Author Topic: Breaking the "more accurate weapons are always better" disfunction.  (Read 2165 times)

Offline Litppunk

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4358
  • Laughing at death: the answer to impossible
    • View Profile
Re: Breaking the "more accurate weapons are always better" disfunction.
« Reply #45 on: August 06, 2017, 03:35:48 PM »
you are fun to debate with ^.^
Feeds both of grandpas wolves, and but doesn't let them fight; Then saves the car full of cash sells it and starts an orphanage, anti-railroad-tying shenanigans-organization and invests.

Offline Ly

  • Zombie Food
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: Breaking the "more accurate weapons are always better" disfunction.
« Reply #46 on: August 09, 2017, 12:59:58 PM »
I just have horrible visions of this turning into another clusterfuck, with basic zombies dodging bullets like Neo in The Matrix and NPC's becoming invincible killing machines.

Offline Logrin

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 838
    • View Profile
Re: Breaking the "more accurate weapons are always better" disfunction.
« Reply #47 on: August 17, 2017, 05:26:16 PM »
How about we correlate a weapons volume with its maneuverablity and its minimum range before hip firing tied to sights (Ditto for bonuses at extended range.)

Maneuverability would be a new weapon stat which reduces the penalties for firing a weapon in less than ideal circumstances, such as:
*Reduces penalties for firing at a directly adjacent hostile (Which there should be, assuming they're groping for/lashing out at you)
*Similarly combats the temporary dodge skill a creature gains right after it leaps/charges (Which again, would be a good addition I think. Cougars and leapers having a 1 turn buff to dodge after landing to represent how hard it would be keeping a bead on them.)
*To a lesser extent being grappled, restrained, prone, etc etc.
*The more maneuverable a weapon the easier it is to use from inside a vehicle/riding a bike. (Niche case but worth considering, pistols and SMGs are the king of drive bys, especially if you're the one driving.)

Offline Litppunk

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4358
  • Laughing at death: the answer to impossible
    • View Profile
Re: Breaking the "more accurate weapons are always better" disfunction.
« Reply #48 on: August 17, 2017, 06:58:02 PM »
How about we correlate a weapons volume with its maneuverablity and its minimum range before hip firing tied to sights (Ditto for bonuses at extended range.)

...

Oh yeah, I meant to include this, though I guess it would probably be a redundant suggestion. Can't be the first time this has been suggested.

The rest of it is inspired though. Love it. Not sure how adjacent de-penalty should balance out with penalty and decreased aim time for range. Should be interesting to see this come together.
Feeds both of grandpas wolves, and but doesn't let them fight; Then saves the car full of cash sells it and starts an orphanage, anti-railroad-tying shenanigans-organization and invests.

Offline Senrain

  • NPC
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Literal piece of garbage
    • View Profile
Re: Breaking the "more accurate weapons are always better" disfunction.
« Reply #49 on: August 19, 2017, 11:03:54 AM »
the problem is not all enemies would even ATTEMPT  to dodge, ether from lack of intelligence or lack or knowledge that guns are bad. why would a mi-go avoid the direction a puny human is pointing a tube? and a zombie hulk would only think  "SMASH!!!" and move directly towards you. dodging in melee is almost completely instinct, an attempt to avoid the object coming towards you so even nearly brain dead critters would try to dodge a fist or a baseball bat.

Well, my take on dodging that I'm unashamedly ripping from the GURPS handbook is that a zombie or other 'dumb' creature isn't intentionally moving out of the way of your shots as much as simply moving unpredictably.

The swaying, lurching gait of a zombie is bound to make you whiff shots, the same with a charging animal or any other beast. An unpredictably moving target is hard to hit, sometimes even if it's charging straight at you.

Offline Litppunk

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4358
  • Laughing at death: the answer to impossible
    • View Profile
Re: Breaking the "more accurate weapons are always better" disfunction.
« Reply #50 on: August 20, 2017, 02:39:50 AM »
Quote

Well, my take on dodging that I'm unashamedly ripping from the GURPS handbook is that a zombie or other 'dumb' creature isn't intentionally moving out of the way of your shots as much as simply moving unpredictably.

The swaying, lurching gait of a zombie is bound to make you whiff shots, the same with a charging animal or any other beast. An unpredictably moving target is hard to hit, sometimes even if it's charging straight at you.

It should still amount to less than a creature ACTIVELY trying to dodge. So Mi-gos and other intelligent creatures would get a dodge bonus for agility and intelligence (in lore and theory if not practice) I think Kevin already said something along these lines are what he planned to do.
Feeds both of grandpas wolves, and but doesn't let them fight; Then saves the car full of cash sells it and starts an orphanage, anti-railroad-tying shenanigans-organization and invests.

