Make Dual Wielding Useful

[yrizoud]

> Low strength requirement
Your dual beretta soldier will be able to wear more utilities like grenades, smokes, sensor grenades, medikits, stun rods, motion sensors... But with two hands full, he will be unable to quickly use any of them.
> low TU cost for individual weapon fire if needed,
You already get this by equipping a pistol in one hand and a two-handed weapon in the other; or keeping one hand free and a pistol in belt (2TU to draw)
> double the ammo capacity between reloads,
Well no : If you compare akimbo shots with the single pistol, you reload after as many Snap(x2). If you compare akimbo shots with rifles/cannons, you reload even more often, because rifle clips are larger.

edit: Anyway, I find it looks silly if soldiers that have access to fighter jets, tanks and rocket launchers choose to fight instead with ... twin colt 45s.

[Solarius Scorch]

I think it's mostly a matter of preference. I agree this is not UFO: Aftershock, but there are situations where dual-wielding is tactically sound (and allowed by the graphic engine), so why forbid it just to prove something? I would, for instance, give two pistols to a rocket launcher operator, because they can't carry a backup rifle (no place in the backpack).
If you don't want akimbo to be too attractive an option (I don't), simply give it appropriate penalties. That's what I think.

[Sean Mirrsen]

> Low strength requirement
Your dual beretta soldier will be able to wear more utilities like grenades, smokes, sensor grenades, medikits, stun rods, motion sensors... But with two hands full, he will be unable to quickly use any of them.

It's easy to holster (or drop) one if a grenade is needed, and it's a tradeoff for the extra firepower you get.

> low TU cost for individual weapon fire if needed,
You already get this by equipping a pistol in one hand and a two-handed weapon in the other; or keeping one hand free and a pistol in belt (2TU to draw)

4 to draw, actually, at least by original X-Com rules. And 8 to put back, otherwise you lose accuracy on the main weapon next turn.

> double the ammo capacity between reloads,
Well no : If you compare akimbo shots with the single pistol, you reload after as many Snap(x2). If you compare akimbo shots with rifles/cannons, you reload even more often, because rifle clips are larger.

But for single pistol shots, you have twice as much ammo. And considering that the Pistol isn't that far behind the Rifle for damage, you could actually deal as much as 160% the damage of a Rifle shot with every 2xSnap, and you only carry 40% less ammo for that.

Let's run some numbers here. Let's say a 2xSnap with Pistols costs 25%TU, up from 18%, and accuracy degrades to 45% from 60%, but you fire two 26 AP shots. A Rifle gives you a single 60%, 30 AP shot, for the same 25% TU. Or it gives you three 35%, 30 AP shots, for 35% TU. The dual Pistols would actually be at a rather decent advantage, damage-per-turn-wise, although you pay for it with some logistical problems, as outlined above.

edit: Anyway, I find it looks silly if soldiers that have access to fighter jets, tanks and rocket launchers choose to fight instead with ... twin colt 45s.

.45 ACP is a pretty popular, and very powerful round, I should say. If any soldier were to be capable enough to use two .45 handguns simultaneously (in game terns, has high TU and Accuracy), I wouldn't be surprised if he would do so. And this does extend past mere pistols - laser pistols and plasma pistols come later, as well as any modded single-handed SMGs with alloy rounds.

[Qpoter]

Some have suggested that the TU cost for akimbo fire should be higher, but this doesn't make any sense to me. Why would firing birth guns at the same time take any longer?

[Solarius Scorch]

Some have suggested that the TU cost for akimbo fire should be higher, but this doesn't make any sense to me. Why would firing birth guns at the same time take any longer?

Try it with pencils
(Just don't fall)

[Sean Mirrsen]

Some have suggested that the TU cost for akimbo fire should be higher, but this doesn't make any sense to me. Why would firing birth guns at the same time take any longer?

If you're not literally just spraying bullets everywhere, and are not perfectly ambidextrous (as few people are), you will take some extra time to get both weapons pointed in the same general direction. And you'll still get an overall reduction in accuracy for the double shots, because that requires perfectly converging the two weapons on the target - a task made difficult for people that have a "primary" hand, as the other hand will not follow the movement correctly.

[KiethSomataw99]

I believe that there should be functions for firing while dual-wielding. Firing duel wielding weapons uses slightly more time units than single wielding but fires double, with less accuracy for each mode on non dominant hand:

Twin Shot: double snap shot
Unload: double auto shot
Double Aim: double aimed shot

Also, I believe each soldier should have a random dominant hand, which determines the accuracy of the item in hand. The three types of dominant hand are:
Right Handed: (accuracy penalty on left hand, more if dual wielding, no dual wield penalty on right hand)
Left Handed: (accuracy penalty on right hand, more if dual wielding, no dual wield penalty on left hand)
Ambidexterous: (no accuracy penalty on either hand, small accuracy penalty on each hand for dual wielding)

[Sean Mirrsen]

They already have dominant hands, I think. So far I think it only determines which hand their weapon gets auto-assigned to.

And "double aimed shot" is about the silliest thing suggested so far. You can't aim down two sets of sights with one set of eyes.

