### Author Topic: hit probability and movement  (Read 3238 times)

#### kurja

• Captain
• Posts: 504
##### hit probability and movement
« on: December 07, 2011, 10:02:44 am »
How does movement affect weapon accuracy/hit probability? If an actor moves during his turn, then fires, or remains still before firing? If a target has moved during his last turn, is this considered a moving target and thus more difficult to hit?

#### geever

• Project Coder
• PHALANX Commander
• Posts: 2561
##### Re: hit probability and movement
« Reply #1 on: December 07, 2011, 11:19:11 am »
No, I don't think there is a penalty for moving. It's not that complicated (IMHO). The different fire modes (with different TU usage) model the "How difficult to aim" problem. Soo simple.

-geever

#### kurja

• Captain
• Posts: 504
##### Re: hit probability and movement
« Reply #2 on: December 07, 2011, 12:40:20 pm »
No, I don't think there is a penalty for moving. It's not that complicated (IMHO). The different fire modes (with different TU usage) model the "How difficult to aim" problem. Soo simple.

-geever

I agree. But what about target movement? I think it should matter, for benefit of both gameplay and apparent realism.

#### Jon_dArc

• Posts: 134
##### Re: hit probability and movement
« Reply #3 on: December 07, 2011, 04:32:39 pm »
Non-simultaneous movement is such a big departure from realism in this area that I don't really see target movement helping. I think a better way to model this, if it's desired from a gameplay perspective, would be to permit reserving TUs for evasion (or simply applying a penalty to hit based on remaining TUs, subtracting the appropriate amount for Reaction Fire reservations).

Now that I think about it, the big issue with this kind of thing is that to-hit is done by having the target occupy a stationary volume and the attacker's shots emerge in a cone. Either of our suggestions would basically mean that shots spread variably depending on the characteristics of the target. Also keep in mind the ability to aim and fire at empty space in front of a target—I think the whole concept of having to-hit vary on anything about the target other than its silhouette is a non-starter without completely changing the combat system.

~J

#### kurja

• Captain
• Posts: 504
##### Re: hit probability and movement
« Reply #4 on: December 07, 2011, 08:19:38 pm »
Non-simultaneous movement is such a big departure from realism in this area that I don't really see target movement helping. I think a better way to model this, if it's desired from a gameplay perspective, would be to permit reserving TUs for evasion (or simply applying a penalty to hit based on remaining TUs, subtracting the appropriate amount for Reaction Fire reservations).

I beg to differ, as in reality one doesn't dodge bullets - but it is more difficult to hold a steady aim at a target that's moving rather than staying still.

Quote
Now that I think about it, the big issue with this kind of thing is that to-hit is done by having the target occupy a stationary volume and the attacker's shots emerge in a cone. Either of our suggestions would basically mean that shots spread variably depending on the characteristics of the target. Also keep in mind the ability to aim and fire at empty space in front of a target—I think the whole concept of having to-hit vary on anything about the target other than its silhouette is a non-starter without completely changing the combat system.

Well, in that case

#### Jon_dArc

• Posts: 134
##### Re: hit probability and movement
« Reply #5 on: December 07, 2011, 11:05:20 pm »
I beg to differ, as in reality one doesn't dodge bullets - but it is more difficult to hold a steady aim at a target that's moving rather than staying still.
Right, but my point is that we've already got a fundamentally unrealistic situation—the target remains motionless during the attacker's entire turn, and for that matter the attacker's team's entire turn. This proposal would end up with us acting as if the target is stationary part of the time (if you move or shoot at something else, the target will still be in the same square in the same posture when you finish), but acting as if it's moving at other times (when the attack gets the target-moved penalty). The end result doesn't feel any more realistic to me.

That said, the way combat works now renders such philosophical discussions moot.

~J

#### kurja

• Captain
• Posts: 504
##### Re: hit probability and movement
« Reply #6 on: December 08, 2011, 07:23:23 am »
Right, but my point is that we've already got a fundamentally unrealistic situation—the target remains motionless during the attacker's entire turn, and for that matter the attacker's team's entire turn. This proposal would end up with us acting as if the target is stationary part of the time (if you move or shoot at something else, the target will still be in the same square in the same posture when you finish), but acting as if it's moving at other times (when the attack gets the target-moved penalty). The end result doesn't feel any more realistic to me.

That said, the way combat works now renders such philosophical discussions moot.

~J

For me the turn-based combat system is a presentation of a reality (albeit a virtual, fictious one) where events occur simultaneously, as they would in the real world, it's just the represantation that happens to be turn-based; viewing it any other way would deny player's immersion in to the game world. To that effect, we already have reaction fire, allowing action during the opposition's turn which is a huge step away from purely turn based action.

As a side note I recall that in the original x-com, movement during the opponent's turn was also possible (when a soldier panicked). Seeing it was possible to move, I always wondered why soldiers and aliens alike would not take cover when under fire if they had TU's left, even simply crouch when unexpectedly shot at - or turn to look where the fire came from, if a fellow combatant nearby just recieved a hit.

But then of course it's just a game and not a hard simulation of reality, if you take my meaning, and like any game it's to be taken for what it is and to be played by it's rules which are what they are.

Moot or not, now it's said