Author Topic: UFO Extender accuracy discussion  (Read 4170 times)

Offline Solarius Scorch

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 8665
  • WE MUST DISSENT
    • View Profile
    • Nocturmal Productions modding studio website
UFO Extender accuracy discussion
« on: November 29, 2017, 11:58:32 pm »
I don't use UFOExtender accuracy, so it's just using the default values.  I should probably update it because it seems to be a fairly popular add-on.

Can I ask why not? It's like not using multiple map levels... Why not have an accuracy penalty for longer distances?

I'm asking because it's not a "fairly popular add-on", you are literally the only person I know of who doesn't use UFO Extender Accuracy. It's just so weird, so I suppose there is some reason behind it?

Offline chaosshade

  • Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 175
  • The Harpy
    • View Profile
Re: UFO Extender accuracy discussion
« Reply #1 on: November 30, 2017, 02:09:59 am »
*snip*
I'm asking because it's not a "fairly popular add-on", you are literally the only person I know of who doesn't use UFO Extender Accuracy. It's just so weird, so I suppose there is some reason behind it?

Vanilla feel.  As much as I love modding OXC until it gets unstable, I'm trying to keep as much of the vanilla "feel" as possible.  I am aware that some of the things I do, some of the mods I have, and nearly all the mods I've written, absolutely demolish the laws of vanilla, but we're each playing our own way, right?

Also might explain why I find the game easier on Superhuman than I do on Beginner...

Offline The Reaver of Darkness

  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 1241
    • View Profile
Re: UFO Extender accuracy discussion
« Reply #2 on: November 30, 2017, 06:24:52 am »
I'm asking because it's not a "fairly popular add-on", you are literally the only person I know of who doesn't use UFO Extender Accuracy. It's just so weird, so I suppose there is some reason behind it?
I don't use it and I've said before that I don't like it. It doesn't increase accuracy at shorter ranges, only decreases it at longer ranges. While I do feel accuracy should go down at longer ranges, my (much) larger concern is that it doesn't significantly improve at close range until you're no more than 1 tile away from an enemy, and even then the number of missed shots is ridiculous. Even diagonally adjacent, soldiers with poor accuracy often miss.

If UFO Extender Accuracy would address this problem in some way, I would use it. If not, I don't need it.

Offline Solarius Scorch

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 8665
  • WE MUST DISSENT
    • View Profile
    • Nocturmal Productions modding studio website
Re: UFO Extender accuracy discussion
« Reply #3 on: November 30, 2017, 12:02:05 pm »
Thanks for the feedback! I was hoping to provoke this sort of discussion, because it's something I have actually wanted to discuss. Sorry for using your thread Shade, I will separate it.

Reaver, how would you suggest this should work? Drop accuracy from tile 1 instead of a certain breaking point (normally 9 for auto etc.)? And increase overall accuracy to compensate, of course.

Offline The Reaver of Darkness

  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 1241
    • View Profile
Re: UFO Extender accuracy discussion
« Reply #4 on: November 30, 2017, 12:51:17 pm »
I've thought that if I set all weapons to have about the same accuracy for every shot, and simply alter their range values, I could likely get good field numbers. The problem would be the misleading numbers in the UI. Players will be confused as to why their auto shot has the same accuracy as their aimed shot.


What I would do is have an optimal range, and at that range you get the listed accuracy. You just do OR/TR to get your final accuracy modifier, where OR is optimal range and TR is target range.[/i]
« Last Edit: December 17, 2017, 09:42:22 am by The Reaver of Darkness »

Offline Meridian

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 5257
  • Aaand we're back!
    • View Profile
    • My Wiki
Re: UFO Extender accuracy discussion
« Reply #5 on: December 21, 2017, 12:13:48 pm »
It doesn't increase accuracy at shorter ranges, only decreases it at longer ranges. While I do feel accuracy should go down at longer ranges, my (much) larger concern is that it doesn't significantly improve at close range until you're no more than 1 tile away from an enemy, and even then the number of missed shots is ridiculous. Even diagonally adjacent, soldiers with poor accuracy often miss.

If UFO Extender Accuracy would address this problem in some way, I would use it. If not, I don't need it.

I COMPLETELY agree... accuracy should go up at close range.... and be a guaranteed hit at 1 tile range.
Unfortunately, many people don't share our opinion.

Offline Solarius Scorch

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 8665
  • WE MUST DISSENT
    • View Profile
    • Nocturmal Productions modding studio website
Re: UFO Extender accuracy discussion
« Reply #6 on: December 21, 2017, 12:35:02 pm »
Shooting point blank (from 1 tile away) is a special case. Thinking you can walk up to a combat ready enemy, put your rifle to their head and hit them with 100% chance is beyond silly and I'm sure we all understand it...

But the issue here is with a bit longer distances, like 3 or 7 tiles. I have no strong opinion on this, except that it probably relies on the weapon.

Offline Meridian

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 5257
  • Aaand we're back!
    • View Profile
    • My Wiki
Re: UFO Extender accuracy discussion
« Reply #7 on: December 21, 2017, 02:34:08 pm »
Shooting point blank (from 1 tile away) is a special case. Thinking you can walk up to a combat ready enemy, put your rifle to their head and hit them with 100% chance is beyond silly and I'm sure we all understand it...

No, I don't.
I think it's beyond silly that you cannot do that (unless you have a 3 ton 15-century naval cannon in your hand).
I have listed the reasons many times, I won't repeat myself.

