llunak Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 It is possible to have soldiers running with shields and safely switch to a different gun when encountering an alien without risk of reaction fire. Save game: http://ge.tt/69cH3lh1/v/0 Steps to reproduce: - walk with the shield soldier through the door and spot the alien inside - go to inventory, drop the shield, take out the rifle from the backpack - there's no reaction fire - shoot at the alien This means it's possible to move with a protection and switch to a powerful gun when needed (in this example the rifle is not quite enough, but shield+shotgun would work). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legit1337 Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 This is not a bug. Inventory management does not provoke reaction fire. I honestly don't see the problem to be honest. So what if you run around with combat shields and drop them to pull out a shotty and gib the aliens? A combat shield can only absorb so much damage and they are heavy. Besides you have to drop them to use the other weapon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Not a high priority fix I'm afraid. Unless you mean that reaction fire is not provoked when carrying the shield? That would be a fairly major issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llunak Posted May 23, 2014 Author Share Posted May 23, 2014 Not a high priority fix I'm afraid. Unless you mean that reaction fire is not provoked when carrying the shield? That would be a fairly major issue. No, running with the shield is fine on its own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a_beorning Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 For me, any TU-spending activity must provoke reaction fire. But if it is too much work to do (or just too late to change) - OK, reaction-safe inventory usage is acceptable, considering how it was in OG. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legit1337 Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) For me, any TU-spending activity must provoke reaction fire.But if it is too much work to do (or just too late to change) - OK, reaction-safe inventory usage is acceptable, considering how it was in OG. Really, even looking around? How is that realistic, OR balanced? Considering scanning an entire room takes a fraction of a second IRL. Granted, rummaging around in a backpack would probably take too long. But transferring a grenade from your belt to your hand shouldn't provoke reaction fire either. Edited May 23, 2014 by legit1337 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llunak Posted May 23, 2014 Author Share Posted May 23, 2014 It would work. If a soldier wins reaction fire check against an enemy when getting into its LOS, he'd still win the check after spending the one TU to turn a bit (and BTW, scanning en entire room actually does not need to take just a fraction of section, if you want to talk about realism). What-if discussion at this point, anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legit1337 Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 It would work. If a soldier wins reaction fire check against an enemy when getting into its LOS, he'd still win the check after spending the one TU to turn a bit Not if the original check was won by only 1 TU. (and BTW, scanning en entire room actually does not need to take just a fraction of section, if you want to talk about realism). In a combat situation yes it does. Humans are very good at picking out movement, and colors that stand out against a background. A cursory scan of a room taking even a tenth of a second will reveal enemies with those traits. However, the time it takes to spot an immobile enemy who blends into the background will have you riddled with bullets before you have even a chance of noticing them. Thus anything more then a quick scan is both dangerous and counterproductive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StellarRat Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) Well, if it makes anyone feel any better you can always assume that the shotgun or whatever is slung over the back in a sling holster, so it could probably be gotten to hand pretty quickly (same with rifles.) You'll never see a soldier with a long gun actually in a backpack. That would nearly impossible because they are too long to fit in a standard size pack. Just assume it's carried on the soldiers body in a convenient location and device for quick access. The soldiers aren't "rummaging" through their backpacks looking for a rifle like it's a can of beans. The backpack is just an abstraction for stuff carried on his/hers body. Edited May 23, 2014 by StellarRat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llunak Posted May 23, 2014 Author Share Posted May 23, 2014 Not if the original check was won by only 1 TU. Of course. What's your point, besides nitpicking? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a_beorning Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 (Was: For me, any TU-spending activity must provoke reaction fire.) Really, even looking around? How is that realistic, OR balanced? Considering scanning an entire room takes a fraction of a second IRL. If you spend some time (no matter how many time!) in enemy's field of view and enemy technically can shot you - he have his chance. As more time you spend as bigger chance. It is a reason why reallife cops, when breaking into a room with armed criminals, first rolling aside from presumptive line of fire, and only then scanning a room. Did you asked for realism? But transferring a grenade from your belt to your hand shouldn't provoke reaction fire either. Transferring a grenade from belt to hand take same fraction of second as drawing a revolver from holster. And Clint Eastwood successfully used his reaction fire chance versus Angel Eyes - it's more or less of realism too. Alien aiming your troopers have better chance than Clint Eastwood, his gun is already drawn. What about balance? Balance problems can be solved by ajustment of coefficients in reaction chance formula. