Flamer aim?

The place to discuss balance changes for future versions of the game.
(Master releases & 3.X)
Post Reply
LezzoMazonn
Greenhorn
Posts: 9
Joined: 18 May 2019, 18:55

Flamer aim?

Post by LezzoMazonn » 09 Oct 2019, 01:38

I've noticed the starting flamer (in SP skyrmish) almost never hits his targets, buildings or enemies, the turrets basically shots friendly units when firing.
Don't know about the inferno and such, right now i've noticed only that, still need to research the others.

Also noticed something similar with mgs, just spray all over the place, the AI doesn't seem to be THAT much affected.

Not that much gamebreaking, but still a pain to watch.

User avatar
Berserk Cyborg
Code contributor
Code contributor
Posts: 833
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 19:56

Re: Flamer aim?

Post by Berserk Cyborg » 10 Oct 2019, 22:19

Flamers tend to have poor long range accuracy, however, that isn't necessarily a bad thing and notably helps a fleeing unit that can keep its distance from a pursuing flamer. Probably one of the best cases of where army speed can make a big difference going against flamers.

Code: Select all

Flamer:
long range = 3 tiles @ 40% accuracy
short range = 2 tiles @ 90% accuracy

Inferno/Plasmite:
long range = 4 tiles @ 50% accuracy
short range = 3 tiles @ 75% accuracy
Friendly fire only happens if the weapon has splash damage (mostly cannon/mortar like weapons) and the AI doesn't have any magical buffs to accuracy that I know of. Most likely some AI controlled units were within that short range distance of whatever they were attacking.

User avatar
Prot
Trained
Trained
Posts: 205
Joined: 29 Nov 2010, 12:41

Re: Flamer aim?

Post by Prot » 11 Oct 2019, 05:34

Yeah, in Math or Balance it may necessary.
But visual it look ugly, when cyborg before shot a foe, turns to the side at 45 degrees and shoots a flamethrower.

nick87720z
Trained
Trained
Posts: 77
Joined: 25 Feb 2014, 16:37

Re: Flamer aim?

Post by nick87720z » 15 Oct 2019, 07:34

Is it impossible to make dispersion based on exact distance instead of range classification short/medium/long?
When I played flamer tanks in skirmish, units did not intentionally turn aim, but sometimes fire goes up to 90 deg to side. Not just ugly, but... impossible (can't remember exact situation, probably target was enough close).
when cyborg before shot a foe, turns to the side at 45 degrees and shoots a flamethrower.
Never noticed units turning to some angle to shooting line, but it could be another bug, I encountered these days: when on High-Ground I tried to shoot something behind closer derick on enemy side with mortar (played Return to Basics, then tested Cobra AI in same conditions), sometimes mortar clearly chose different target, so I had to click several times.

User avatar
Prot
Trained
Trained
Posts: 205
Joined: 29 Nov 2010, 12:41

Re: Flamer aim?

Post by Prot » 18 Oct 2019, 13:13

Well, now i see how flamer cyborg shoots flames almost 180 degree. It's very strange to see a cyborg run forward and shoot backwards.

nick87720z
Trained
Trained
Posts: 77
Joined: 25 Feb 2014, 16:37

Re: Flamer aim?

Post by nick87720z » 18 Oct 2019, 13:57

Well, now i see how flamer cyborg shoots flames almost 180 degree. It's very strange to see a cyborg run forward and shoot backwards.
Berserk Cyborg XD

User avatar
Berserk Cyborg
Code contributor
Code contributor
Posts: 833
Joined: 26 Sep 2016, 19:56

Re: Flamer aim?

Post by Berserk Cyborg » 18 Oct 2019, 22:13

nick87720z wrote:
15 Oct 2019, 07:34
Is it impossible to make dispersion based on exact distance instead of range classification short/medium/long?
When I played flamer tanks in skirmish, units did not intentionally turn aim, but sometimes fire goes up to 90 deg to side. Not just ugly, but... impossible (can't remember exact situation, probably target was enough close).
when cyborg before shot a foe, turns to the side at 45 degrees and shoots a flamethrower.
Turrets don't turn, the projectile just misses. Maybe too good.

I watched a flamer cyborg attack a tower for good while... it never shot backwards. Nor when I moved it around it. There might be a chance where the miss location is a couple tiles off to the side, or, maybe directly in front of the cyborg. Couple that with moving in the right direction and it may look like it shot backwards.
Never noticed units turning to some angle to shooting line, but it could be another bug, I encountered these days: when on High-Ground I tried to shoot something behind closer derick on enemy side with mortar (played Return to Basics, then tested Cobra AI in same conditions), sometimes mortar clearly chose different target, so I had to click several times.
Probably an old inconvenience where artillery has the tendency to hit the tops of structures in-between the intended target and the artillery unit. This happens a lot with those square defense patterns like in highground and rush maps. It's the hitboxes... they are taller than the visual representation.

Unless your saw those mortars turning towards a unit after you clicked a structure. That would be a bug.

nick87720z
Trained
Trained
Posts: 77
Joined: 25 Feb 2014, 16:37

Re: Flamer aim?

Post by nick87720z » 19 Oct 2019, 08:38

Unless your saw those mortars turning towards a unit after you clicked a structure. That would be a bug.
Yest, exactly so - they are turning :)
Another instance of probably same issue, is that even if I target wall behind the derrick, in hope to avoid hitting closer wall instead of derrick, it still mostly hits wall (having two mortar chance to hit upgrade).

Edit: I guess second case is side effect, better working with direct fire, when units intentionally target enemy units on the way of requested target (as guessed when I have seen that).

User avatar
Iluvalar
Regular
Regular
Posts: 1802
Joined: 02 Oct 2010, 18:44

Re: Flamer aim?

Post by Iluvalar » 19 Nov 2019, 00:20

If he's playing with the new aim system that was fixed recently, we should just oblige and fix the accuracy to match better his expectation. Flamers used to miss inside the hitbox anyway, with the splash dmg, it was most likely hitting at 100%.

Now, I also believe playing with fire should be a bit hazardous and we should leave a little bit of wriggle room for a few epic miss. This being said, if the cyborgs now shoot behind them regularly, this is a matter of just adjusting individual accuracy stats in the file.
Heretic 2.3 improver and proud of it.

nick87720z
Trained
Trained
Posts: 77
Joined: 25 Feb 2014, 16:37

Re: Flamer aim?

Post by nick87720z » 14 Dec 2019, 12:34

Never could not understand, why accuracy is measured by distances instead of angle. It would be more essential on max distance, and least likely at close, and no miss at point blank. How could change from current to angle-based spread worsen balance. Of course, there was different topic about that (afaik, made by me), but it is too old - I'm not sure if necroposting is good here. Same applies to any weapons. When I used MG - not even at point blank, sometimes bullets fly at 45deg (at last version).

As for room for random miss - it probably should depend on unit experience, and be applied to weapon's precision. With one note - it is better to be added than multiplied, since it is clear that no matter how good weapon is if you can't properly operate it.

Post Reply