1
The X-Com Files / Re: Real weapons overhaul discussion
« on: May 09, 2021, 03:51:48 am »
Shorter M4A1, and another with my attempt at putting a red dot on it. Also, the sprites I use for the AP ammo.
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email? November 21, 2024, 08:29:56 pm
Did you miss your activation email? November 21, 2024, 08:29:56 pm
News: If you can't login, please contact us with your username and e-mail so we can fix it.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
The X-Com Files / Re: Real weapons overhaul discussion
« on: May 04, 2021, 02:11:59 am »Well, maybe... But it'll hrow the current model into disarray, since 5.56 is already AP, while 7.62 is not (but is stronger). So this distinction already exists.Depends on what you think is the "standard" bullet. The discussion about 7.62 vs 5.56 (standard bullets) is that both are somewhat similar in armor penetration, but 7.62 inflicts bigger wounds. Translating this relationship into gameplay values means the standard 5.56 has to have some armor penetration (or more than 7.62).
I actually did not think the 5.56 we have right now is a special armor piercing bullet. But also I played mostly PirateZ before x-com files, and there the standard assault rifle ammo has 0.85 AP, while armor piercing ammo has 0.7 AP. So this influences my view on the matter.
But regarding things beeing in order in the current model:
The P90 ammo has AP 0.8 and 25 damage. This ammo is better vs armor than the current 5.56. This actually made me believe the current 5.56 is not a special armor piercing bullet. Adding 5.56 AP ammo would fix that relationship.
3
The X-Com Files / Re: Real weapons overhaul discussion
« on: May 02, 2021, 04:59:44 pm »
First of all, thank you for the positive feedback.
This is probably the right time to ask: Is it better for you if I give you a modified items_XCOMFILES.rul? So you can use merge tools to get the changed prices? Or how do you prefer that I post the numbers?
About the AP ammo:
I was thinking just for 5.56/5.45 and 7.62 ammo. Those currently have only one ammo type (with the exception of the ADS).
And thanks for the link to the java tool. Let's see by how much my calculations were off.
All right, but then we'd need an overhaul of all buyable items; or at least a review of them to see if they make sense in comparison.Yep, that is what I am working on right now.
This is probably the right time to ask: Is it better for you if I give you a modified items_XCOMFILES.rul? So you can use merge tools to get the changed prices? Or how do you prefer that I post the numbers?
Quote
Also, while I don't have much experience with this, I believe that your code won't work - according to the ruleset reference, you can't specify amounts on everyItemList, only on everyMultiItemList. But that's just a tip, doesn't really matter for the discussion.I tested the event, it seems to do what I want. The numbers in 'weightedItemList:' are weights, not amounts. The regular difficulty event gives you two guns, the low difficulty event gives you four guns. That's why I thought 100% chance is not too much, it's just two guns that you get.
About the AP ammo:
I was thinking just for 5.56/5.45 and 7.62 ammo. Those currently have only one ammo type (with the exception of the ADS).
And thanks for the link to the java tool. Let's see by how much my calculations were off.
4
The X-Com Files / [MOD] Weapon overhaul, early game
« on: May 02, 2021, 02:50:17 am »
Since I already posted the spreadsheet with the stats, I might as well publish the mod in it's current state. So here goes.
-- DISCLAIMER --
This is a work in progress and not yet finished.
What this does:
Changes sprites and stats for a few weapons that are relevant at the early game. Mostly stuff you get before promotion 2.
Also adds a weapon delivery event that is unlocked when you get the military envoy. The event stops when you reach promotion 2.
The .rul file is heavily commented, I try to explain my decisions.
I did not compleately test this as I have spent too much time modding and not enough playing. Please report if you stumble across things not working.
I would also apreciate feedback on what you think of the weapon stats.
Not all sprites in this mod are made by me. The scoped hunting rifle bigob, the PPsH floorob and the pump action slugs I stole from piratez.
You may use all the sprites that I made in any way you whish and don't need to ask me for permission.
-- DISCLAIMER --
This is a work in progress and not yet finished.
What this does:
Changes sprites and stats for a few weapons that are relevant at the early game. Mostly stuff you get before promotion 2.
Also adds a weapon delivery event that is unlocked when you get the military envoy. The event stops when you reach promotion 2.
The .rul file is heavily commented, I try to explain my decisions.
I did not compleately test this as I have spent too much time modding and not enough playing. Please report if you stumble across things not working.
I would also apreciate feedback on what you think of the weapon stats.
