Shot Miss Scattering

Ah I wasn't sure if you meant that the misses would avoid the target tile (and the area behind it) or if the target area just had a 0% stopping chance.

Once I get my internet connection sorted I will have to have a proper try and see

How does it look with the missed shots going through the original target area?

I haven't been able to try the new version yet to see for myself.

I didn't see any shots go "through" the target tile. But, now I'm wonder what a point blank range miss is going to look like?? Anyway, last night all my autoshots were from medium to long range.

But, now I'm wonder what a point blank range miss is going to look like??

Hilarity ensues. I had an assault and rifleman lined up in front of a door when a sebilian walked out. No reaction fire--of course. I had my assaultwoman take the shot (why 50% accuracy vs an adjacent square, exactly?). She missed the alien, but hit the guy standing to her right (she even turned to do it). I took another snap-shot, and she shot the guy's corpse. Finally, I had her take a normal shot, which hit the sebilian. The sebilian, no doubt muttering "WTF?" returned fire and killed her, so it was a happy ending all around.

I once had a guy do an about-face and shoot the ground instead of the Sebillian which was directly in front of him.

I once had a guy do an about-face and shoot the ground instead of the Sebillian which was directly in front of him.

Tempted to keep playing just to see that.

Tempted to keep playing just to see that.

So, it's still wacky then. A miss at point blank range HAS TO go right through the alien tile. Otherwise you get the crazy miss stuff that I was afraid of. It can't go left or right without it looking totally nuts. At this point I'd almost say it would be better to not even draw the shot or calculate 0 damage if it's a miss. Thinking back to the original XCom I'm not 100% sure you could even miss at 1 tile away. Edited April 4, 2013 by StellarRat

That was what I was concerned about.

If the whole target tile is always avoided then any miss at short to medium range is going to look odd.

Remember though that Chris said the accuracy calculation was throwing out some odd numbers as well so this issue could be related to that as much as the deviation?

You could miss at point-blank in the original. Oh, how you could miss. Sometimes it would hit the ground under their feet or to the side. I've seen some auto fires where 2/3 rounds missed an adjacent muton. "Least it wasn't a chryssalid."

You could miss at point-blank in the original. Oh, how you could miss. Sometimes it would hit the ground under their feet or to the side. I've seen some auto fires where 2/3 rounds missed an adjacent muton. "Least it wasn't a chryssalid."

Man, I sure don't remember that happening. I seem to remember that if you managed to get that close you could go to auto on your laser rifle and drop them with three hits in a row. Maybe my troops were too good.

You *could* miss, but it was damn rare since even a miss would go through the alien tile. It'd happen about 1 in 20-30 shots and they'd hit the ground under the alien's feet. Add the lethality of basic laser rifles (never mind HP) and even a single miss would often go unnoticed.

As it currently stands with V18 HF1, shooting from knife range is a bad idea since the shots will usually brutalise the tile to the right of the soldier i.e you will miss without 80% of your shots. Walk 3-4 tiles away then shoot, much better odds.

You *could* miss, but it was damn rare since even a miss would go through the alien tile. It'd happen about 1 in 20-30 shots and they'd hit the ground under the alien's feet. Add the lethality of basic laser rifles (never mind HP) and even a single miss would often go unnoticed.

As it currently stands with V18 HF1, shooting from knife range is a bad idea since the shots will usually brutalise the tile to the right of the soldier i.e you will miss without 80% of your shots. Walk 3-4 tiles away then shoot, much better odds.

Yeah, it's not good. I'd much rather have a pass through shots, foot shots, zero damage hits (to represent misses), or just a guaranteed hits at point blank. I wonder if they forgot to test the current solution at point blank range. It actually is much better than old one at longer ranges.

After some more thought I think the best solution from a programming standpoint would be to make close misses just do 1 or 0 points of damage to the target. In other words, you just grazed the bad guy or took off his finger nail. That way you don't have to force a spread that is unreasonable at close range. My programmer hat tells me this would not take a lot of code.

Edited April 5, 2013 by StellarRat

We'll probably add some flat accuracy bonus code at short range to make missing at short range less likely. Even the shotgun has about a 50% chance to hit at point blank, which seems wrong.

According to the accuracy formula shouldn't the hit chance at that range be pretty good?

Could the poor hit chance up close be down to the oddness of the calculation that you mentioned previously or is that only affecting the displayed chance?

Having a flat accuracy bonus sounds like a good idea. 37% on a Reaper 1 tile away with a laser carbine is just odd.

Hmm yeah the weapon accuracy rating is used as a modifier to your soldiers accuracy isn't it.

So if your soldier had 66 accuracy, using a laser carbine, he would have ~49% chance to hit at close range if I am working it out properly.

Maybe short range shots should cap the accuracy at either the soldiers or the weapons base accuracy with that cap falling off with range?

Perhaps setting the weapon modifier to 100 and working down to the actual weapon accuracy out at 50% of the weapons optimal range?

I have no idea, as long as at least 3/4 of the shots at point blank hit I'll be happy.

The Reapers? Not so much.

Hmm yeah the weapon accuracy rating is used as a modifier to your soldiers accuracy isn't it.