Offline Solarius Scorch

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 8665
  • WE MUST DISSENT
    • View Profile
    • Nocturmal Productions modding studio website
Re: UFO Extender accuracy discussion
« Reply #8 on: December 21, 2017, 02:45:11 pm »
I have no martial training, but I'm still fairly sure I'd have pretty good chance to grab the rifle, deflect the rifle or sidestep it. Like any other person in combat situation.
Would I bet my life on this? Of course not. And if the attacker misses the first time, the second or third would do the job. But still, I am untrained and generally in bad shape.
Can you reiterate your counter-argument, Meridian? Because I honestly don't get your point. Where are you coming from?

Offline Meridian

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 5257
  • Aaand we're back!
    • View Profile
    • My Wiki
Re: UFO Extender accuracy discussion
« Reply #9 on: December 21, 2017, 03:30:08 pm »
I have no martial training, but I'm still fairly sure I'd have pretty good chance to grab the rifle, deflect the rifle or sidestep it. Like any other person in combat situation.
Would I bet my life on this? Of course not. And if the attacker misses the first time, the second or third would do the job. But still, I am untrained and generally in bad shape.
Can you reiterate your counter-argument, Meridian? Because I honestly don't get your point. Where are you coming from?

1. I am 10 meters away from you
2. I have a pistol in my hand
3. I raise my hand and start (roughly) aiming at you
4. I start walking closer to you while constantly aiming at you (and improving the aim and closing the distance at the same time)
... my chances to hit you go up exponentially
5. just before I am at arm's distance away from you (=1 tile), I fire
... because I have never used a gun (and it will probably be still locked or something), my chances of hitting you are 0%... but any trained soldier's chance to hit you is 99.99999999%

Offline Solarius Scorch

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 8665
  • WE MUST DISSENT
    • View Profile
    • Nocturmal Productions modding studio website
Re: UFO Extender accuracy discussion
« Reply #10 on: December 21, 2017, 03:48:48 pm »
Yeah, I understand your point and I agree. However, this is only one of many scenarios on how a unit finds itself in melee combat range - when going around the corner, or falling from a higher level, or because the units are already engaged in close combat, etc. Since the engine is a simplification anyway, I just think CQC is a more versatile approach, and also (as a bonus) more "cinematic".

Offline The Reaver of Darkness

  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 1241
    • View Profile
Re: UFO Extender accuracy discussion
« Reply #11 on: December 21, 2017, 10:51:17 pm »
If you're talking about being close enough for them to knock the weapon away from you, then sure, you lose accuracy if and only if they disrupt your weapon. It quickly drops from a nearly certain hit to none at all if the disrupt is successful. But if you were just a few cm further, and out of reach, you're going to hit most likely.

What isn't debateable is that accuracy improves as range to target decreases. If you want to talk realism, accuracy at sufficiently short ranges (instant hit, no drift) is a function of angular size, angular velocity, and short term changes in angular velocity. Someone with good aim can defeat the angular velocity itself, meaning the only factors that matter are range to target and the target's ability to perform evasive maneuvers. You can write the latter in as a unit defense attribute, the former fits exactly what we're talking about. The angular velocity factor is unimportant as it is more complex to simulate (especially in a turn-based game) and it is suitably covered by having soldier accuracy attribute in the first place.

There's nothing wrong with allowing a soldier to hit every time when they are adjacent to the target. It's a reasonable compromise for the much more important and very realistic situation in which you almost always hit at 1 tile away. And if someone is REALLY bothered by this, they can write their own mod to perform weapon disruption attacks on reactions.

Offline Zyzyfer

  • Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 56
    • View Profile
Re: UFO Extender accuracy discussion
« Reply #12 on: December 30, 2017, 12:46:06 pm »
I also find that on the higher difficulty (on the mod I play), attempting to get 1 square to targets often gets you picked off and killed. So its actually quite risky. So if you do manage it why not reap the reward of 99.9% accuracy of point-blank range; its actually quite realistic.

Offline Starving Poet

  • Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 254
    • View Profile
Re: UFO Extender accuracy discussion
« Reply #13 on: January 25, 2018, 05:19:44 am »
Just stand 2 tiles away.  98% accuracy instead of 99 and immune to melee counters.  If you don't kill them, take 1 step forward and disrupt their attacks next turn.

Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk


Offline The Reaver of Darkness

  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 1241
    • View Profile
Re: UFO Extender accuracy discussion
« Reply #14 on: February 01, 2018, 02:56:14 am »
Unfortunately a soldier at 1 tile distance from the target will still miss around half as often as they will from opposite ends of the map.


I ran a test using a shot with a 30% listed chance to hit. Here are the results:
orthogonally adjacent: 98% hit
1 tile away orthogonal: 73% hit
1 tile away orthogonal + 1 tile up: 64% hit
diagonally adjacent: 99% hit
diagonally adjacent + 1 tile up: 53% hit
1 tile away diagonal: 72% hit


What you can see here is that being truly adjacent to the target makes it hard to miss, but being just one square distant from the target gives the soldier a very substantial capacity to miss. Being a tile higher increases this further. If the soldier is a tile higher yet still adjacent to the target, they can miss a lot. Being above or diagonal to the target can reduce accuracy even faster than distance will. My highest miss rate was while adjacent to the target.

I tried again at 2 tiles away (2 tiles between soldier and target) and hit 52%. The result was about the same as diagonal+up yet adjacent, leading me to believe that the soldier being 3 taxicab moves away from the target in both cases is more important to hit chance than the actual euclidean distance. I feel like I'm probably wrong, but my results have generally correlated accuracy with taxicab distance, not euclidean distance. Something funny is going on here.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2018, 03:03:45 am by The Reaver of Darkness »