Not all sprites in this mod are made by me. The scoped hunting rifle bigob, the PPsH floorob and the pump action slugs I stole from piratez.
You may use all the sprites that I made in any way you whish and don't need to ask me for permission.
5
The X-Com Files / Re: Real weapons overhaul discussion
« on: May 01, 2021, 11:57:07 pm »
Alright, now it will get complicated. This is where I discuss my spreadsheet.
Here the TL;DR:
You might know that a 100% accuracy shot can still miss and you need about ~120% for a guaranteed hit. Something similarly funky is going on for low accuracies. At distance 16 tiles, a shot with stated 1% accuracy has an actual accuracy of a little over 10% (I have tested that).
-- BEWARE OF MATH !---
So I tried to build a damage model that is as accurate as possible. This consists of two parts. Part 1 is the actual damage done, part two is 'do you hit or not'?
For the 0 - 200% damage roll, the average damage is:
{[(damage * resistance * 2) - armor * armorpierce]^2 } / (damage * 4)
Now calculating the hit chance... boy this gets complicated.
There is already a good amount of info out there: https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Accuracy_formula and https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Firing_Accuracy_Testing
Sadly, the page on firing accuracy testing does not actually state the formula that was used, it just gives the graph. So I tried to reverse engineer it from the information given. I arrived at this formula:
actual-hit-chance (dist) = 0,86 * acc + ( 1 - 0,86 * acc) * 0,462 / (dist * sin(deg))
dist = distance
acc = accuracy of the shot as stated by the game
deg is the angle of the firing cone for a missed shot as discussed in https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Accuracy_formula at the bottom. This value deg is also dependent on acc.
Using this formula I could get a reasonable fit of the graph.
Then I did my own testing to verify the formula. Unfortunately, I got different results. This could be because I used a different target. The example discussed here https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Firing_Accuracy_Testing uses a Muton as a target. I used an Agent in a suit as the target. They might have different size.
Anyway, my own results were as follows:
Distance 14, game accuracy 21, 180 shots. 61 hits = 34%
Distance 14, game accuracy 36, 180 shots. 87 hits = 48%
Distance 14, game accuracy 49, 120 shots. 67 hits = 56%
Here is where my scientific rigor is lacking. When doing statistics, you need a much bigger sample size to get consistent results. About 2000 or more is needed for the values to be reliable. Sooo... yeah, there is definately some error present. But I got tired of counting hits and misses at some point.
So to fit these results, I needed to modify the formula to:
actual-hit-chance (dist) = 0,8666 * acc + ( 1 - 0,8666 * acc) * 0,75 / (dist * sin(deg))
with deg(acc) = (20 - acc * 19) * Pi/180
I get a reasonable fit for my testing values with this formula. I played around with this formula for a bit and found that it has weaknesses. It can't do really close distances, and really low accuracy also seems to be off. So I would limit it's validity to distances of 8 to 20, accuracy should be 10% or more. I have also not added limits for accuracy over 100 yet.
So using this formula, I built a spreadsheet. You can enter the agent accuracy, the target armor, it's resistance and the distance of the shot. The spreadsheet takes into account dropoff and ranges of auto/snap/aimed shot. The output is then a single number that I would call 'damage output' of a gun. A higher number is better.
For an aimed shot however, this number is not a good indicator. Most rifles can do just one aimed shot per round, and it doesn't matter too much wheather it takes 60% or 70% Tu. What matters more is damage per round (number-of-shots-per-round * acc * damage). I've added that as a fourth column. At distances ~20 the stated accuracy should be close enough to actual accuracy that I don't need to use the complicated formula.
The spreadsheet has two pages. First page is the current state of the mod. Second page is my attempt at changing the stats for a better balance. Your opinion of what is a good balance will probably be different. This is still work in progress.
Here the TL;DR:
You might know that a 100% accuracy shot can still miss and you need about ~120% for a guaranteed hit. Something similarly funky is going on for low accuracies. At distance 16 tiles, a shot with stated 1% accuracy has an actual accuracy of a little over 10% (I have tested that).
-- BEWARE OF MATH !---
So I tried to build a damage model that is as accurate as possible. This consists of two parts. Part 1 is the actual damage done, part two is 'do you hit or not'?
For the 0 - 200% damage roll, the average damage is:
{[(damage * resistance * 2) - armor * armorpierce]^2 } / (damage * 4)
Now calculating the hit chance... boy this gets complicated.