So if your soldier had 66 accuracy, using a laser carbine, he would have ~49% chance to hit at close range if I am working it out properly.

Maybe short range shots should cap the accuracy at either the soldiers or the weapons base accuracy with that cap falling off with range?

Perhaps setting the weapon modifier to 100 and working down to the actual weapon accuracy out at 50% of the weapons optimal range?

Just have the tile right next to the alien be a nearly guaranteed hit for non-precision weapons. I've never fired a gun before, but I'm certain that if I put the muzzle practically in somebody's face I'd have a real hard time missing.

A 'nearly guaranteed hit' would involve an increase in accuracy at short range which is what I suggested.

How would your nearly guaranteed hit at one tile scale to the next tile?

If it was purely a single tile increase as you suggest then you could well go from 95% hit chance to 50% in a single step and then scale down from there.

I suggest that keeping a smooth reduction in accuracy is likely to be easier for the player to keep track of when planning shots, as well as making more sense.

I firmly believe that smooth changes are preferable over sudden jumps in accuracy per tile.

Your positioning should be important because of cover and angle of attack, not because one tile forward takes you into the magic circle that gives you an extra 15% chance to hit.

Some weapons would probably be exempt from the close in accuracy bonus, like the precision rifle as you mention.

A 'nearly guaranteed hit' would involve an increase in accuracy at short range which is what I suggested.

How would your nearly guaranteed hit at one tile scale to the next tile?

If it was purely a single tile increase as you suggest then you could well go from 95% hit chance to 50% in a single step and then scale down from there.

I suggest that keeping a smooth reduction in accuracy is likely to be easier for the player to keep track of when planning shots, as well as making more sense.

I firmly believe that smooth changes are preferable over sudden jumps in accuracy per tile.

Your positioning should be important because of cover and angle of attack, not because one tile forward takes you into the magic circle that gives you an extra 15% chance to hit.

Some weapons would probably be exempt from the close in accuracy bonus, like the precision rifle as you mention.

One tile out, and the diagonals from an alien, would be MAX(weaponAcc, soldierAcc) and then moving out from there would be the regular formula scaling down smoothly. The only reason standing right next to an alien would be a near guaranteed hit is because when you're that close you're basically pressing the muzzle against the creep and pulling the trigger, which all but guarantees a hit.

You wouldn't even have to increase accuracy just do, like:

if((soldPosX == (targetPosX + 1) && soldPosY == (targetPosY + 1)) ||       (soldPosX == (targetPosX - 1) && soldPosY == (targetPosY + 1)) ||       (soldPosX == (targetPosX + 1) && soldPosY == (targetPosY - 1)) ||       (soldPosX == (targetPosX - 1) && (soldPosY == (targetPosY - 1)))           hitChance = 99;else if((soldPosX == (targetPosX + 1) && soldPosY == (targetPosY ) ||       (soldPosX == (targetPosX - 1) && soldPosY == (targetPosY)) ||       (soldPosX == (targetPosX) && soldPosY == (targetPosY + 1)) ||       (soldPosX == (targetPosX) && (soldPosY == (targetPosY - 1)))           hitChance = MAX(soldierAcc, weaponAcc);else           hitChance = (whatever fabulous formula the coders have come up with);

Something like that I think would work.

Edited because I can't code properly, it seems.

Edited again because Jesus I am bad at maths. Somebody make sure that my graph maths are correct here, because I'm frankly embarrassed that I even know me.

EDIT: Hah. Take that mathematics!

Edited April 6, 2013 by Assoonasitis

Writing code is so much darn fun, guys.

Edited April 6, 2013 by Assoonasitis

To be honest, I have no idea why the precision rifle would be less accurate at close range. Slower, yes, but not less accurate. If you've ever shot anything from within 7 feet, you know that you're not using sights, so having a scope is no disadvantage. Point and shoot.

To be honest, I have no idea why the precision rifle would be less accurate at close range. Slower, yes, but not less accurate. If you've ever shot anything from within 7 feet, you know that you're not using sights, so having a scope is no disadvantage. Point and shoot.

Long, heavy barrel.

Makes no difference. It's as heavy from 200 yards as it is from 200 inches.

It's more unwieldy from very close range though. A barrel that's .6096m to .6604m in length, not counting the stock of the gun, is going to be very hard to get in something's face, considering your centre-mass is 1.6m away from that thing's centre-mass. You have to consider that your arms are about .7366m long, so add maybe half of that for reach with the rifle and we're at .9179m, round it off to 1.0m so you're less than the barrel's length from what you're aiming at, that's going to be really tough.

A long rifle is about a meter. That leaves about the length of my arm from the muzzle to the alien's chest. A heavier and longer barrier takes longer to bring up, and that's it. If I can accurately shoot someone from 25 meters firing from the shoulder, you better bet I can do it from 2. Heck, even if you're lazy and have bad training and don't have the stock in your shoulder, you could still accurately hit something at that range.

Ask someone with a hunting rifle to take you shooting. Stand 5 feet away from the target, bring the rifle up, and shoot it. You'll notice that it takes a long time to swing the barrel up, but you'll also notice that hitting the target is effortless.