Search found 235 matches

by Deus Siddis
21 Mar 2013, 06:01
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 88896

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

Yes. It's very simple: defeat me in 1x1 and i'll trust you. If you can't even defeat me , then i believe you shouldn't have a word on balance issues. That's just how balance works: you can have no clue if there is one at all until you're close to the top of the ladder. Not quite that simple though....
by Deus Siddis
20 Mar 2013, 21:24
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 88896

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

Iluvalar : i'm still promoting the idea of making a closed (or read-only for normals) balance forum to avoid all the pointless talk to walls like those guys above or other users who have never heard of balance. Bah, all I said was this in response to something Per wrote and now you two are having a...
by Deus Siddis
20 Mar 2013, 08:47
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 88896

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

And it's not much about being faster or slower, but much more about moving or not moving. ... I'm not kidding, the balance would NEED to assume that none of the opponent can move one tile aside. The one that do it would win. Maybe this feature was disabled, but in the original warzone the units wou...
by Deus Siddis
20 Mar 2013, 05:42
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 88896

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

Do you understand that positioning your unit one tile away would become of greater importance than to research or change your design ? What is it with you and making grand but thoughtless statements? Putting your unit at point blank would nullify your accuracy and evasion advantages as much as your...
by Deus Siddis
20 Mar 2013, 01:18
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 88896

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

↑ Here Reg312, that's probably why my patch is still not implemented. Each time the discussion end, there is a new guy who didn't read what was said before that doesn't understand the consequences of his request and come ask for more realism instead. :annoyed: I've been around here three years long...
by Deus Siddis
18 Mar 2013, 18:47
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 88896

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

I think the biggest problem is that we now have two accuracy systems. One based on physics, and one based on accuracy rolls. This game just ain't big enough for the both of them. One night they will meet in dark alley, and only one of them will walk out alive... :ninja: Go with physics based, it's ...
by Deus Siddis
14 Mar 2013, 01:45
Forum: Campaign
Topic: The game is too hard
Replies: 49
Views: 34765

Re: The game is too hard

As i've shown above, time limit should be at least 4x decreased in most missions to actually become a challenge. In fact, i'm seeing no aspects in which the campaign is hard, apart from learning how to play, which is absolutely necessary anyway. I don't know what you think you have shown or proven,...
by Deus Siddis
13 Mar 2013, 16:43
Forum: Campaign
Topic: The game is too hard
Replies: 49
Views: 34765

Re: The game is too hard

The problem is the campaign is too hard and too easy in the wrong aspects. You should be fighting the enemy not the clock. But the campaign's challenge is a built around a stupid, hard time limit rather than defeating a superior funded and tech-ed opponent with a competent AI. Timed missions should ...
by Deus Siddis
05 May 2012, 02:37
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 88896

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

Next, we determine the angle of shoot using a real looking Gaussian bell curve. We raycast the projectile to see were it would land, we determine the closest target to that location. If it's a hit, we correct the angle to hit it, if it's a miss, we correct the angle to miss it. We shoot at that loc...
by Deus Siddis
04 May 2012, 17:03
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 88896

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

Can you use more simple words? :roll: I can try, but then I have to use a much larger number of them. :wink: Okay, basically what "dice roll" means is if a weapon's stats say it has a 75% chance of hitting a target, then when the weapon "shoots" at the target, the game instantly...
by Deus Siddis
04 May 2012, 07:43
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 88896

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

you use dice rolls for most everything Eh? O_o Not *literal* dice, what we mean when we say that is "decided ahead of time by a pseudo-random number generator calibrated by a various unit stats" as opposed to a more physical simulation. Of course WZ uses a bit of both, but less so simulat...
by Deus Siddis
03 May 2012, 20:07
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 88896

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

We have a cartoonish accuracy where a assault gun miss half of his ammo even when facing an enemy that is wider than it is far. There is no way we can make it realistic without changing the whole game... Unless you have a solution that doesn't rely on a magic balance fairy that will come a fix your...
by Deus Siddis
02 May 2012, 18:41
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 88896

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

The problem with simulating actual trajectories is the computing requirements; it is not a trivial thing to do efficiently and its cost is always proportional to the amount of units on the map. Every simulation is an approximation. You use the degree of approximation that balances realism and trans...
by Deus Siddis
02 May 2012, 16:19
Forum: Balance
Topic: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)
Replies: 186
Views: 88896

Re: Chance to hit (accuracy) - does not sense in 3.1 (?)

You meant, rolling the actual dice roll, and then shooting the projectile, either on the target or beside the target if it's a miss. No, I meant shooting a projectile directly at a target, except with some deviation in the trajectory derived from a dice roll. Whether the projectile hits or misses a...