There is already a good amount of info out there: https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Accuracy_formula and https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Firing_Accuracy_Testing
Sadly, the page on firing accuracy testing does not actually state the formula that was used, it just gives the graph. So I tried to reverse engineer it from the information given. I arrived at this formula:
actual-hit-chance (dist) = 0,86 * acc + ( 1 - 0,86 * acc) * 0,462 / (dist * sin(deg))
dist = distance
acc = accuracy of the shot as stated by the game
deg is the angle of the firing cone for a missed shot as discussed in https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Accuracy_formula at the bottom. This value deg is also dependent on acc.
Using this formula I could get a reasonable fit of the graph.
Then I did my own testing to verify the formula. Unfortunately, I got different results. This could be because I used a different target. The example discussed here https://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Firing_Accuracy_Testing uses a Muton as a target. I used an Agent in a suit as the target. They might have different size.
Anyway, my own results were as follows:
Distance 14, game accuracy 21, 180 shots. 61 hits = 34%
Distance 14, game accuracy 36, 180 shots. 87 hits = 48%
Distance 14, game accuracy 49, 120 shots. 67 hits = 56%
Here is where my scientific rigor is lacking. When doing statistics, you need a much bigger sample size to get consistent results. About 2000 or more is needed for the values to be reliable. Sooo... yeah, there is definately some error present. But I got tired of counting hits and misses at some point.
So to fit these results, I needed to modify the formula to:
actual-hit-chance (dist) = 0,8666 * acc + ( 1 - 0,8666 * acc) * 0,75 / (dist * sin(deg))
with deg(acc) = (20 - acc * 19) * Pi/180
I get a reasonable fit for my testing values with this formula. I played around with this formula for a bit and found that it has weaknesses. It can't do really close distances, and really low accuracy also seems to be off. So I would limit it's validity to distances of 8 to 20, accuracy should be 10% or more. I have also not added limits for accuracy over 100 yet.
So using this formula, I built a spreadsheet. You can enter the agent accuracy, the target armor, it's resistance and the distance of the shot. The spreadsheet takes into account dropoff and ranges of auto/snap/aimed shot. The output is then a single number that I would call 'damage output' of a gun. A higher number is better.
For an aimed shot however, this number is not a good indicator. Most rifles can do just one aimed shot per round, and it doesn't matter too much wheather it takes 60% or 70% Tu. What matters more is damage per round (number-of-shots-per-round * acc * damage). I've added that as a fourth column. At distances ~20 the stated accuracy should be close enough to actual accuracy that I don't need to use the complicated formula.
The spreadsheet has two pages. First page is the current state of the mod. Second page is my attempt at changing the stats for a better balance. Your opinion of what is a good balance will probably be different. This is still work in progress.
6
The X-Com Files / Re: Real weapons overhaul discussion
« on: May 01, 2021, 11:17:53 pm »
Another thing I have ready is the gun delivery event.
The idea is, you have a chance to get the more rare guns at a point where they are still useful to you.
There is also a second part to this event that is not ready yet. I want to introduce armor piercing bullets for these guns. So you would get armor piercing ammo instead of the regular ammo from the event. 5.56/5.45 would have 0.7 armor piercing, 7.62 would have 0.85 armor piercing. To buy them you would need promotion 2, so these events are the only way to get that ammo before promotion 2.
What's not ready yet are the sprites. But should be finished soon.
Why armor piercing ammo?
The reason why special forces use an M4A1 and police rather use the mp5 is body armor. So supposedly 5.56 is a lot better vs body armor. Again, I want the game to resemble real life more closely and make 5.56 ammo an option vs armored enemies.
Code: [Select]
extraStrings:
- type: en-US
strings:
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_DESCRIPTION: "Greetings, Comm'der! Your Military Envoy here. About them guns you've been asking me for...{NEWLINE}The council does not trust you enough to give you access to the military hardware dealers. However, I did manage to get us a small shipment of military assault rifles and ammo. Don't get excited, this is just them politicians covering their asses. In case this whole cult business is bigger than expected, they don't want the records to say they ignored my requests. It's not much, but at least we don't have to pay for it."
