crouching down

[petza]

what does crouching down  do

[bayo]

what? where?

[Thrashard96]

increases accuracy, but decreases movement ability.

[Lew Yard]

Last I checked, there's a per-weapon modifier that is a multiplicative factor for weapon spread.   In other words, it affects the precision of your shot.  Quite a few weapons have their spread halved, IIRC, but some receive lesser or no bonus.  I recall no other effect on weapon firing (e.g. it doesn't affect accuracy, just precision; nor does it affect speed of use).

There are weapons that should probably receive *penalties* (largish slashing weapons would be more awkward to use, for instance) but none that I recall.

And yes, TUs to move go up from 2 to 3 per square.

It should also lower your silhouette, making you harder to hit in various situations, but I haven't really checked on that.

[Duke]

@Lew
A very good description of what crouching does, but...
...a stupid question from a non-native speaker:

e.g. it doesn't affect accuracy, just precision;

What's the difference ?

[Lew Yard]

Taking a .50 BMG rifle supported by a bipod, in good condition, firing at a stationary target with good technique may result in precise and accurate fire.

Take the same rifle, damage the sighting equipment so it's badly off, and attempting to squeeze off a few shots may result in a reliable, tight grouping in the wrong place.  That's precision combined with inaccuracy.

Loading a sawed-off open-choked shotgun with birdshot and firing it at a target 100 yds away may result in highly accurate fire (if the shooter and target are both stationary and good technique is used) but the individual pellets will likely be spread over quite an area at that range.  That's imprecise.  The same would go for firing smoothbore muskets at range w/ 1800's-tech-level powder and ammo.

[mor2]

so gamewise, can i say that accuracy is your chance to hit the target while precision is your chance to hit multiple times.
if so its means that sitting improves your chance to hit target using half/full auto but it doesnt matter if you going for a single shot 

[Lew Yard]

Spread affects all shots, and crouching reduces the imprecision -- meaning that you'll probably deviate from the 'perfect' shot less.

Spread affects the how much each shot is likely to deviate -- in angular terms.  Take the error in angle terms, add the range to target, and that affects how far you've actually missed by (if the shot makes it without being stopped by an obstacle).  Missing the center of the target by a tiny distance might mean that you actually hit.  OTOH, at extremely long ranges or against targets mostly behind cover (*), even a small angular deviation may mean a bad miss.

Burst fire tends to have a higher spread, and therefore the expected deviation of each shot is higher -- but you can still be spot on, it's just less likely.  Aimed-shot fire modes have lower spreads than snap shots, but you pay with higher TU cost.  Per-shot damage is also per fire mode, so it's technically possible to e.g. model a hit from an aimed shot as more deadly on average (reflecting better placement, say).  The flamethrower is actually modeled as a weapon that fires many, many shots... individually low-damage shots, but so many that you're likely to do a fair bit of damage unless your target has armor that's suitably fire-resistant, even if you're not especially skilled.

IIRC, the code supports the possibility of a weapon's fire mode having a bias (a tendency to fire too high, say) -- that'd introduce systemic inaccuracy into that mode.  That could be used to simulate e.g. badly controlled muzzle climb -- not only might the spread by high but the (expected) center of the burst might be slightly above the target.

(*) Should be noted that cover can be penetrated, to a limited degree (limited number of walls and at reduced damage), by certain projectile weapons (IIRC, the coil gun has the best 'throughwall' factor of any weapon available in the campaign mode).

[mor2]

yes but, modern weapons has very low spread, if you equip it on stationary platform and shoot 10 consecutive shots for 50-100 meters you are most likely to hit the same spot.
so when we speak about spread we mostly speak about recoil effects, static values like the weapons compensation mechanism and dynamic you and how you react.

thus for one aimed shot when you dont need to require the same spot to shoot again the effects of "weapon precision" should be minimal.
you can say that in other positions it easier to shoot multiple single shot but brust, its mostly how you compensate ( "accuracy" or weapon handling)

[Duke]

Thanks Lew

I understand that accuracy expresses how well the weapon is handled, while precision expresses how well the weapon itself can perform, right ?

Is that difference in the meaning of the two words restricted to weapon use ?

[Destructavator]

Thanks Lew

I understand that accuracy expresses how well the weapon is handled, while precision expresses how well the weapon itself can perform, right ?

Is that difference in the meaning of the two words restricted to weapon use ?

No, the two words have other meanings in different contexts.

