Messages

1

OXCE Suggestions Archive / Re: [Suggestion] Sniper/Scoped rifle inverse accuracy

« on: June 03, 2024, 01:39:33 am »

Automatic Sniper rifles . Scopes on mounted M2 are a thing but I would not call them sniper rifles. Even M82s are not classified as sniper rifles. Most of the semi-auto "sniper rifles" act more like DMRs (or Anti Material). Where the main advantage is the longer reach of a full load cartridge, compared to an intermediate cartridge. There are some very accurate semi-auto rifles, but those are rare exceptions, issued to highly trained specialists. A sniper rifle is accurate, simple, light and kills with one shot.

Added double tap for kicks. Maybe it is an M21.

The numbers are from my calculated hit chance table. Simulated about 142 millions shots using the game's hit calculation method at a 8x8 voxels target (some mild cover) between 1-120 range and 0-120 final acc ratings. The excel is available as a download in my other thread regarding hit chances if you are interested. 

40 distance is not unheard of. It is like 28x28 tiles away where the average map is 50x50 tiles. My shooters usually engage from super long distanced. The spotter rookie runs around and finds targets for the shooter teams waiting BVR.

The MinRange is not bad, but using it for all fire modes makes it somewhat tricky.

I run some numbers, and that may even work:
Aimed Acc: 110
Snap Acc: 140
SnapRange: 6
MinRange: 22
DropOff: 4

Between 1-10 range, the Snap has a 10-20% higher hit chance on average.
At 13 it crosses over, Aim has a 77, Snap has 75 hit chance.
At 20, Aim 96%, Snap 74% hit chance
At 30, Aim is 99%, Snap is 40%
At 40, Aim is 99%, Snap is 1%

That behaves like a sniper rifle should.
 

2

OXCE Suggestions Archive / Re: [Suggestion] Sniper/Scoped rifle inverse accuracy

« on: June 02, 2024, 10:06:54 pm »

Hm, you say the current sniper rifle implementation is kinda lacking. You end up with such OP monsters that the players use Snap shots because even those hit.   
Here is something that would not result such thing:
Aim: 110 Acc / 60% TU
Snap: 70 Acc / 40% TU

damageAlter:0
      RandomType: 7              # 50-200%
      ArmorEffectiveness: 0.8    # Armour only applies 80% of nominal value

AimMinDistance: 20
snapRange: 15
DropOff: 3
With a 90% Acc shooter, these will be the hit chances:

shot	1	2	3	4	5	10	15	20	30	40	50
aimed	82	79	77	74	71	75	82	94	94	93	92
snap	87	84	83	79	75	66	64	47	19	0	0

From 15 tiles on, the snap drops off (normal accuracy calc) and the aimed takes (inverse or minrange acuracy calc) over the hit chance.

DamageBonus none, you already have a huge Critical damage bonus rolled into the damageAlter.

3

OXCE Support / Re: [Suggestion] spriteFacility for 2x2 facilities.

« on: June 02, 2024, 09:27:47 pm »

You mean you want a facility that is over another facility? Like build a 1x1 Defence installation which has a 1x2 sprite that goes "over" the hangar? Not in functionality, just the looks. That is dealing with the Z order.
If I understand correctly, you want something like an "always on top" tag to make the tagged facility sprites always cover the normal, lower level facilities. Like how it happens in case of the hangars.

4

OXCE Suggestions OK / Re: [Suggestion] Craft size and Hangar capacity

« on: June 02, 2024, 09:12:18 pm »

...

XCom is a more or less realistic tactical game. Realistic planet, environment, weapons and situations. As realistic as the capabilities of the contemporary computers and style of game allow. Heck, if you replace the aliens with terrorists, you can call it Rainbow Six tactical.
The realism in the game even hurt the gameplay experience. Like soldier inventory management, buying mags and reloading the weapons manually, come on. XCOM'12 streamlined all the excess "realism" away.

Anyhow Type isn't all that hard to implement. If you want to buy a Craft Type 2, the can can interate through the facilities and check:
Can fit craft? Yes/No
Can fit Type 2? Yes/No
Does have enough free capacity? Yes/No

The game doesn't really care which craft is stored in which facility. Just like it doesn't care in which General Store you hold what item. You have free space for the craft at the time of purchase, you are good.

I know the Craft nr can be modified and I did that. I could fit 8 cars and that was cool. I could also fit 8 space dreadnoughts, which was a bit weird. That was the point I realized, a Craft size would be a good addition.
   