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_NATO: "Weapon Delivery"
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_WARZAW1: "Weapon Delivery"
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_WARZAW2: "Weapon Delivery"
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_NATO_LOTS: "Weapon Delivery"
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_WARZAW1_LOTS: "Weapon Delivery"
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_WARZAW2_LOTS: "Weapon Delivery"
eventScripts:
- type: STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_SCRIPT
eventWeights:
0:
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_NATO: 50
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_WARZAW1: 25
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_WARZAW2: 25
firstMonth: 0
executionOdds: 100
researchTriggers:
STR_MILITARY_ENVOY_CONTACT: true
STR_MILESTONE_2_SUMMARY: false
minDifficulty: 2
- type: STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_SCRIPT_EXTRA
eventWeights:
0:
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_NATO: 50
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_WARZAW1: 25
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_WARZAW2: 25
firstMonth: 0
executionOdds: 33
researchTriggers:
STR_MILITARY_ENVOY_CONTACT: true
STR_MILESTONE_2_SUMMARY: false
minDifficulty: 2
- type: STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_SCRIPT_LOTS
eventWeights:
0:
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_NATO_LOTS: 50
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_WARZAW1_LOTS: 25
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_WARZAW2_LOTS: 25
firstMonth: 0
executionOdds: 100
researchTriggers:
STR_MILITARY_ENVOY_CONTACT: true
STR_MILESTONE_2_SUMMARY: false
maxDifficulty: 1
- type: STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_SCRIPT_LOTS_EXTRA
eventWeights:
0:
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_NATO_LOTS: 50
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_WARZAW1_LOTS: 25
STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_WARZAW2_LOTS: 25
firstMonth: 0
executionOdds: 33
researchTriggers:
STR_MILITARY_ENVOY_CONTACT: true
STR_MILESTONE_2_SUMMARY: false
maxDifficulty: 1
events:
- name: STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_NATO
description: STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_DESCRIPTION
background: BACK13.SCR
randomItemList: [STR_RIFLE_M16, STR_RIFLE_L85, STR_FAMAS]
weightedItemList:
STR_RIFLE_M16: 2
STR_FAMAS: 2
STR_RIFLE_L85: 2
STR_COLT_COMMANDO: 1
STR_STEYR_AUG: 1
STR_G36: 1
everyMultiItemList:
STR_RIFLE_M16_CLIP: 10
timer: 20
timerRandom: 43500
- name: STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_WARZAW1
description: STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_DESCRIPTION
background: BACK13.SCR
randomItemList: [STR_AK47, STR_AKM]
weightedItemList:
STR_AK47: 3
STR_AKM: 3
STR_GROZA: 2
everyMultiItemList:
STR_WP_7_62_CLIP: 10
timer: 20
timerRandom: 43500
- name: STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_WARZAW2
description: STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_DESCRIPTION
background: BACK13.SCR
everyItemList: [STR_AKSU74]
randomItemList: [STR_AK47, STR_AKM]
everyMultiItemList:
STR_WP_7_62_CLIP: 5
STR_WP_5_45_CLIP: 5
timer: 20
timerRandom: 43500
- name: STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_NATO_LOTS
description: STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_DESCRIPTION
background: BACK13.SCR
randomItemList: [STR_RIFLE_M16, STR_RIFLE_L85, STR_FAMAS]
randomItemList: [STR_RIFLE_M16, STR_RIFLE_L85, STR_FAMAS]
weightedItemList:
STR_RIFLE_M16: 2
STR_FAMAS: 2
STR_RIFLE_L85: 2
STR_COLT_COMMANDO: 1
STR_STEYR_AUG: 1
STR_G36: 1
weightedItemList:
STR_RIFLE_M16: 2
STR_FAMAS: 2
STR_RIFLE_L85: 2
STR_COLT_COMMANDO: 1
STR_STEYR_AUG: 1
STR_G36: 1
everyMultiItemList:
STR_RIFLE_M16_CLIP: 40
timer: 20
timerRandom: 43500
- name: STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_WARZAW1_LOTS
description: STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_DESCRIPTION
background: BACK13.SCR
randomItemList: [STR_AK47, STR_AKM]
randomItemList: [STR_AK47, STR_AKM]
weightedItemList:
STR_AK47: 3
STR_AKM: 3
STR_GROZA: 2
weightedItemList:
STR_AK47: 3
STR_AKM: 3
STR_GROZA: 2
everyMultiItemList:
STR_WP_7_62_CLIP: 40
timer: 20
timerRandom: 43500
- name: STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_WARZAW2_LOTS
description: STR_WEAPON_DELIVERY_DESCRIPTION
background: BACK13.SCR
everyItemList: [STR_AKSU74]
everyItemList: [STR_AKSU74]
randomItemList: [STR_AK47, STR_AKM]
randomItemList: [STR_AK47, STR_AKM]
everyMultiItemList:
STR_WP_7_62_CLIP: 20
STR_WP_5_45_CLIP: 20
timer: 20
timerRandom: 43500
The idea is, you have a chance to get the more rare guns at a point where they are still useful to you.
