after movement. The shotgun fire costs 20 TUs regardless of the movement.

As for other things to consider, I mentioned them because of initial idea. If we assume soldiers are running over already discovered terrain (without spotting) we have to consider the edge cases as well. Because if a game allows for some action with one scenario in mind it has to take into account some other (ab)uses.

Not sure if that applies to x-com world, but I do remember where one forbade player to carry too much, but still allowed him to throw something. Abuse of that would cause player to pick some stuff up, just to throw it to whenever he was going. It was done like that, because after player left for X meters away from that "region" anything on the ground was lost.