[DONE] [Suggestion] Accuracy reduction for indirect fire

[clownagent]

I think it would be good to have an (optional) accuracy reduction if you try to hit an unseen enemy, for example through smoke or by arcing weapons.

A common exploit is to put your troops into smoke where they are save, move a scouting rookie out and snipe all encountered enemies from the smoke cover.  The AI can of course not use this simple trick which makes some missions very unbalanced.

I think it would be more balanced if the units sitting in smoke and cannot see anything would suffer from an accuracy reduction for targeting units they cannot see by themselves.

[Solarius Scorch]

The simplest solution would be targeting the tile right behind the unit though.

[ohartenstein23]

To implement it directly in the engine would be a little difficult in terms of how to do it without making it possible to get around it as Solarius mentioned. One already-available method for this in OXCE is to write a script to have smoke damage cause an accuracy debuff that lasts for a half-turn.

[robin]

The simplest solution would be targeting the tile right behind the unit though.

i guess this penalty should apply on the tile: you target an unseen tile, you get the penalty whether that tile hosts a unit or not.

[clownagent]

To implement it directly in the engine would be a little difficult in terms of how to do it without making it possible to get around it as Solarius mentioned. One already-available method for this in OXCE is to write a script to have smoke damage cause an accuracy debuff that lasts for a half-turn.

There should also be the penalty if the unit is just behind the smoke. So the penalty should just depend on the line of sight not if it is standing in smoke.

i guess this penalty should apply on the tile: you target an unseen tile, you get the penalty whether that tile hosts a unit or not.

exactly.

[Meridian]

Flat or percentage?
Weapon-specific or global?

How about opposite approach... giving bonus when aiming at a visible unit?
That would eliminate problems mentioned above.

[clownagent]

Flat or percentage?
Weapon-specific or global?

How about opposite approach... giving bonus when aiming at a visible unit?
That would eliminate problems mentioned above.

A weapon specific flat "LOS-modifier" would be most flexible.

If only bonus instead of penalty is implemented, the information shown in the ufopedia would maybe be misleading?
For example you give a weapon 50% accuracy and  a +30% LOS-modifier it would be in most cases a 80% weapon, but the ufopedia would show 50%.

Therefore I would prefer if the "LOS-modifier" could be positive or negative.
 

[Meridian]

It can be negative too.

The difference to original is that it applies when aiming at a visible enemy... instead of when aiming at anything else than a visible enemy.

As for confusing, I agree, in all cases it would be confusing.
Both Ufopedia and Battlescape action menu would show wrong numbers, regardless of solution chosen... unless someone comes with something completely new.

[clownagent]

It can be negative too.

The difference to original is that it applies when aiming at a visible enemy... instead of when aiming at anything else than a visible enemy.

As for confusing, I agree, in all cases it would be confusing.
Both Ufopedia and Battlescape action menu would show wrong numbers, regardless of solution chosen... unless someone comes with something completely new.

Not sure if I understand correctly:
1st suggestion: Always use normal accuracy, except for all tiles/enemies NOT seen by the unit. This means the LOS modifier would probably be not used very often, because for most shots you have a line of sight.
2nd suggestion: Always use normal accuracy, except for all tiles/enemies seen by the unit. This means a LOS modifier would be applied for many shots.

If these are the two suggestions I would prefer the 1st one, because I think the LOS-modifier should not be applied too often to avoid confusion.

As information for the player an icon could be shown above the target cursor if the LOS-modifier is applied. For example a stylized crossed out eye icon.

[BTAxis]

Perhaps such an icon could also be displayed on the targeting reticule graphic when aiming at a tile that is subject to a penalty, to communicate said penalty to the player.

[mumble]

Couldn't there be an aim reduction per squares of smoke shot through??? This would be a pretty simple means, wouldn't it?

Or is this impossible to do?

To be honest, this solution would also make the game dynamic a bit more interesting...

[7Saturn]

On additional thing to consider: Further gain in accuracy for units within LOS would need a rebalancing of existing weapons, because most of the time you are withing LOS, at least when entering UFOs. One would experience an increase of accuracy, where formerly none was existent. I under stand it, that it is not meant to be changed for situations like these, but the opposite, only when there's no LOS.

[robin]

I think the accuracy displayed in the firing menu should be the real one, in normal conditions (target visible). The bonus for visible targets sounds confusing.
About the penalty I was thinking the inverse (or so) of the bonus you get by crouching, so that if you crouch you "even out" and you get the normal standing accuracy. Haven't given it much thought though, maybe it needs to be harsher to be meaningful.
I'm still not convinced; but for countering the "scout and snipe" tactic, I overwhelmingly prefer this solution than riddling the soldiers arsenal with wacky range limits.

p.s. I guess an icon on the target reticle (or something else, dunno) would be needed, since the accuracy in the menu doesn't change and the player needs somehow to know that he is targeting outside the sight range of his dude.

[7Saturn]

That displaying of different accuracies requires the text box with the accuracy knowing, where you are going to point at in advance, or being open during the entire target choice process.

[robin]

just in case this goes further.
quite crude though, i'm not that good at making icons.