There is also a second part to this event that is not ready yet. I want to introduce armor piercing bullets for these guns. So you would get armor piercing ammo instead of the regular ammo from the event. 5.56/5.45 would have 0.7 armor piercing, 7.62 would have 0.85 armor piercing. To buy them you would need promotion 2, so these events are the only way to get that ammo before promotion 2.
What's not ready yet are the sprites. But should be finished soon.
Why armor piercing ammo?
The reason why special forces use an M4A1 and police rather use the mp5 is body armor. So supposedly 5.56 is a lot better vs body armor. Again, I want the game to resemble real life more closely and make 5.56 ammo an option vs armored enemies.
7
The X-Com Files / Re: Real weapons overhaul discussion
« on: May 01, 2021, 11:01:07 pm »X-Com prices have little in common with real market prices anyway. You'd need to adjust all prices in the game, and I doubt it would even work well.The thing is, when I googled the prices some X-Files prices were already remarkably close to what I found. For example the AUG is 2200$ and the m16 is 3000$. These are really close to current real world prices. Of course, these are civilian prices. No idea what government organizations pay.
Sooo... the results this approach gives are a lot better than you would think.
Quote
Thanks, but to be honest, I'd need the entire 5.56 family together. Without it, I can't even say much. do you have something like this?Of course I have. Neatly sorted in a spreadsheet. This will take some explaining though, I will add that in the next post.
Here is the 5.56 family. Please keep in mind this is work in progress, I have not playtested this enough.
Code: [Select]
- type: STR_RIFLE_M16
accuracyAuto: 55 #45
accuracySnap: 80 #75
accuracyAimed: 120 #115
tuAuto: 34 #36
tuSnap: 23 #25
tuAimed: 55
snapRange: 18 #16
autoRange: 14 #11
- type: STR_RIFLE_L85
accuracyAuto: 55 #50
accuracySnap: 75
accuracyAimed: 110 #100
tuAuto: 31 #35
tuSnap: 21 #22
tuAimed: 51 #55
tuLoad: 20
autoRange: 12 #11
snapRange: 19 #16
- type: STR_FAMAS
accuracyAuto: 50 #40
accuracySnap: 70
accuracyAimed: 105
tuAuto: 28 #35
tuSnap: 19 #20
tuAimed: 51 #55
tuLoad: 20
autoRange: 12 #11
snapRange: 17 #16
- type: STR_COLT_COMMANDO
accuracyAuto: 45 #50
accuracySnap: 65 #70
accuracyAimed: 95 #90
tuAuto: 31 #33
tuSnap: 24
tuAimed: 48 #46
autoRange: 11
snapRange: 13 #15
aimRange: 30 #25
confSnap:
shots: 2 #1
autoShots: 4 #3
- type: STR_STEYR_AUG
accuracyAuto: 60 #40
accuracySnap: 80 #75
accuracyAimed: 115 #105
tuAuto: 31 #35
tuSnap: 21 #24
tuAimed: 51 #60
snapRange: 20
autoRange: 13 #11
- type: STR_G36
accuracyAuto: 60 #45
accuracySnap: 85 #75
accuracyAimed: 125 #115
tuAuto: 35
tuSnap: 23 #25
tuAimed: 55 #60
snapRange: 22 #20
autoRange: 15 #11
The guidelines I used were these:
- If it has a scope, it gets more snap range. L85, AUG and G36 have scopes.
- Bullpup means faster to aim, but less accurate at range.
- There are two tiers. M16, Famas and L85 are lower tier. M4A1, AUG and G36 are the higher tier.
The reason behind the two tiers is that the higher tier guns are harder to get. I have only looked this up in the game files, so I might be wrong. G36 is only available from the cult dealers and can not be found as a drop (you could buy it at promotion 2, but since it doesn't drop you can't research it and thus don't get it). AUG needs promotion 2 to buy. M4A1 is used mostly by high ranking Exalt.
The G36 beeing the most accurate is based on that it has probably the best optics and is the newest design (introduced 1997). The AUG is a direct copy of the L85 with +5% acc on everything and +1 auto and snap range. This is mostly based on that it needs promotion 2 to buy.
8
The X-Com Files / Re: Real weapons overhaul discussion
« on: May 01, 2021, 07:03:45 pm »
I changed the skorpion price too to fit in (850$). For the prices, I actually tried to google them. This is what I came up with. Seems reasonable to me, considering the glock price is 800.
