"Realistic accuracy and cover system" option

[jnarical]

What setting should I play on?

It's up to your liking, honestly. RA settings affect both you and the enemy. As far as I know, aliens are aware of cover effects and use cover-modified hit-chance numbers to evaluate their actions. If you want something close to original game, you should use 50% setting, 30% will be (kinda) closer to OXC/E, and 0% will be brutal in terms of sheer number of successfull hits for both sides. Bear in mind, that for 0% it won't include even 10% "hidden" cover efficiency which presented in OXCE - you'll get accuracy number directly converted to hit-chance. And tight shooting spread on top of that, which makes explosive shots far more effective.

More cover efficiency gives (in general) longer fights and increases the role for throwable explosives.

[Stormtrooper]

I started with default 70%, then went for 100%, now I don't want to go back. It's awesome and if not 100% realistic (pun intended) since it's just a game with many simplifications compared to IRL firefights and whatnot, at least it's very immersive, standing in the open is a deathwish but solid cover often requires different approach than bullet spam. And makes aimed shots useful once again for my x-files veterans with 120+ accuracy and stuff.

[jnarical]

I'm gradually closing issues, the next targets are:

• update the description for RA
• check and fix off-center shooting for reaction fire
• add minimal chance-to-hit option for reaction fire, now units just waste TUs and ammo shooting with <10% chance to hit from across the map
• return to idea of adding arcing shots under RA mechanics

UPD:
I've got an idea recently. I could change the original accuracy formula to get tighter and more realistic spread, by implementing gauss distribution to original algorithm. This won't have any common code with current RA implementation. As I see it - it will be clean and short solution, and could be added to base OXC/E as an option, without touching existing code. That was my initial goal when I started to dive into OXC code, but I didn't have needed knowledge back then.

Meridian, is there any chance such PR will be accepted? We're talking about additional (and conditional - under new option) single block of code inside Projectile::applyAccuracy()

[Meridian]

UPD:
I've got an idea recently. I could change the original accuracy formula to get tighter and more realistic spread, by implementing gauss distribution to original algorithm. This won't have any common code with current RA implementation. As I see it - it will be clean and short solution, and could be added to base OXC/E as an option, without touching existing code. That was my initial goal when I started to dive into OXC code, but I didn't have needed knowledge back then.

Meridian, is there any chance such PR will be accepted? We're talking about additional (and conditional - under new option) single block of code inside Projectile::applyAccuracy()

That sounds ok to me.

[jnarical]

That sounds ok to me.

I miss the ability to give likes/reactions here on forum...
To clarify, the goal is to copy current deviation algorithm and tune it from #1 to #2 distribution, preserving chance to hit.