project-navigation
Personal tools

Author Topic: 2.5 sucks completely  (Read 64395 times)

Offline Triaxx2

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 164
    • View Profile
Re: 2.5 sucks completely
« Reply #45 on: February 14, 2013, 10:09:27 pm »
Stunning is very strange. I had one alien get stunned after getting burned with a flame thrower. I never got to use my Stun rod, because I didn't need it. Strange.

Offline Sarin

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 339
    • View Profile
Re: 2.5 sucks completely
« Reply #46 on: February 14, 2013, 10:26:53 pm »
If you shoot down UFO, some aliens will spawn injured or partially stunned, so they go down easier. I've had an alien go down stunned after just one hit from assault rifle. But they will still bleed after they are stunned, I've seen a few die this way.

Offline krilain

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
Re: 2.5 sucks completely
« Reply #47 on: February 14, 2013, 10:36:27 pm »
Only map where I actually fired more than one magazine of sniper rifle ammo per soldier was dam. I never ever had need for more than one reload for most weapons except rocket launcher.
Sure, for one map, but it occures that you chain 2 or 3 missions, including rescue for instance. For this reason, taking additional amno or a secondary weapon cant be discouraged totally.
Flashbangs have area of effect similar to other grenades. It doesn't matter if it explodes in front or behind alien, as long as he's close enough.
Added this to allow Mattn to answer ;)
« Last Edit: February 14, 2013, 10:42:48 pm by krilain »

Offline Mattn

  • CaveExpress
  • Administrator
  • PHALANX Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 4830
  • www.caveproductions.org
    • View Profile
    • CaveExpress
Re: 2.5 sucks completely
« Reply #48 on: February 14, 2013, 10:38:09 pm »
this is not true - flash grenades do a field-of-view check and only affect those victims, that are looking into the direction of the explosion.

Offline Sarin

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 339
    • View Profile
Re: 2.5 sucks completely
« Reply #49 on: February 14, 2013, 10:49:01 pm »
Odd. I'm sure I had aliens flashbanged from various angles.

Offline H-Hour

  • Administrator
  • PHALANX Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
    • View Profile
Re: 2.5 sucks completely
« Reply #50 on: February 14, 2013, 10:54:16 pm »
Is there some kind of accuracy threshold you have to hit for soldiers to bother to fire, though?
Someone did some tests recently and found RF would not activate under a certain accuracy % threshold (maybe 25%?). This may account for a lot of the perception that it "doesn't work", especially if people are routinely trying to RF at distance with single-shot firemodes. We're considering reducing or eliminating this threshold.

Offline krilain

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
Re: 2.5 sucks completely
« Reply #51 on: February 14, 2013, 11:02:48 pm »
Someone did some tests recently and found RF would not activate under a certain accuracy % threshold (maybe 25%?). This may account for a lot of the perception that it "doesn't work", especially if people are routinely trying to RF at distance with single-shot firemodes. We're considering reducing or eliminating this threshold.
Can I ask some question about a thing that intrigates me, so that I would sleep better this night? How comes that there is a need for testing to learn about the RF threshold (which I'm sure is existing because RF is sometime erratic) ? Wouldn't it be easier to read the code at the section dedicated to RF? It is a 2 cents question I suppose, but I'm not a coder so pardon my ignorance.

Offline Triaxx2

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 164
    • View Profile
Re: 2.5 sucks completely
« Reply #52 on: February 15, 2013, 02:03:01 am »
My guess is that the accuracy might change from tile to tile and angles might reduce the accuracy. So if the alien comes straight on, you might get to 25% accuracy farther away, than if they come from an angle. Or perhaps the point at which they've used enough TU to trigger reaction fire isn't the same point at which they're over the threshold.

It also might not be possible to read an exact number from the code. It might be in a different format than what the game reports.

---

I'm finding myself loosing 1-2 soldiers per mission. It's making it a little awkward to try and do multiple missions. I've reconfigured loadouts so I can have everyone in armor, but it's not helping.

Also, I've got a Firebird landing at the mansion, but the Map is very badly messed up. Restarting the game and computer both failed to help. Where do I upload the save for you?

Offline krilain

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
Re: 2.5 sucks completely
« Reply #53 on: February 15, 2013, 02:35:09 am »
My guess is that the accuracy might change from tile to tile and angles might reduce the accuracy. So if the alien comes straight on, you might get to 25% accuracy farther away, than if they come from an angle. Or perhaps the point at which they've used enough TU to trigger reaction fire isn't the same point at which they're over the threshold.
That sounds very possible.
It also might not be possible to read an exact number from the code. It might be in a different format than what the game reports.
Maybe, but thus it means that something has been coded for behaving very basically, and however some unexpected things have occured in real implementation. Is this what you mean?
Also, I've got a Firebird landing at the mansion, but the Map is very badly messed up. Restarting the game and computer both failed to help. Where do I upload the save for you?
It has been reported . For my part I've met mansion as the first map of my last launch concerning last version. So I figured it was a direct effect of some bugs. With the gentle help of H-Hour, a ticket is opened about this in the 2.5dev bug section. (in campain, not skirmish - in skirmish I test 2 maps and crashed for twice)
« Last Edit: February 15, 2013, 02:36:53 am by krilain »

Offline Triaxx2

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 164
    • View Profile
Re: 2.5 sucks completely
« Reply #54 on: February 15, 2013, 08:40:35 am »
Actually I was saying that since the hit chance displayed by the game itself is only a general estimate of the actual chance to make a shot, due to the calculation necessary for an accurate estimate being more complex than can be done in a timely manner, 25% could represent several specific numbers only some of which might over lap with those high enough to be able to trigger reaction fire, thus introducing a minor random element. Thus a high 25 might trip reaction fire, where a low 25 might not.