The stats overhaul I am working on does consider the prices of all guns relative to each other. I'm just a bit hesitant to post all the stats now because, you know, different opinions. Also, I am not done yet. With the latest addition of difficulty based sell prices, I have to check all the prices that none have a higher sell price than 75% of buy price. That 75% is what I chose as the limit, so on beginner that is 93% sell price. Beretta clip sell price needs to go down for example.
Why the aimed shot:
I want to prevent a loadout where you carry an Uzi and a pistol, that seems kinda gamey to me. So I want to make the Uzi good enough at range that you would not feel the need to also carry a pistol. It is worse than a pistol at range still.
Also, the AI does not have that option. They only get one gun. So this helps the AI more than it helps the player. Consistently I gave a (crappy) aimed shot to all smgs. Piratez has that as well, so it's not too far out there.
But I welcome the feedback. The optimal case is that you like my stats overhaul and will incorperate it in the mod. More feedback from you means more likely you will approve.
So here are some more stats, m16 and colt commando. For those I am somewhat sure I got the stats right.
For the m16, I started by using the stats from Piratez (like you recently did with the blackops rifle). Then I increased the power of the autoshot so it has a little more damage output than a colt45 at range ~15 and up. (Again, not wanting you to feel whipping out a pistol for medium range combat is better).
For the Colt Commando, I felt that the 2-shot snap is really needed. So you have more damage output with reaction fire. But the snap should not be better at range than an m16. With these stats, the m16 snap is better at ranges ~25 and up (depending on agent accuracy).
The colt commando has pretty strong stats, but it is still below blackops weapons. I intend it to be one of the strongest promotion I weapons. Considering how popular it is with real life special forces, that seems fitting.
The stats overhaul I am working on does consider the prices of all guns relative to each other. I'm just a bit hesitant to post all the stats now because, you know, different opinions. Also, I am not done yet. With the latest addition of difficulty based sell prices, I have to check all the prices that none have a higher sell price than 75% of buy price. That 75% is what I chose as the limit, so on beginner that is 93% sell price. Beretta clip sell price needs to go down for example.
Why the aimed shot:
I want to prevent a loadout where you carry an Uzi and a pistol, that seems kinda gamey to me. So I want to make the Uzi good enough at range that you would not feel the need to also carry a pistol. It is worse than a pistol at range still.
Also, the AI does not have that option. They only get one gun. So this helps the AI more than it helps the player. Consistently I gave a (crappy) aimed shot to all smgs. Piratez has that as well, so it's not too far out there.
But I welcome the feedback. The optimal case is that you like my stats overhaul and will incorperate it in the mod. More feedback from you means more likely you will approve.
So here are some more stats, m16 and colt commando. For those I am somewhat sure I got the stats right.
Code: [Select]
- type: STR_RIFLE_M16
accuracyAuto: 55 #45
accuracySnap: 80 #75
accuracyAimed: 120 #115
tuAuto: 34 #36
tuSnap: 23 #25
tuAimed: 55
snapRange: 18 #16
autoRange: 14 #11
- type: STR_COLT_COMMANDO
handSprite: 2096 #Same as m16.
accuracyAuto: 45 #50
accuracySnap: 65 #70
accuracyAimed: 95 #90
tuAuto: 31 #33
tuSnap: 24
tuAimed: 48 #46
autoRange: 11
snapRange: 13 #15
aimRange: 30 #25
confSnap:
shots: 2 #1
autoShots: 4 #3
extraStrings:
- type: en-US
strings:
STR_COLT_COMMANDO: "M4A1"
STR_COLT_COMMANDO_UFOPEDIA: "The number one choice of all U.S. special operation units. Essentially a more compact M16, the M4A1 is better suited for close range combat than a full size assault rifle. This reduces long range performance, but the rifle is still accurate enough that the U.S. Armed Forces consider making it the standard infantary rifle.{NEWLINE}Purchasing this weapon requires Contact: Cult Arms Dealers and EXALT Operations or Promotion II."
For the m16, I started by using the stats from Piratez (like you recently did with the blackops rifle). Then I increased the power of the autoshot so it has a little more damage output than a colt45 at range ~15 and up. (Again, not wanting you to feel whipping out a pistol for medium range combat is better).
For the Colt Commando, I felt that the 2-shot snap is really needed. So you have more damage output with reaction fire. But the snap should not be better at range than an m16. With these stats, the m16 snap is better at ranges ~25 and up (depending on agent accuracy).