Offline Kevin Granade

  • Administrator
  • Survivor
  • *****
  • Posts: 5588
  • I code dead people.
    • View Profile
Re: Breaking the "more accurate weapons are always better" disfunction.
« Reply #51 on: August 20, 2017, 03:11:08 AM »
Yea, that matches my reasoning.  It might be productive to think of it as, "being hard to hit" to highlight that it's not reactive and not necessarily intentional.
Anything that moves will have *some* dodge to differentiate it from targets that don't move, with a higher score for:
High speed, intelligence, moving  erratically and special ability.
Its like a fun family cookout, except your family is burning in flames while trying to eat you. -secretfire
I'm more excited than a survivor on meth and toast'ems. -Nighthawk
The the giant wasp is slammed through the zombie brute!

Offline ZoneWizard

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 304
    • View Profile
Re: Breaking the "more accurate weapons are always better" disfunction.
« Reply #52 on: September 07, 2017, 01:24:55 AM »
I'm rather interested in the concept of dodging as well so I shall chime in again.

My take on this "unpredictable" idea is not that I disagree with it, as much as I worked my way up the ranks of personal marksmanship in real life and I feel a zombie is not going to be difficult to hit. Look at every zombie film that DOESN'T use running zoms. Watch their movement. Even with f**ked up legs, they are pretty easily picked off. Not because actors portray them as easy pickins, no. They are able to move in a shamble/shuffle/walk slow to fast sorta way. Go watch people at your local mall and before they remove you for being creepy, you will see movement is not very unpredictable at all.

Perception should certainly play a large roll in aiming. Aiming at a raging moose? Easy for how large the beast is. Dog/Zombie Dog? Not so easy as it is already. Shot be it pistol or shotgun or modified rifle should almost always hit as long as the direction is within 15 degrees.

I do have a point in this. I keep reading about how critters will be able to dodge and how staying steady will be scaled. I really REALLY hope as Ly mentions this won't boil down to a matrix "Dodge this" style game.

As for my question; Will mobs/NPCs have a point system in which all their skills and category be tallied against the players to get = hit/miss? Is this the gist of things?

Not sure how close what I'm thinking is to what will be so maybe an example to compare too is in order:

-Mob category (giant bee gets into the "really fast" rank, norma. zombie gets slow rank)
-Flight or Ground based ; I find this an interesting concept. I can hit that fast dog with little to no skill. But trying to hit that flying bastard is a task best left to avg.-skilled
   ;caveat to flight/ground- shoot wings to ground mob for easier kill and damage legs for the same reason(which is why I placed this higher on the list to trickle down)
-Mobs body size(can lower or increase speed rank?)
-Mobs Weight(can lower or increase speed rank?) ; why is this separate? Because a thin moose will beat the sh!t out of you same as a fat moose, but maybe depending on how detailed you devs wanna get. The difference in damage would be similar to bouncing off a Mini car(uk vehicle, now in the states ^_^) compared to getting hit by, say, a dump truck?
-Skills/specifications: assuming mobs have them and NPCs will continue to have them these are added after the list above? Maybe? I don't code so... o_0
-Player skills/specs to compare to that of the target and onto...
-SCALING: to compare movement points per tile?

I dunno folks. Am I understanding this thread correctly or adding anything that can be useful? I always appreciate the feedback all the same. =D

Offline Litppunk

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4358
  • Laughing at death: the answer to impossible
    • View Profile
Re: Breaking the "more accurate weapons are always better" disfunction.
« Reply #53 on: September 07, 2017, 01:35:15 AM »
from the way kevin's been talking it looks like the EVENTUAL goal is to be very Dwarf Fortress in the damage system, and what you are describing sounds like that.... or Rim World. Though I may be reading into this too much.

I still remember when missing projectiles being able to pass intended target and hit other things became a feature.
Feeds both of grandpas wolves, and but doesn't let them fight; Then saves the car full of cash sells it and starts an orphanage, anti-railroad-tying shenanigans-organization and invests.

Offline Kevin Granade

  • Administrator
  • Survivor
  • *****
  • Posts: 5588
  • I code dead people.
    • View Profile
Re: Breaking the "more accurate weapons are always better" disfunction.
« Reply #54 on: September 07, 2017, 04:18:35 AM »
I feel a zombie is not going to be difficult to hit. Look at every zombie film that DOESN'T use running zoms. Watch their movement. Even with f**ked up legs, they are pretty easily picked off. Not because actors portray them as easy pickins, no. They are able to move in a shamble/shuffle/walk slow to fast sorta way. Go watch people at your local mall and before they remove you for being creepy, you will see movement is not very unpredictable at all.
Our zombies aren't shamblers, but they also aren't runners (oops, some are!).  I've repeatedly said that average zombies are going to have poor dodging in this system because they aren't that fast, but it'll be enough to interfere a bit with players with poor weapon skills that are having trouble hitting anyway.

