Range vs Accuracy: Let's improve it.

[Stratadrake]

There is another issue - the way WZ calculates what range a unit fires at. If at short range then a unit will approach to within Short Range setting, halt and fire. If at long range, a unit will approach to within Max range setting, halt and fire. "Optimum" range simply means whichever one has more accuracy (which is otherwise unknown to you midgame).

In the case of a target that is retreating from the attacker, this has an occasional problem where at Long range, the unit will continuously have to creep after its target just to get a shot off. At Short range, the same applies only with regards to shots hitting at actual Short range accuracy.

[aubergine]

One thing to note with shot range (although slightly off-topic) is that it's often very useful to have things like VTOLs fire at long range so they at least fire their weapon before being blown out of the sky by enemy AA defences. This makes a big difference to VTOLs when attacking a well defended enemy base: it's better to fire a shot that might hit something than to get blown up before getting to optimum range (no shot = 100% chance of not hitting anything).

[NoQ]

You may as well say that it's better to hope to fly through the AA fire and get a 95% accuracy (with a no-splash weapon!) than to have a 5% accuracy, this is a question of stat balance and game situation. It also doesn't apply to VTOLs only, but to pretty much anything in a similar fashion.

[iap]

There is another issue - the way WZ calculates what range a unit fires at. If at short range then a unit will approach to within Short Range setting, halt and fire. If at long range, a unit will approach to within Max range setting, halt and fire. "Optimum" range simply means whichever one has more accuracy (which is otherwise unknown to you midgame).

This makes a lot of sense now! So I should select "optimum" most of the times... (Sorry, sometimes my noob-ism is out of control)

[iap]

There is another issue - the way WZ calculates what range a unit fires at. If at short range then a unit will approach to within Short Range setting, halt and fire. If at long range, a unit will approach to within Max range setting, halt and fire. "Optimum" range simply means whichever one has more accuracy (which is otherwise unknown to you midgame).

This makes a lot of sense now! So I should select "optimum" most of the times... (Sorry, sometimes my noob-ism is out of control).

EDIT: No wait! I was thinking that mostly the short range is more accurate and long is less and optimum is somewhere in between, that is calculated to get best shot with enough distance - this is possible with the new interpolated calculation.
I'm not a noob - I was ahead of my time!!

(edit2: sorry for the double post - will the mod erase the one above?)

[aubergine]

It depends on the weapon as to whether it's better at short or long range.

[NoQ]

When weapon is inaccurate on the long range, setting it to long range may still may make sense if the target is large (eg. a big mass of enemy short-range units).

[Marlena Perez]

I really like this idea!

[Stratadrake]

EDIT: No wait! I was thinking that mostly the short range is more accurate and long is less and optimum is somewhere in between, that is calculated to get best shot with enough distance - this is possible with the new interpolated calculation.
I'm not a noob - I was ahead of my time!!

No, not exactly. "Optimum" range ALWAYS maps out to either "Short Range" or "Long Range", depending on the individual weapon equipped on the individual unit and whether that weapon has a higher Short or Long accuracy. This is why your Machineguns, Flamers, and Cannons will approach close to their opponents (higher short range accuracy) while your Lancers will hang back and frag them from afar (higher long-range accuracy). A range-accuracy interpolation would not affect whether Optimum means "Short" or "Long" to a particular unit, it just eliminates the night/day distinction between the two categories.

One thing to note with shot range (although slightly off-topic) is that it's often very useful to have things like VTOLs fire at long range so they at least fire their weapon before being blown out of the sky by enemy AA defences. This makes a big difference to VTOLs when attacking a well defended enemy base: it's better to fire a shot that might hit something than to get blown up before getting to optimum range (no shot = 100% chance of not hitting anything).

Almost all AA weapons have a maximum range of 16 squares - nearly twice the standard unit's vision range (8sq) which is the upper range limit on all direct-fire weaponry, VTOLs included. So it's safe to assume you will NEVER get off a shot before the AA defenses lock on to you - nonetheless attacking from long range does mean spending less time in enemy airspace, so that's a risk you have to decide on yourself.

[Per]

...by which I don't mean changing how the game calculates a "hit" or "miss" - WZ has always used a virtual dice-roll to determine whether a projectile will damage the target; a simple and efficient abstraction that has served its role well not only in videogames, but pen and paper too.

Except that in this version of the game, we actually both check a dice roll and do a line and box intersection test to see if the projectile would actually hit. If either fail, we miss. (Actually, if we miss by both, we might still hit our original target by accident, since the dice roll miss will calculate an error position, which might be the target's actual position. I'm not sure if it is this way by design or not.)

I think the accuracy system in the current version is totally bonkers, and was pretty bad in the original, too.

Let's take the original dice-roll system first. The accuracy variable of a weapon is totally unnecessary. It could be baked into reload speed, and (randomness being averaged over time) nothing would be lost.

The weapon ranges are opaque to most players, a hidden game mechanic that does not work intuitively. To the extent that it makes a difference, this difference is almost impossible to use correctly, since it is not visualized in any way. It would be better if the accuracy was a function of some linear algorithm, but it would still be hidden. It would be best if it was removed from the game entirely.

The new hit system was introduced because it seemed intuitive that units could move out of the way from very long range artillery and missile projectiles, since they took quite a while to reach their targets. However, for direct fire weapons, this has no relevant meaning.

So what I would propose instead, is that the old dice accuracy system is removed along with the short/medium/far buttons, and the new line/box intersection hit system is used for indirect fire weapons, while direct fire weapons always hit. Any tech that changes accuracy, instead changes reload speed. This neatly solves all existing problems with accuracy, and makes both the user interface and the game rules simpler.

[Per]

PS Also see previous discussion on same topic viewtopic.php?f=42&t=8964&p=95247

[Iluvalar]

So what I would propose instead, is that the old dice accuracy system is removed along with the short/medium/far buttons, and the new line/box intersection hit system is used for indirect fire weapons, while direct fire weapons always hit. Any tech that changes accuracy, instead changes reload speed. This neatly solves all existing problems with accuracy, and makes both the user interface and the game rules simpler.

And make all weapons look the same ?

At least tell me you are aware that the accuracy upgrade do not affect all the weapons the same way and so it's impossible to come with a real % of ROF gain. That will fit all perfectly.

[Per]

At least tell me you are aware that the accuracy upgrade do not affect all the weapons the same way and so it's impossible to come with a real % of ROF gain. That will fit all perfectly.

I probably do not understand what you mean. Of course, one would not make the same change to reload time/RoF for all weapons...

[JJjopando]

At least tell me you are aware that the accuracy upgrade do not affect all the weapons the same way and so it's impossible to come with a real % of ROF gain. That will fit all perfectly.

I probably do not understand what you mean. Of course, one would not make the same change to reload time/RoF for all weapons...

I like having weapons miss, but I don't like a HIT OR MISS dichotomy. I would rather see a d20 roll, and how far off the shot is depends on the saving throw.

[Iluvalar]

At least tell me you are aware that the accuracy upgrade do not affect all the weapons the same way and so it's impossible to come with a real % of ROF gain. That will fit all perfectly.

I probably do not understand what you mean. Of course, one would not make the same change to reload time/RoF for all weapons...

No you don't understand.

Actually I don't care about arguing with you. As long as you waste your own time in your project and you solve the accuracy bug before the 3.1 release.

It will not be a pure waste of time since you will be force to implement the multiplicative logic upgrade system that dont exist yet...