The colt commando has pretty strong stats, but it is still below blackops weapons. I intend it to be one of the strongest promotion I weapons. Considering how popular it is with real life special forces, that seems fitting.
9
The X-Com Files / Re: Real weapons overhaul discussion
« on: May 01, 2021, 05:57:24 pm »
Tha mac10 has a better floorob sprite already in the mod that is not used.
The minebea I changed to a 2x2 gun. In case you are interested, these are the stats I am using for it:
(changed value #original value)
The Uzi stats are changed similarly:
Autoshot values are based on their real life fire rate. Micro Uzi does 1200 rounds/min, Minebea pm-9 does 1100 rounds/min. One XCOM round is considered 1 second long. Most other guns follow this convention.
The minebea got this special treatment from me, because I always felt it should be a kinda good gun. I mean, the Kiryu-kai used it!
The minebea I changed to a 2x2 gun. In case you are interested, these are the stats I am using for it:
(changed value #original value)
Code: [Select]
- type: STR_MINEBEA_UZI
costBuy: 1200 #600
costSell: 900 #400
accuracySnap: 55
accuracyAuto: 43 #40
accuracyAimed: 65 #60
tuSnap: 26 #30
tuAuto: 32 #40
tuAimed: 22 #45
autoRange: 7 #9
snapRange: 12
aimRange: 20 #25
confSnap:
shots: 3
twoHanded: true #false
oneHandedPenalty: 90
invWidth: 2 #1
invHeight: 2
autoShots: 6
- type: STR_UZI_CLIP
costBuy: 180 #100
costSell: 135 #50
power: 22 #20
extraStrings:
- type: en-US
strings:
STR_MINEBEA_UZI_UFOPEDIA: "This modified micro-Uzi is equipped with a foregrip and a flash suppressor. Used by the Japanese Defense Force, it was also employed by the Kiryu-kai as their basic close quarters combat weapon. Intended for two-handed use, one-handed use is slighly less accurate.{NEWLINE}>Concealable"
The Uzi stats are changed similarly:
Code: [Select]
- type: STR_UZI
costBuy: 1100 #450
costSell: 800 #300
accuracySnap: 50 #55
accuracyAuto: 40
accuracyAimed: 55 #0
tuSnap: 26 #30
tuAuto: 40
tuAimed: 22 #0
autoRange: 7 #9
snapRange: 12
aimRange: 20 #0
confSnap:
shots: 3
twoHanded: false
autoShots: 8 #6Autoshot values are based on their real life fire rate. Micro Uzi does 1200 rounds/min, Minebea pm-9 does 1100 rounds/min. One XCOM round is considered 1 second long. Most other guns follow this convention.
The minebea got this special treatment from me, because I always felt it should be a kinda good gun. I mean, the Kiryu-kai used it!
11
The X-Com Files / Real weapons overhaul discussion
« on: May 01, 2021, 05:46:51 pm »
Heya!
So I am working on a weapon overhaul of the early game weapons. Those that have real life counterparts. While changing stats is most often controversial, better sprites are always welcome. So here are my sprites:
So I am working on a weapon overhaul of the early game weapons. Those that have real life counterparts. While changing stats is most often controversial, better sprites are always welcome. So here are my sprites:
12
The X-Com Files / Re: Some Basic Questions?
« on: April 25, 2021, 07:05:48 pm »
In Vanilla, all axplosives are concussive damage. For example HE ammo and blaster bombs.
There is also incendiary ammo, which is area of effect but not concussive.
Modding has allowed to give any weapon any damage type, so there are no general rules anymore for a modded game.
Explosions are still mostly concussive. Concussive is also used for blunt melee weapons. The iron pipe for example deals concussive damage.
A knive does different injuries than an iron pipe. So these items have different damage types to show that difference.
There is also incendiary ammo, which is area of effect but not concussive.
Modding has allowed to give any weapon any damage type, so there are no general rules anymore for a modded game.
Explosions are still mostly concussive. Concussive is also used for blunt melee weapons. The iron pipe for example deals concussive damage.
A knive does different injuries than an iron pipe. So these items have different damage types to show that difference.
13
The X-Com Files / Re: 1.8 Feedback
« on: April 18, 2021, 01:50:13 am »
Since you asked for an idea:
Extend the current formula to include strength in the following way.
Strength based multiplier: strMod = 1 + 0,2*((your str / opponent str) - 1)
So your cqc value is [current cqc formula]*strMod. Done for both attacker and defender.
Example calculation:
Lets say agent has str 50 and cqc value 50, while Sectoid has str 20 and cqc value 100.