5

OXCE Suggestions OK / Re: [Suggestion] Craft size and Hangar capacity

« on: June 02, 2024, 08:53:50 pm »

A hangar is not just a space to fit vehicles, it's the in-game representation of the logistics network required to maintain that craft and its interception/transport missions. It very much makes sense that you cannot park your global car rental agreement in the sub pen.

Pave over? Put a metal sheet on the pen? Or how about making it fly? Or maybe put it onto the sea using cranes? So many options.

Except they don't. No matter if the alien is a tiny brainsucker or a giant sloth creature, they all take the exact same amount of containment 'space'. This is an example of type and size working in parallel, not together.

It is usually not the same because containment has either infinite space or some very high number, like 50. Hangars have neither of those stats. But I agree that if a single 2x2 hangar could hold 50 crafts, then this would be a non issue.
 
 

But nothing actually uses type and size together.

How about, I don't know, dead aliens? They have a Type ("CORPSES") AND a Size (0.4). Imagine if the stores worked like you said, no type and size. Muton corpse 1 space, pistol mag 1 space, Eleriumm crystal 1 space. Have fun fitting all the equipment and material into a single base...

6

OXCE Suggestions OK / Re: [Suggestion] Craft size and Hangar capacity

« on: June 02, 2024, 06:11:52 pm »

The base issue is: I have 2x2 Hangar with Craft = 1.
I have a tiny car. Since the hangar is craft = 1, I can fit either a car, or an Osprey chopper or a massive space dreadnought because all of them are exactly 1 craft.
How can I make the game realize that a car is smaller than 747 jumbo jet, therefore I should be able to put more than 1 car sized craft into a 747 sized hangar.
You say car is type 1, 747 is type 2. Make the 747 hangar accept only type 2. Ok, but that raises the question, why on earth cars are not allowed into a 747 hangar? What is the logic behind that real life or game? You say, ok type 1 cars are allowed into the 747 hangar. Nice, problem solved. Except, I can still park a single car into that massive hangar.

Type works one way, big thigs dont fit into small facilities but it say nothing about small things taking the exact same size as big things if allowed into big facilities.

General stores vs Containment are the example how Type AND Size work together. Everything in game have Type AND Size. Even manufacture. Except crafts. They have neithet Type nor Size. They are single crafts. Adding type is one part of the concept adding size is the other.

7

OXCE Suggestions OK / Re: [Suggestion] Craft size and Hangar capacity

« on: June 02, 2024, 02:51:41 pm »

Yes, both can be implemented.

I just said I will do type first and then reevaluate.

That is good enough for me, thanks! If you want a hand, I can chime in. The code doesn't look too complicated compared to FPS or Unreal games.

8

OXCE Suggestions OK / Re: [Suggestion] Craft size and Hangar capacity

« on: June 02, 2024, 02:48:44 pm »

Land vehicles over sea, well I consider the agents buy plane tickets. Then drive to an airport, get on a plane, fly to the other continent and rent another car.
For the APCs, they fly as cargo on a chartered C130 or similar slow plane.
An underwater base with a car driving out would be some wild James Bond stuff like the white Lotus.

9

OXCE Suggestions OK / Re: [Suggestion] Craft size and Hangar capacity

« on: June 02, 2024, 02:36:44 pm »

Hm, how about doing some old timey range divisions? Take the size and divide by 16. Integer part is type, remainder is size.
Size 0-15 is type 0. Size 16-31 is type 1 etc. Size 0 is type 0, size1. Size 18 is type 1, size 3. Simple no quaternions or whatever.
If you dont care about size just type, use 0, 16, 32 etc. If you do care, go for other numbers. Size can be type but type cant be size. Unless you want a different facility for different types/sizes. Also, it still doesnt solve the issue of allowing 1 tiny craft in a massive hangar. Unless  you also add another value say can hold 4 type 1 crafts or 2 type 2 crafts or 1 type 3 craft. At this point you implemented craft size, just not from the craft's perspective but from the facility's.

I don't care about type, I still dont. The alternate proposal was called a compromise. Meridian pointed he would prefer type. Instead of bashing type as stupid and pointless idea, because size is the only true way, I merely mentioned, why not both? It is not that they are mutually exclusive or something. Being a dev and a software architect, I picked up a few ideas how to propose features in a non aggressive way.

10

OXCE Suggestions OK / Re: [Suggestion] Craft size and Hangar capacity

« on: June 02, 2024, 12:52:54 pm »

Size can have two "types". Above water with a +sign and below water with a - sign. Facility with -4 capacity can hold only below water crafts.
If we go purely type, you can go pretty nuts twisting the system to have some consistency.
You either have a large number of different facilities which would not allow cross parking. Or you allow cross parking, say a van can park a hangar but an interceptor cant be placed into a parking lot. Then you will be back to square one because only 1 craft can be in s hangar regardless of craft size.

