Accuracy straw poll

The place to discuss balance changes for future versions of the game.
(Master releases & 3.X)

Which accuracy system do you want?

Random to-hit roll, no physics
0
No votes
Gaussian to-hit roll, no physics
7
28%
Physics-based only, no random roll
8
32%
Projectiles always hit (the Starcraft option)
3
12%
Do not change anything / I do not understand this poll / No opinion
7
28%
 
Total votes: 25

Originway
Trained
Trained
Posts: 412
Joined: 08 Aug 2012, 06:22

Re: Accuracy straw poll

Post by Originway » 02 Apr 2013, 19:29

War2070 wrote:I know you guys like to look like you know what your doing. Your changing it so much it looks like its headed to be crap and you won't be able to remember what you did to make it like that.
everything they do is listed at the github so you can't forget
You guys made a mess of everything from what Warzone 2100 version 1.1 was. To me you you all look like a bunch of kids trying to learn programming on everyone's backs. The weapons in 1.1 were dependable and fired just the way it was supposed to. Now if you can make the weapons dependable I have no problem with that.
yeah it is much better to play 1.0 with all the issues that had :roll:
they do make mistakes but at least they are going back on somethings like #3918 which now works as expected

User avatar
Rexy
Trained
Trained
Posts: 104
Joined: 30 Aug 2012, 07:04
Contact:

Re: Accuracy straw poll

Post by Rexy » 02 Apr 2013, 21:06

Nevermind.
Last edited by Rexy on 02 Apr 2013, 21:29, edited 1 time in total.
"My roots - My culture" = Decebalus Rex - "The Brave One" King of Dacia 87-106 AD
Romanian-American at heart!

User avatar
Rommel
Trained
Trained
Posts: 446
Joined: 03 Nov 2012, 19:44

Re: Accuracy straw poll

Post by Rommel » 02 Apr 2013, 21:18

Whatever you say Rexy, War2070 is completely out of line... maybe you should teach your boy some manners, maybe put him over your knee and give him a good spanking...
Moving back instead of forward
Seems to me absurd
~
Metallica - Eye of the beholder

User avatar
War2070
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 25
Joined: 06 Mar 2012, 04:42

Re: Accuracy straw poll

Post by War2070 » 02 Apr 2013, 22:26

I know your a volunteer but your not the red cross, and I'm not attacking you personally. I just have a problem with the stuff you produce in these versions of warzone. Being as you took up the mantle to continue warzone, you do have a responsibility to produce something playable. I don't understand why anyone would want to be subjected to a 15 minute game when 1 hour has passed. That's one of the options you provided us for free. Warzone is the only game I know of that does it. The build pointer still goes all over place origin. But its not the point I want to make here. What I'm asking is to make the weapons dependable like it used to be. The only one that gets close to fitting that profile is the starcraft option.

This is Warzone 2100 we're talking about here and its the tip of the pyramid in all strategy games. So I have very high expectations. You have to understand what I'm saying here. It's one of my passions to play this game and the only direction I want to see this game go is to make it fun and playable for all.

raycast
Trained
Trained
Posts: 131
Joined: 12 Sep 2012, 19:16

Re: Accuracy straw poll

Post by raycast » 03 Apr 2013, 17:06

If you want to play starcraft, go play starcraft with its simpler shooting logic (and, actually, 2D flat maps).

If you want to play WZ 1.1, then go play WZ 1.1.

I do like the gameplay of WZ 3.1, and I do have the impression that a lot of other people do so, too.

In my opinion, warzone has always being about requiring (even) smarter players, that makes use of the terrain, that research weapons in the way that fits to their current strategy. That try to exploit weapon differences, accuracy and all the small details of the gameplay.

Whereas Starcraft seems to be a lot about becoming the fastest micromanager, and is all about ordering units fast to do maximum (guaranteed) damage. If you want this, it's well available: Starcraft!

I do believe that NTW T3 is largely a hack to make WZ simpler, by largely removing economy and research out of the equation (and usually, also the maps do not have a lot of terrain, either). The call for a T4 is along the same lines. In my opinion, any game where a player is able to max out on research is a bad game. Because it means, a player ran out of research choices!

How about just doing a mod that gives 100% accuracy if you want simpler gameplay? There shouldn't be anything in the engine stopping you from doing this, actually. But why cripple the base game to the point where it is just a cheap Starcraft clone?

Per
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Warzone 2100 Team Member
Posts: 3777
Joined: 03 Aug 2006, 19:39

Re: Accuracy straw poll

Post by Per » 03 Apr 2013, 18:35

raycast wrote:Starcraft with its ... 2D flat maps
Actually, height matters a great deal on Starcraft maps. Making correct use of cliffs is one thing that can decide the outcome of a game. In Warzone, higher ground has no similar advantage.

User avatar
NoQ
Special
Special
Posts: 6226
Joined: 24 Dec 2009, 11:35
Location: /var/zone

Re: Accuracy straw poll

Post by NoQ » 03 Apr 2013, 18:40

In Warzone, higher ground has no similar advantage.
Yeah, its advantages are quite subtle. But there are some.

In general, you can move faster when you are moving from highground to lowground. This makes it harder to take the base by attack up the ramp (long-range defense will have more time for dealing damage), and also allows the guy on the highground quickly move away from incoming flamers or other short-range weapons (he won't be able to do that when he's at the bottom of the cliff, and flamers are coming from the other side), and also let flamers that stay on highground make more effective surprise attacks, and that sort of stuff.

