Don't bring a knife to a gunfight

[Meridian]

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bring_a_knife_to_a_gunfight

Verb
bring a knife to a gunfight
    (idiomatic) To enter into a confrontation or other challenging situation without being adequately equipped or prepared.

I haven't played XCOM:EU 2012 much and haven't followed upcoming XCOM 2 too much either.
But I saw in the trailer you'll be playing guerrilla tactics in XCOM 2 and will use for example a sword (or katana, or whatever it was).

I wonder if anyone knows any more details about mechanics of this new type of attacks?
Are there any details / articles / videos out there already?


I am currently brainstorming how to make my current play-through a bit more challenging (and more importantly easier to accept for my mind without producing too many division by zero errors).
So far I didn't come up with many options, only with one really, a straightforward one:
  - As soon as an enemy unit (with a ranged weapon) spots you, your melee attacks (against that particular enemy unit) will do either flat zero damage or a very small percentage of the damage (at most 25%)
  - Attack from the front is de facto impossible (maybe unless the enemy spotted you when you were already standing next to each other, e.g. when opening doors?)
  - Attacks from the sides work with 100% damage
  - Attacks from the back may get a small bonus, let's say 110%

I'd like to hear more about mechanics, tactics, playability vs reality, and so on... the actual damage (weapon power) can already be adjusted easily.

[ivandogovich]

To clarify:  You think that Melee in XPirateZ as currently implemented is over powered, and would like to nerf it so that it becomes viable only in more "realistic" situations where you can "flank" an opponent. 

Am I right?

I'm wondering, because it seems like you feel that the game on Superhuman difficulty is too easy right now.  O.O

[Meridian]

I wouldn't say it's overpowered in all situations... remember my first terror mission where I basically missed 7 out of 10 times?... which is also totally unrealistic (but at least mentally acceptable as a game mechanic).

I just say that I have a mental block walking straight to the enemy, who should in 99% just shoot and kill me... and if they for whatever reason cannot (and they can run as fast as I can) they should just run and let their friends shoot me... there's no logical way how to make a successful attack this way.

I am also not saying PirateZ is easy (so far it is giving me more than enough challenge, hopefully it stays like that), and I would like to keep the discussion mod-neutral (thus opening a topic in this subforum, not in piratez subforum) if possible. Just ideas how does melee combat best fit into turn-based strategy games.

[Dioxine]

My reply:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNhYJgDdCu4

Yeah, try shooting a skilled melee fighter from a point-blank range, see how well it goes. You might get lucky with a pistol, if you know a thing or 2 about melee yourself, but if you have a rifle, he can easily turn your weapon aside and kill you. Not even mentioning that the enemy can dodge to the side, and rapidly changing your aim by 90 degrees is not that easy. Remember that to shoot someone, you don't only need to pull the trigger. First, you need to align the barrel and target's body in a single line. Easy from far away, harder from close-up.
So IMO it should be the other way around, if anything - shooting from 1 tile away should be really risky, instead of instawin. But this cannot be coded into the current engine (I think), since no matter the penalty, you always hit with a ranged weapon from 1 tile away.

This is for discussion. However what sounds downright silly to me is that you suggest the melee penalty completely disappears once you flank the enemy. This is balooney, since a) they're only depicted as immobile, since its TURN BASED GAME b) it'd defeat the whole purpose of this mechanics as you can easily circumvent it by spending paltry 4 TU more on movement.
Attacking from the back is already hugely advantageous, even if the enemy doesn't have any melee dodge, and if their armor is equally good from the back as from the front. You. Don't. Get. Reaction. Fired.

We must not be captive to game mechanics and remember that a melee strike in XCOM actually represents the whole process of attack, dodge, block etc; quite possibly multiple movements by both combatants; "swirling melee" as they call it in Warhammer.

Also, running. Well, that's another brain bug. You actually run much slower backwards than forwards, so you really cannot run from a charging melee fighter, unless you've seen him from far away (Reaction shots are supposed to cover that - unless someone gets surprised, because he was careless and used all his TUs).

As for missing 7 out of 10 - your melee fighter who was attacking was far less skilled from the target. Really, I would never even attempted a melee attack at less than 70-80% chance to hit unless desperate/in no risk. Your problem was using sub-par fighters and NOT GANGING UP. Soldiers working without support tend to die, especially if they push deep forward (as it is normal in melee charge).

What I'd put for discussion is... Is it a bad thing or a good thing that enemies don't react to melee? Not sure about that one, really.

[Meridian]

You have probably not read my post very carefully.

1/ The attack in the video was not melee, it was a short range throw...

2/ I agree you cannot shoot at melee range (and I will maybe address that in the future too), but the point is, that you should not even get to melee range while the enemy sees you.... they should shoot at you (and kill you) already while you're walking to them from afar.

3/ I didn't say penalty will disappear when you go around the enemy... exactly the opposite!!... as soon as the enemy spots you for even a millisecond, your melee against that enemy is totally useless for the rest of the turn.

The rest I will not comment, because I feel you misunderstood what I wanted to say.

[Yankes]

Right now OXCE allow that you can over 100% dodge chance for front. Causing that you can't hit your opponent even if you want.
Second I think that is possible to re enabled reaction for melee (in ruleset, can be per item or armor). This will allow real sword fight, enemy could react to your attack in two ways: facing you reducing your attack chance and you can face counter-attack.
In my long term plans I would like have it in OXCE.