I was thinking an analogy and the General Stores came to my mind. Now there are 2 types, general and live storage. Imagine if you added like general, gun racks, blast proof, refrigirated, live psionically shielded, live reinforced, live because a dead muton is like 6x the size of a heavy plasma but instead of assigning it a size of 9, you just want to count it as 1 since it is one piece of stuff. No, we happily accepted the typeless nature of stores if favor of size. Why is it an issue to have the same logic applied to crafts?

You may say like you can build 3 separated parking lots and then the sum capacity would allow a heavy transport plane to land. You cut the big craft into 3 parts or what? That would be  weird. I agree on that, so just fill craft size descending order into facility capacity ascending order.
You have a transport 7s, interceptor 5s, 2xAPC 3s, 2xVan 2s, 3xCar 1s. And you have 2xHangars 8c, 3xParking lots 4c.
Transport check parking 1-2-3 doesnt fit. Hangar 1 fit. Hangar 1 capacity is 1 now.
Interceptor, Hangar 1-parking 1-2-3 doesnt fit. Hangar 2 fits, cap is 3 there.
APC1 goes parking 1.
APC2 goes parking 2.
Van 1, 2 goes to parking 3.
Cars go hangar 1, parking 1, parking 2.
Hangar 2 has 3 more capacity for crafts.
Subs do this but they do everything with Abs()

11

OXCE Suggestions OK / Re: [Suggestion] Craft size and Hangar capacity

« on: June 01, 2024, 10:49:55 pm »

The craft size is somewhat more generic of a solution. You have a hangar where you can fit a chopper for 6 space and a van for 2. Meanwhile the type solution would make you build a parking lot for the two cars and a hangar for the chopper. You would not allow cars to a hangar even if it is empty.

The size solution would still allow types. Such as make a "parking lot" 4 space and make the smallest flyer 5 size.

12

OXCE Suggestions Archive / Re: [Suggestion] Sniper/Scoped rifle inverse accuracy

« on: June 01, 2024, 10:15:39 am »

What do you mean by "quadratic stat scaling"? The hit chance model is quadratic in the game for evety projectile weapon. Also the higher the accuracy the lesser the "LOS" penalty. You will hit in a tighter circle. That is how it works even now.
Damage bonus is noooo. Snipers aim for center mass not for boom headshots. Actually, that is also realistic in the game.
The Snap shot should not suffer because your sights are optimized for long range. For short range, you just point and click.

13

OXCE Suggestions Archive / Re: [Suggestion] Sniper/Scoped rifle inverse accuracy

« on: June 01, 2024, 12:27:53 am »

Similar indeed but not quite. It applies to all fire modes, not just aim. And as the dropoff is the same for all modes, it will make Snap/Auto even less accurate. That is not the intention.  It is to make scoped/sniper rifles less accurate on short ranges when using the scope (ie Aimed shot)

14

OXCE Suggestions Archive / Re: [Suggestion] Real Hit Chance displayed When UFOExtender Accuracy is ON

« on: June 01, 2024, 12:18:38 am »

Every chance based thing is fake. Probability is not math, it is just some game you can play with numbers.  You can have 99.99999% chance to win and you can still lose. The number will just give you a likelyhood to win. You can also say that you have a good feeling about that, that woukd be just as accurate.

I checked the BOXCE thing and it is practically XCOM'12 hit system with all the fixed modifiers and dodads. Old XCOM doesnt work like that and I respect that. The number displayed is based on massive sampling, which results real, accurate chance numbers. If you play heads or tails a million times, it will show you a 50-50 divide between the results, which is accodentally your hit chance in thst game.

15

OXCE Suggestions OK / [Suggestion] Craft size and Hangar capacity

« on: May 30, 2024, 06:27:52 pm »

Facilities have the "crafts" value to set how many crafts the facility can hold. So far so good.
How about giving crafts a "size"? With this, you could set a hangar's capacity 2, and the small interceptor size 1. You could hold 2 interceptors there. Or make a heavy fighter size 2 so only 1 such craft could he housed in the hangar.

XCom Files come to my mind where this could be very helpful. Now you can park a single car in a massive hangar. After this, the hangar could be set to craft = 8. And the car is size 1, the van size 2, the tank is 3 and the actual planes like 6-8.