[moriarty]

And "double aimed shot" is about the silliest thing suggested so far. You can't aim down two sets of sights with one set of eyes.

well, technically you only need one eye to aim one weapon, so if you aim at the same target, you could theoretically align each weapon with one eye's sightline... but practically those sightlines are only as far apart as your eyes are (less than that, the further away from your eyes you hold the weapons), so at arm's length the pistols would probably touch.

yeah, double aimed is pretty silly. I keep thinking about a severely squinting soldier double-aiming at two enemies at once...

akimbo shooting only makes sense for two things, I guess:

1) (using auto-fire weapons) over a short-to-medium distance: spraying an area with twice the bullets per time (and hoping for lucky hits) before the enemy can reaction-fire
2) (using anything at all) in close combat: inflicting maximum damage when you just can't miss before the enemy kills you

[mumble]

Sorry for the necro but, I wanted to provide my 2 cents on this.

First, one critical use I would use akimbo for, is allowing multiple target firing with less tu usage compared to one. Imagine 2 smgs fired in opposite directions. You could not only double the fire rate, but target more enemies in a turn this way.

I'm no mathematician but I thought some about possible balance for it.

first, if 2 firearms are in hand, give some sort of option for akimbo combined, or independent.

Combined would be roughly as explained above, firing both at the same target. I wouldn't explicitly lock out 2 handed weapons that can function 2 handed, I'd just give it MISERABLE accuracy, and less efficiency in doing so compared to hand weapons. But I wouldn't really lock out using multiple types of guns together, I'd just round to the largest shot value for both.  Not ideal, but would be easy to implement.

Independent would be a bit janky to use, but would give much more versatility. my idea is you could enable akimbo independent stance in the weapon choices, which works like a toggle, with possibly a minimal 2 tu cost, or possibly none at all, and it would work like the following : first off, you have slightly lowered accuracy, possibly more than what dual fire would be (since you concentrate on 2 guns), and if you fire one, it discounts firing the other by 90% the cost of the first, yet the second is less accurate, with extra penalty for amount you must turn. (shooting behind you would be a crap shot if you used this). After the second hand is fired, it procs back to akimbo ready, allowing you to fire the first gun again, OR, disable akimbo to fire more accurately.  This would enable true akimbo, rather than effectively strapping 2 pistols together. you could, with a good troop, make pistols much more effective. However akimbo cancels if you move, to prevent unrealistic abuse (fire one gun, run 4 tiles, fire again for free?)

I was also thinking bringing reactions into this, I'm not certain of the math, but perhaps besides the slight drop in accuracy, subtract reactions from firing skill, and whatever is left over you perhaps multiply (.5?) and then also subtract from aim. Also, penalty on turning could also be effected by reactions, the same way. This way if you are an amazing shot, BUT, a terrible reactions person, akimbo will be far worse, but a mediocre shot with high reactions with them will at least be more stable over all. Perhaps akimbo could also effect reactions chance slightly so akimbo doesn't trigger reactions twice as much. As a balance issue, akimbo could also WIDEN  the possible cone of fire on said firearms to emulate awkwardness of firing 2 guns at once and trying to aim.

I know independent fire would be a much more complex coding to do, most certainly, but being able to fire them independently would make for a VERY interesting class dynamic....Imagine a magnum with smg combo, in decent hands, shooting a guy at 10 units, and spraying a guy to his side in half the time as normal. It would also allow particularly skilled troops to engage twice as many enemies, which, even with the accuracy issue, I could see double uzis being extremely useful in CQC engagements.

Honestly, I'd go with JUST independent fire, where you could effectively combine them IF YOU WANTED, but I figured I'd mention both. I know its more involved to code, and use, but the versatility added to it is well worth it in my opinion. And even with bad accuracy, this, and spray and pray feature, would give me a reason to try double uzis.

[The_Funktasm]

Necro of a necro here but I think dual wielding already works fine. It's a bit of a poorly working burden on a soldier unless they're using a CQC loadout such as a knife and pistol. There are plenty of weapons that can be iron-sighted while holding another weapon, assuming you aren't trying to use both at once. There is using the forearm in a sloppy form of a Weaver aiming stance...

I always thought dual wielding like in the movies was a flight of fancy and that any "real life" cases of it were probably cases of people picking up another weapon from someone dead/injured and using it until it was empty before discarding it. Like shooting only one at a time and mostly taking advantage of having more ammo without a break spent reloading.
(in xcom terms this is spending less TUs to pick up a gun instead of using more to reload or stow/replace a soldier's weapon with a backup.)

I suppose with laser sights, maybe some low-recoil weapons could work well in a pair, but I kinda doubt this would apply to everything. I would guess that stocked SMGs/carbines that can be tucked under the arm would probably end up the most accurate fired in tandem.

[The Reaver of Darkness]

I think the main reason dual wielding is weak is because there's usually a limited array of one-hand weapons to choose from. I haven't played much X-Piratez yet but I bet there's plenty of reasons to dual wield in that game. The trick is to have a wide variety of one-hand weapons and devices that achieve different objectives. In my mod I just recently buffed the Plasma Pistol as well as made the Psi Amp require line of sight. A good trick then is to run your soldiers around with plasma pistols and psi amps. Another good loadout is a pistol and a knife--assuming the knife is stronger than the pistol when you get close enough to use it. I've also found it can be useful to have several soldiers equipped with motion scanners, and while they usually work okay with two-hand weapons, they do increase the likelihood I bring one-hand weapons.

That's how I dual-wield, I just put two different things in the opposite hands.

[Abyss]

My couple of pennies:

There is a mechanic that allows to autofire between two-three points selected (Ctrl+Shift+Clicks).
How can Macedonian firing be implemented? The only way that comes to my thoughts is an additional check parameter "the second pistol/SMG/rifle is equipped" that allows an additional firemode with the same Clicks on two separated targets.