As for my question; Will mobs/NPCs have a point system in which all their skills and category be tallied against the players to get = hit/miss? Is this the gist of things?
More or less, though this thread is just about the dodging thing, which is just about player aim speed (which combines several player stats and some weapon properties) vs monster dodge ability.

-Mob category (giant bee gets into the "really fast" rank, norma. zombie gets slow rank)
Each monster has an individual dodge score.
-Flight or Ground based ; I find this an interesting concept. I can hit that fast dog with little to no skill. But trying to hit that flying bastard is a task best left to avg.-skilled
No, flying monsters would need to have a high dodge score, some might have a bad score if they just hover, so flying speed doesn't necessarally mean good dodging.
   ;caveat to flight/ground- shoot wings to ground mob for easier kill and damage legs for the same reason(which is why I placed this higher on the list to trickle down)
Maybe, this would be trated more or less the same as cripling the leg of a walking monster, in either case dodging becomes effectively zero so no need to have special handling for flying monsters.
-Mobs body size(can lower or increase speed rank?)
Body size is already factored into chance to hit, so it isn't going to be counted again for dodging.
-Mobs Weight(can lower or increase speed rank?) ; why is this separate? Because a thin moose will beat the sh!t out of you same as a fat moose, but maybe depending on how detailed you devs wanna get. The difference in damage would be similar to bouncing off a Mini car(uk vehicle, now in the states ^_^) compared to getting hit by, say, a dump truck?
The difference in cross section between a "thin moose" and a "fat moose" is going to be pretty irrelevant to how easy they are to shoot.
-Skills/specifications: assuming mobs have them and NPCs will continue to have them these are added after the list above? Maybe? I don't code so... o_0
... for the purposes of getting shot, dodge score and size are all that really matter.
-Player skills/specs to compare to that of the target and onto...
Yep, that's where it gets complicated, have some code:
https://github.com/CleverRaven/Cataclysm-DDA/pull/21468/files#diff-f1933acfcc0056a11de5cb2ad6fd6caaL183
https://github.com/CleverRaven/Cataclysm-DDA/pull/21468/files#diff-f1933acfcc0056a11de5cb2ad6fd6caaR1578
https://github.com/CleverRaven/Cataclysm-DDA/pull/21468/files#diff-c5873ed460ae46963dac594829494e52R1477
-SCALING: to compare movement points per tile?
I'm not sure I know what you mean, if you mean it's adjusted by move speed, no it's not.
Its like a fun family cookout, except your family is burning in flames while trying to eat you. -secretfire
I'm more excited than a survivor on meth and toast'ems. -Nighthawk
The the giant wasp is slammed through the zombie brute!

Offline tarburst98

  • NPC
  • **
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
Re: Breaking the "more accurate weapons are always better" disfunction.
« Reply #55 on: September 10, 2017, 06:04:16 AM »
hmmm, could also make night engagements with some kind of visual range enhancement worthwhile, because then you can get in gun range of a zombie and it wouldn't see you, meaning it would probably be standing still, which even if it is swaying, it would be less 'lurchy' and thus easier to hit.

Offline Litppunk

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4358
  • Laughing at death: the answer to impossible
    • View Profile
Re: Breaking the "more accurate weapons are always better" disfunction.
« Reply #56 on: September 10, 2017, 02:26:11 PM »
hmmm, could also make night engagements with some kind of visual range enhancement worthwhile, because then you can get in gun range of a zombie and it wouldn't see you, meaning it would probably be standing still, which even if it is swaying, it would be less 'lurchy' and thus easier to hit.

Um... probably 'relatively' still. They do wander around a bit, if I am not mistaken, but it should confir some bonus, possibly enough to undo penalty for NVG cumbersome and such maybe even more, and if natural night vision....

Hmm. In calculations it would probably come down to skill level whether it is worthwhile or not. And whichway the difference would fall. Higher skill levels will probably be ?less? effected by such minor inconveniences.

Of course NV of any kind + laser sight should be absurdly good at any range the game actually allows for. or... say what is the theoretical distance of the reality bubble radius? Seems like it shouldn't be more than ~200-300 yards or so, which leaves laser sights at night at their A-game.
Feeds both of grandpas wolves, and but doesn't let them fight; Then saves the car full of cash sells it and starts an orphanage, anti-railroad-tying shenanigans-organization and invests.

Offline ZoneWizard

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 304
    • View Profile
Re: Breaking the "more accurate weapons are always better" disfunction.
« Reply #57 on: September 10, 2017, 09:21:04 PM »
Thanks for the info. My query was less about being lazy and not reading over it consolidating what we have to look forward to which is current from the devs.

Plus I can't get online a lot and I sometimes need a refresher and it helps when you list everything you can think of =D