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinHann Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 (Was: For me, any TU-spending activity must provoke reaction fire.)If you spend some time (no matter how many time!) in enemy's field of view and enemy technically can shot you - he have his chance. As more time you spend as bigger chance. It is a reason why reallife cops, when breaking into a room with armed criminals, first rolling aside from presumptive line of fire, and only then scanning a room. Did you asked for realism? Transferring a grenade from belt to hand take same fraction of second as drawing a revolver from holster. And Clint Eastwood successfully used his reaction fire chance versus Angel Eyes - it's more or less of realism too. Alien aiming your troopers have better chance than Clint Eastwood, his gun is already drawn. What about balance? Balance problems can be solved by ajustment of coefficients in reaction chance formula. Clint Eastwood and realism, nice argument Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StellarRat Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Clint Eastwood and realism, nice argument "Aim for the heart, Ramón. Don't forget the heart." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a_beorning Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Clint Eastwood and realism, nice argument "More or less realism". As far as I heard, "wild west style" gunfighting duels were real practice, as a result of contradiction between mutual wish to kill an opponent (not so rare in any human society), right to defend yourself (read: kill opponent when he already have weapon in hand), and hanging as punishment for murder (read: killing opponent before he draw his weapon). Sergio Leone romantized but not invented such custom. In any case, gunfighters are more real then aliens: they surely have historical prototypes! BTW, are we not too far in off-topic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legit1337 Posted May 24, 2014 Share Posted May 24, 2014 (edited) (Was: For me, any TU-spending activity must provoke reaction fire.)If you spend some time (no matter how many time!) in enemy's field of view and enemy technically can shot you - he have his chance. As more time you spend as bigger chance. Speaking as someone who has actually been shot at before, this is blatantly false. It is quite possible to poke your head up and have a quick look, then duck into cover again before an enemy can react to shoot you. Even with engagement ranges as close as 15 meters, and even if they were covering your position. The average human's reaction time is .33 seconds for movement, under OPTIMAL circumstances. Transferring a grenade from belt to hand take same fraction of second as drawing a revolver from holster. And Clint Eastwood successfully used his reaction fire chance versus Angel Eyes - it's more or less of realism too. Alien aiming your troopers have better chance than Clint Eastwood, his gun is already drawn. This has nothing to do with quick draw antics. You point a gun at me, and if I have a grenade on my belt, I guarantee you I can grab it before you can even react, I can bring it up before your bullet hits me, and pull the pin before I die. Even as close as 5 meters. There is a reason why people say "no sudden moves!" when they are taking prisoners, drawing a weapon is faster then you think and often takes less than a second. It is even faster for trained soldiers and professionals. Granted you would probably not survive if you tried to pull a weapon in that scenario but you could definitely take someone with you. Edited May 24, 2014 by legit1337 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a_beorning Posted May 24, 2014 Share Posted May 24, 2014 (edited) Speaking as someone who has actually been shot at before, this is blatantly false. It is quite possible to poke your head up and have a quick look, then duck into cover again before an enemy can react to shoot you. Yes, it is quite possible to make it. And quite possible to catch a bullet. I'm glad you were lucky. Boys who weren't do not write to forums. Even with engagement ranges as close as 15 meters, and even if they were covering your position. The average human's reaction time is .33 seconds for movement, under OPTIMAL circumstances. .33 seconds for what? For get a picture, catch your silouette with muzzle-sight, make desicion to shoot (biggest part!) and move trigger finger? Yes, too much to do, he will late. For just finish already started finger move? .1 seconds is more than enough. This has nothing to do with quick draw antics. You point a gun at me, and if I have a grenade on my belt, I guarantee you I can grab it before you can even react, I beleive yes. I can bring it up before your bullet hits me, With chances, but not certain. and pull the pin before I die. Even as close as 5 meters. It very depends of circumstances. With bullet in belly - maybe. But you never pull the pin with bullet in your cerebellum. You never pull the pin when bullet hit carpal, elbow or shoulder joint of your grenade holding arm. You never pull the pin with bullet-amputated finger of your second arm. And so on. All these variants are possibilities with low but greater then zero chances. There is a reason why people say "no sudden moves!" when they are taking prisoners, drawing a weapon is faster then you think and often takes less than a second. I know. Reason why cops say it: they prefer not to kill (too much paperwork), but better kill then be killed. Aliens are not cops And aliens are not wild-westerners. They have no limitation "fire only when enemy is already armed", so their task is easier. About personal experiences: once I spent twenty minutes being aimed with RPK-74 machinegun. I had to do some tech work really close to guarded "top secret" object, between outer and inner guarded perimeter. And tower guard was instructed to let me do my work but not into inner territory. We both knew for sure: my wrong step, even stumble, and I got a burst and he got a prize vacation. 20 meters, plain sight, daytime. I did not stumbled, next day we nicely played football (my sqaudron vs site-protection squadron) and no hard feeling. But after 19 years I still remember that day in details. Edited May 24, 2014 by a_beorning Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted May 24, 2014 Share Posted May 24, 2014 Let's stop this debate please, bug threads are not the place for realism discussions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.