[Dioxine]

@Meridian

1) The video was just for fun and giggles, just like the picture you posted - a counter-opinion made in joking manner. If you took it 100% seriously, we did really misunderstood each other. If you want a real illustration, just google any special forces CQC training.

2) Yes. But that's supposed to be adressed by the Reactions mechanics. If someone has no TU to react, IMO it means any melee attack against him is past his ability to react in an active manner (ie. a surprise attack). I agree with the strife to make the mechanics better, but not at the price of depreciating its core elements. If you want to start discussion on how Reactions mechanics itself can be improved - sure, let's do that.

3) Sorry, let me explain it better. I wanted to point out that enemies, IMO, aren't totally oblivious to flanking melee attacks, even if they didn't spot you. They just can't react properly.

4) I just wanted to add more context and explain my thoughts better, and respond to your challenges

5) I am still torn about reactions to melee; it's complex. I am quite sure that other actors (than the attacked one) shouldn't react, as it is really difficult for them to draw a bead on the melee fighter, engaged with one of their own. But first, I propose the following: anyone who's been hit, either by melee or ranged fire, should always react by facing the attacker, even if they cannot shoot back for whatever reason. Naturally only after they win reactions face-off, else ambushes with multiple snipers won't work (and they should work).

As for the person who's hit... I think we need to first decide if we're doing something with shooting in melee range or not. If such mechanic is worked out, deciding how melee reactions should look like would be much easier.

Oh and one more thing to make myself more clear: what I think Reactions are. So, in my opinion, since there is no stealth/spot in XCom, Reactions must be a compound stat, which combines reflexes with stealth, distraction and 'combat sense' of a soldier.

[Solarius Scorch]

Regarding reaction to melee, I think it should happen; it just feels wrong to me that I can just waltz towards an enemy and stab them five times at no risk, especially since most enemies in Piratez are dodging.

Sure, it makes the game easier, but I miss the situation where you attack a Chryssalid with a sword and it immediately retaliates with its proboscis.

Besides, there was the concept of "fencing" weapons which drain TUs on hit. It can be used to make things more appropriate.

[Dioxine]

Maybe strike a compromise here, and enable retal against melee, but:
- only by the attacked guy, and if he gets hit OR sees the attacker;
- only for melee weapons and one-handed ranged weapons. If he has a long arm, he cannot retaliate (unless using gun butt/bayonet?), but he still turns to face the attacker.

Fencing weapons weren't that great idea since the TU drain was dependant on damage, which should be enabled for all weapons or no weapons, and based on pain resistance (Bravery). But this is complex and not sure if good at all.

[yrizoud]

If I remember correctly, melee allows reaction against melee and (point-blank) shooting, and firearm allows reaction against shooting, but not melee.
I find it quite balanced. If the shooter is not fast enough to reaction-fire before the melee attacker is in range, it seems fair that the attacker is free from further (shooting) retaliation.
It also encourage you to have your units wield a melee weapon to defend themselves, if they expect to be rushed by melee attackers.

[Dioxine]

If it was that way, it'd be all good (or at least, good enough), however, melee currently allows no reactions, by melee weapons or otherwise. I have no proof but I've attacked Reapers, Lobstermen and Chryssalids numerous times with melee weapons, and they didn't retaliate. Unless I tried to do it from the front, naturally. I am not sure if this works for player units as well, though - it is possible they do react with melee against melee. It is just a very rare occurence in my gaming style (my melee fighters either use all their TUs, or flank a door). I remember that in early versions, just after Warboy added melee to official stats, even enemies w/o melee weapons were retaliating against melee with some sort of kick or whatever (unless I'm imagining things).
Also there is some bug with AI melee weapons, that might or might not be related. If they attack using melee, they will keep attacking until no TUs left (I'm 100% sure it is the case with fixed weapons, 70% sure about non-fixed). This is even true if you're controlling AI unit through debug mode.

[Yankes]

what code say:
a) Reaction to melee is not enabled.
b) AI use all TU for melee and this is not bug but behavior from original.

Both things I consider changing at some point in OXCE.

[yrizoud]

Ahh sorry, in the Meridian Piratez LP, I thought I had seen a gal react with a held sword.

[Meridian]

Ahh sorry, in the Meridian Piratez LP, I thought I had seen a gal react with a held sword.

Yes, there were quite a few reactions with melee weapons... but they reacted to movement... not to melee attacks against them.

[Yankes]

I think about system could handle melee reaction with some depth (compared to simply on/off).

Each weapon will have two properties (functionality like damage bonuses):

Code: [Select]

items:
  - type: STR_SOME_SWORD
    meleeReactionTarget:
      reaction: 1.0
    meleeReactionOthers:
       reaction: 1.3
It will except value from 0.0 to 100.0 representing chance of triggering normal reaction (0 - no chance, 100.0 - always). Each unit will test first if can react based on this value form weapon. If it pass it will follow as normal. If not it will skip it. Target of attack will use separate value from rest of enemies.

Additional each armor will have bonus to its melee reaction:

Code: [Select]

armors:
  - type: STR_ARMOR_TYPE
    meleeReaction:
    # some bonuses
    # ...
    meleeReactionBackPenalty: 0.2
It will be only used when this unit is target by melee attack. It will work similar to dodge chance from behind can be lower (hard to react to backstab).
This bonus will be additive to `meleeReactionTarget` (because bigger value mean more likely to have reaction).

This system have one interesting feature, if you use only `100.0` and `0.0` you can threat is as only on/off system without any random chance.
Or you can try simulate bit more realistic when you can have chance that you can sometimes parry enemy attack and hit him before he can react.