With strMod this changes to:
Agent 50*1.3 = 65
Sectoid 100*0.88 = 88
Tune the strMod formula if you want more or less of an effect.
This seems to satisfy the requirements.
- You need a somewhat good cqc score to benefit from this. 0 will stay 0.
- Good cqc score is not reduced to nothing.
- Effects are only seen when there is a large difference in strength.
This is probably not the final formula, but good enough of a starting point.
Extend the current formula to include strength in the following way.
Strength based multiplier: strMod = 1 + 0,2*((your str / opponent str) - 1)
So your cqc value is [current cqc formula]*strMod. Done for both attacker and defender.
Example calculation:
Lets say agent has str 50 and cqc value 50, while Sectoid has str 20 and cqc value 100.
With strMod this changes to:
Agent 50*1.3 = 65
Sectoid 100*0.88 = 88
Tune the strMod formula if you want more or less of an effect.
This seems to satisfy the requirements.
- You need a somewhat good cqc score to benefit from this. 0 will stay 0.
- Good cqc score is not reduced to nothing.
- Effects are only seen when there is a large difference in strength.
This is probably not the final formula, but good enough of a starting point.
14
The X-Com Files / Re: The X-Com Files - 1.7: Market Corrections
« on: December 04, 2020, 08:08:47 pm »Fine, but it doesn't breing us any closer to "how". Environmental conditions are set by deployment, not race or any other such parameter. So I can't see how I can improve this part.
I got an idea that maybe leads to something useful:
- Use a script hook to check which type of enemy is spotted.
- If the enemy is not researched yet, assume it is an unknown enemy. Now apply appropriate stress level. This solution requires that scripts can check for a research topic. I am unsure if that is supported right now, but if not maybe not too much of a hassle to add.
- I think it is possible to start the stress effect script on all soldiers off just one spotting an enemy.
- A script would also allow you to add a round counter that then increases or decreases stress levels if desired. For example, seeing no dangerous enemy for like 10 rounds could reduce stress a little if the scenario is appropriate.
Another use for scripts checking a research topic could be extra damage for known enemies (or damage penalty for having no research). You can even apply it only to certain weapons, short distances or facing.
15
OXCE Suggestions Rejected / [Rejected] Custom field of vision (i.e. different than 90 degrees)
« on: October 13, 2020, 11:14:09 pm »
Rejection reason: this is beyond/outside the scope of OXCE
I've started playing TWoTS, and the early missions have the polyph enemies. It's an immobile coral that spits acid at you. You can sneak up on them when they look in the other direction. This is a bit silly, since a polyph doesn't really have a "facing". If possible, I would like to give them 360° vision, so they can reaction fire on me even when I walk up "from behind".
I think an option like that might also be interesting to add to other types of enemies. Robotic ones that would have sensors all around or some freak alien with multiple eyes or other senses. Since the AI is not particularly good at choosing a facing (like turning it's back to the only door in the room), this would help soften the AI's shortcomings and enable harder enemies.
For playability reasons, allowed values should probably be only multiples of 90°. So 90, 180, 270 and 360. Makes it easier to judge what an enemy can see and what not.
If this is too complicated, only having a choice between 90° and 360° would still be valuable. For 360° vision, simply not checking the facing should be doable. Let's call 360 vision "omniVision".
If what I suggest is possible with scripting, I'll try to do it myself.
I've started playing TWoTS, and the early missions have the polyph enemies. It's an immobile coral that spits acid at you. You can sneak up on them when they look in the other direction. This is a bit silly, since a polyph doesn't really have a "facing". If possible, I would like to give them 360° vision, so they can reaction fire on me even when I walk up "from behind".
I think an option like that might also be interesting to add to other types of enemies. Robotic ones that would have sensors all around or some freak alien with multiple eyes or other senses. Since the AI is not particularly good at choosing a facing (like turning it's back to the only door in the room), this would help soften the AI's shortcomings and enable harder enemies.
Code: [Select]
- type: POLYPH_ARMOR
fieldOfVision: 360 #default 90For playability reasons, allowed values should probably be only multiples of 90°. So 90, 180, 270 and 360. Makes it easier to judge what an enemy can see and what not.
If this is too complicated, only having a choice between 90° and 360° would still be valuable. For 360° vision, simply not checking the facing should be doable. Let's call 360 vision "omniVision".
Code: [Select]
- type: POLYPH_ARMOR
omniVision: true #default falseIf what I suggest is possible with scripting, I'll try to do it myself.