In scientific terms (this is how I learned it from a college professor when I was in a college science class, so what I'm about to give you is a "textbook" science comparison of the two terms, and what would be an "official" or "proper" pair of definitions) it can be explained like this:

Suppose you have a dartboard hanging on a wall, and you throw darts at it, aiming for the bulls-eye center target.

- If the darts tend to hit the center target you're aiming for, that would be accurate, higher accuracy meaning hitting closer to the exact "dead-center" of the target.

- If a number of darts hit spots that are very close to each other, but not necessarily near the target, that would be precise.

It is possible to have a lot of one but not the other, as well as having a lot of both, or not much of either - any combination is possible.  An example of being very precise with the darts but not accurate would be if a lot of darts hit a spot on a side wall very close to each other, but still very far from the intended target.

This comparison between the two terms also applies to measurements in scientific experiments.  (For example, mixing chemicals and measuring how much of a resulting substance is in a test tube afterward, then repeating the experiment and comparing results from each run of the experiment.)

For the record - if this makes you feel any better - This comparison of terms shows up on college exams, some American students over here have trouble themselves remembering the difference between the two, and in some cases cannot get it right.

Outside of the scientific world, the meanings can vary, I guess.

Edit:  In Re-reading Lew Yard's explanation, I'd say he has it right, IMO, just another way of explaining the same thing.

[mor2]

yes, still the problem is figuring out what makes you precise and how you factor it in the formula used for shooting.

the queston was how much crouching helps when throwing a single dart, considering that dart is flying at 900m/s and your release/compensation mechanism is a little more precise and even if you look at stance in terms of center mass, for 60gr dart at that spead it doesnt really matter.

[Destructavator]

yes, still the problem is figuring out what makes you precise and how you factor it in the formula used for shooting.

the queston was how much crouching helps when throwing a single dart, considering that dart is flying at 900m/s and your release/compensation mechanism is a little more precise and even if you look at stance in terms of center mass, for 60gr dart at that spead it doesnt really matter.

From what I've read in this thread, it does indeed seem the current system is a bit flawed and could use some work.

I would imagine that the way it should work (but right now doesn't, from what I've gathered) would be like this:

- Crouching should improve accuracy, so that even a single snap shot has a better chance to hit.

- If the attack is made up of multiple shots that are simultaneous (such as a shotgun-like blast), the precision or spread of the shots should be unchanged.

- If the attack is multiple shots one after the other (such as an automatic rifle) then the both the accuracy and precision should improve.

[Duke]

Thx Dave

What makes this case a bit special is that in the german language there is no distinct word for accuracy. Ie. accuray shares half a dozen translations with precision. We would express the two concepts as
- precision of the gun
- precision of the shot/shooting/soldier/hit

For the record - if this makes you feel any better - This comparison of terms shows up on college exams, some American students over here have trouble themselves remembering the difference between the two, and in some cases cannot get it right.

I also think it's often both interesting and fun to pick two similar terms and ask a native speaker for the *rules* when to use which.
2 years ago we spent half an evening with two canadian friends discussing the difference between 'shadow' and 'shade'

[Destructavator]

I also think it's often both interesting and fun to pick two similar terms and ask a native speaker for the *rules* when to use which.
2 years ago we spent half an evening with two canadian friends discussing the difference between 'shadow' and 'shade'

Probably like "no" and "not" - One thing that a lot of people who don't know English as their first language often mess up, something that really gives away the fact that they are from another country, is confusing "no" and "not" by using the wrong one when they should use the other.  The two words are so close that even I (who knows (American) English as a first language) could not explain a list of hard, set rules that would always tell someone when to use one and when to use the other.  It's one of those things that someone gets a "feel" for after hearing and speaking a language after a while, and has to gradually pick up.

The same goes for the "cannot" that I used in my previous post.  "Cannot" is a compound word that means exactly the same thing as the two words "can not" which can also be contracted to "can't", although there aren't any solid rules as to which of those three to use.

Aaaaannnyyyyways, to get back on topic:

I still think the current system needs to be fixed, in the code, possibly as I described it in my three points I said earlier.


P.S. - Just one last thing about language, something kinda funny:  You might be surprised at how the phrase "Let's go smoke a fag" in the UK is a harmless, casual thing to say when taking a break from working on something, but if spoken here in the United States where I am, it has a totally different, nasty meaning, one that can make people call the police to come arrest you if they think you're really serious.  (I'm not kidding, it can really get you into trouble here!)