User avatar
Iluvalar
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1819
Joined: 02 Oct 2010, 18:44

Re: Accuracy straw poll

Post by Iluvalar » 18 Apr 2013, 04:24

So now ? Is any developer willing to lose his time implementing an epic fail or what ?
Heretic 2.3 improver and proud of it.

Originway
Trained
Trained
Posts: 412
Joined: 08 Aug 2012, 06:22

Re: Accuracy straw poll

Post by Originway » 20 Apr 2013, 21:11

most people want Physics-based only, no random roll

User avatar
Iluvalar
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1819
Joined: 02 Oct 2010, 18:44

Re: Accuracy straw poll

Post by Iluvalar » 21 Apr 2013, 16:12

They want the overall idea to be more realistic. Which I agree on when possible. But this time it's not, it's game breaking.

Since we have an armor layer, balance changes wont be able to be absorbed in invisible variables (ie damage). It ought to be pushed straight into the ROF. This mean that innaccurate weapons like machine guns will need to shoot faster and accurate weapons slower. Slow fireing mg might look ok, but in any rate, it will be essential to keep the accuracy somewhere around the actual one. Otherwise, the ROF will look mad.

Now, knowing that the accuracy will be somewhere around the actual, We can demonstrate easily that a 60% accuracy at 7 tiles will turn into a 100% accuracy around 4.2 tiles away from the target. And that a 50% accuracy will at 3.5. We can mathematically demonstrate that the accuracy efficiency between those 2 poles will shift from 5:6 to 1:1. Causing one of the 2 players get a 20% boost by moving 1/2 a tile away.

We empirically know that this 20% advantage will quickly be a win/lose trigger in every games where players are about the same skill. It would be exactly like giving the assault gun to a player instead of his normal machine gun. Or giving him 1 or 2 more derricks in his base. Unless both player spend most of their attention into moving most of their units into that 0.7 tile wide gap.

A 0.7 tile gap that will never be the same and change depending on the size of the units and the chosen weapon. So, unless both player memorize that 4 dimensional grid of about 625 possibilities (only at start) , one of them will lose randomly. Each time the accuracy of both weapons are not the exact same.

This is not an opinion, it's a mathematical proof by the way.
Heretic 2.3 improver and proud of it.

Cyp
Evitcani
Evitcani
Posts: 779
Joined: 17 Jan 2010, 23:35

Re: Accuracy straw poll

Post by Cyp » 21 Apr 2013, 17:39

Is the size of the gap always 0.7 tiles, or does the size of the gap depend on which types of weapons are used? What is the size of the gap for the combination of flamer vs scourge?

User avatar
NoQ
Special
Special
Posts: 6226
Joined: 24 Dec 2009, 11:35
Location: /var/zone

Re: Accuracy straw poll

Post by NoQ » 21 Apr 2013, 18:13

I'm not understanding, again. By simply eliminating accuracy (accidentally, the most popular option), don't we get rid of these accuracy gaps (in most places, when it comes to fast-bullet direct weapons)? There are other troubles (weird rate of fire, less epic combat scenes, increased focus on micro), but not much of this one (?)

User avatar
Iluvalar
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1819
Joined: 02 Oct 2010, 18:44

Re: Accuracy straw poll

Post by Iluvalar » 22 Apr 2013, 04:10

Cyp wrote:Is the size of the gap always 0.7 tiles, or does the size of the gap depend on which types of weapons are used? What is the size of the gap for the combination of flamer vs scourge?
One must first survive flamer vs mini pod during a long while before he reach the mythical scourge.

You are right, the gap between flamers and pods would be the greater (2 tiles). But I don't think it really affect much my arguments.

If you don't believe me just try. I'm just waiting that now.


@NoQ, but then, why not just applying the patch I made ? Or reg312's one ?
Heretic 2.3 improver and proud of it.

Deus Siddis
Trained
Trained
Posts: 235
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 06:58

Re: Accuracy straw poll

Post by Deus Siddis » 23 Apr 2013, 22:01

NoQ wrote:I'm not understanding, again. By simply eliminating accuracy (accidentally, the most popular option), don't we get rid of these accuracy gaps (in most places, when it comes to fast-bullet direct weapons)?
Indeed, that is what Per's tests confirmed. When physically simulated, shots generally hit their targets with precision. But when unusual situations do happen, the physics simulation handles it realistically so that there is no weird visual glitch.

raycast
Trained
Trained
Posts: 131
Joined: 12 Sep 2012, 19:16

Re: Accuracy straw poll

Post by raycast » 24 Apr 2013, 15:54

Hi all,
Instead of speculating how things may be fun and how they may not, or what may be realistic and which is not (WZ will never be realistic, it's fiction!) - actually try out the available patches.

I have made a patch that is probably more realistic, and hopefully still fun, although it raises the need for rebalancing. However, I have not received a single feedback on it. If we only argue here, and complain, but never even test the goddamn patches, we will be getting nowhere...

So actually, learn how to build WZ, try out some patches, report feedback on the available variants or come up with an own variant. There is little use in discussion how things should be done. Show actual code patches, so we can test. And of course, help testing the variants.

I figure I will stop contributing - and in fact I havn't touched WZ in weeks - if I keep on getting no feedback whatsoever on my proposed patches to accuracy and targeting logics.

What you are doing is theory, but you refuse to get practical. With "you" I refer to pretty much everyone except the active developers such as Per; of course the active contributors do try out things. But a lot of people like to complain, but never bother to try to put their theory into actual C++ code that could run the game, and then actually play-test it.

So start developing, stop complaining. A patch actually has a chance to make it into the game. A complaint barely ever does.

Post Reply