So run it as an auto mission? No problemo.

Offline H-Hour

  • Administrator
  • PHALANX Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
    • View Profile
Re: 2.5 sucks completely
« Reply #55 on: February 15, 2013, 10:24:27 am »
The explanation is more basic: the person doing the tests was not a developer or coder, just someone interested in figuring it out. See the later pages of this thread.

Offline Quizer

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 130
    • View Profile
Re: 2.5 sucks completely
« Reply #56 on: February 15, 2013, 12:42:57 pm »
Actually I was saying that since the hit chance displayed by the game itself is only a general estimate of the actual chance to make a shot, due to the calculation necessary for an accurate estimate being more complex than can be done in a timely manner[...]
I wonder if it could be coded in such a way that the game first gives you the estimate, and then, if you continue holding the mouse over that square, it would start calculating the real accuracy, but break off if you move the mouse somewhere else. Due to the way aiming works, you don't ever need to calculate more than one accuracy value at a time, so I don't see why it should be any more complicated than actually firing.

Is it that firing doesn't actually calculate accuracy in any way, and calculating hit chance via the combat engine would amount to running a Monte Carlo Simulation with a large number of shots to approximate the hit chance? If it's like this, I could see how it's troublesome...

Offline Telok

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
Re: 2.5 sucks completely
« Reply #57 on: February 16, 2013, 10:04:19 am »
Is it that firing doesn't actually calculate accuracy in any way, and calculating hit chance via the combat engine would amount to running a Monte Carlo Simulation with a large number of shots to approximate the hit chance? If it's like this, I could see how it's troublesome...

From my understanding this is essentially correct. What I believe happens when you fire is that the engine takes the soldier's accuracy and the weapon's spread value, mushes the two numbers together, sprays your ammo down range at an angle determined by RNG and the mushy spread number, and then checks the hit boxes like a first person shooter. So the shooting engine never develops or uses a %hit chance. The number reported on your targeting mouse-over is a fuzzy guesstimate from somewhere in the UI code (I think, don't quote me on that one because it's a logic guess).

For real fun:
The reported %hit has no effect on RF. Soldiers may or may not RF anywhere between 0% and 90%+
RF is more likely to happen if your chosen RF mode shoots more bullets.
RF will not happen outside the weapon's listed range (in squares).
Higher soldier stats and skills will mean more frequent and accurate RF. Expect +30% RF if you double the soldier's stats and triple the skills.
Some weapons (and it's definitely the weapons) will RF through a LoS blocking alien.

From the tests I've run a noob soldier with a sniper rifle at 50 squares will take about 50% of the RF (Aimed Shot, crouched, 23% reported hit chance) chances he is offered. And it's about a 50/50 chance as to whether he'll take the RF before or after the provoking action.

From the tests I've run a noob soldier with a machine gun at 65 squares will take about 60% of the RF (Full Auto, standing, 00% reported hit chance) chances he is offered.

I do actually know some coding and am currently going back to school to complete the degree, so if you'll tell me which module the RF code is in than I'll try to look at it.

Offline krilain

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
Re: 2.5 sucks completely
« Reply #58 on: February 16, 2013, 01:45:47 pm »
Thanks for this complete summary. However, I would like to point an element.
/.../
the engine takes the soldier's accuracy and the weapon's spread value, mushes the two numbers together, sprays your ammo down range at an angle determined by RNG and the mushy spread number, and then checks the hit boxes like a first person shooter.
/.../
This is a thing that I've tried to figure out many times. Is there any hit box check, really? It would fall finally on such a thing as depicted below so that the effective hit rate would finally be given by:
  • Hit_rate = Hit_base / Spread_base
But this includes so much parameter in uphill, as the presence of obstacles, that would be a little the same to calculate the things with no real evaluation of those areas. Using shooter parameters (skills / weapon), environement parameters in the line of sight (night/day / obstacle_on/off and amount), and targeted object parameters (armour / crouch_on/off indicator) would lead to similar result, even more quickly.

I add this just as a matter of discus. Final rates remain testable as you did. Only causes are obscured.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2013, 05:05:16 pm by krilain »

Offline GPS51

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: 2.5 sucks completely
« Reply #59 on: February 16, 2013, 09:15:06 pm »
Just wanted to say that I really like the changes to the tech tree made in the recent days/weeks. The researching of the alien light armor leading to laser weapons feels much more "right" and adds to the gameplay. More specifically the rewording of the tech briefings (like the electromagnetic rifle) makes more sense and feels less like a placeholder paragraph :) Keep up the good work.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2013, 09:17:37 pm by GPS51 »