How should direct-fire targeting work?

[Zarel]

If someone with the requisite privileges can create a poll, that'd be nice.

So direct-fire unit targeting is kind of weird, and I think it's implemented incorrectly in trunk. So I'm going to ask everyone how they want targeting to be implemented.

Every direct-fire unit has two ranges, let's call them "internal sensor range" and "weapon range". Internal sensor range is always 8 tiles plus sensor upgrades (max 11 tiles), and weapon range can be anywhere from 3 to 16 tiles (Except Missile Fortress, which is 31 tiles).

"Internal sensor range" is obviously the range the unit can see, and "weapon range" is the range the unit can shoot. This brings the problem of what to do if weapon range is higher than sensor range. I mean, you can't shoot something you can't see, can you?



There are three different ways to do this, so I want you, dear reader, to tell me which way is best. It'd be nice if you told me why you think that way is best. (To be unbiased, I won't tell you which way 2.x or 1.10 does it.)

• A. Units can only shoot up to internal sensor range. Weapons that have ranges higher than 11 will never be able to shoot more than 11 tiles. Obviously, this means that the weapons should be changed so that their weapon ranges don't exceed 11 tiles, so we won't get people asking why Scourge Missile has a 16 tile weapon range if it can only shoot 11 tiles.
• B. Units can only shoot up to internal sensor range, except they can shoot up to weapon range if what they're shooting is seen by a sensor turret or tower (this does NOT include Wide Spectrum Sensor). In other words, their range is like indirect-fire weapons, except they can't fire over walls and obstacles.
• C. Units can shoot anything you can see, up to weapon range.
• D. Units can shoot anything you know where it is, up to weapon range. Nearly identical to the above, except they can also shoot structures you can't see. How does this work? If you bring your units into vision range of an enemy structure, and then you get out of range, you can't actually "see" the structure any more, but it's still on the map and you can still click on it. With C, you wouldn't be able to shoot it. With D, you would.

I might want to appear unbiased, and not show any preferences, but saying my preference shouldn't be different from anyone else saying their own preference, so I'm going to say I like C or D, because A or B really defeat the purpose of having weapons with range greater than 11. Seriously, if you can see it, and it's in range, you should be able to shoot it.

EvilGuru: Added poll.

[caotic]

I would prefer something like: Units can shoot anything they or the commander they are assigned to can see, up to weapon range.

[fisk0]

I'd prefer C, and it shouldn't be limited to the range of the commander or something like that, but if you can see an enemy, and have a unit within weapons range which can not see the unit itself, it should be able to shoot at it, think of it as you've got that unit who spotted the enemy relaying where to point the gun to the unit with the weapon range.
As for D, it is interesting, do you mean that you get a crosshair when holding the mouse pointer over the structure you can't see anymore? Of course, that could be if you fly over an area with an VTOL and notice a lot of structures, and then order your artillery with to fire at the position even after the VTOL can't see the buildings anymore.
I think I'd like there to be something similar to the "force unit to fire" thing available in the C&C games and Total Annihilation, if you hold ctrl the pointer turns to a crosshair and you can fire on any area within weapons range. In C&C and TA that was useful if you though there might be a cloaked unit there, though WZ does not have cloaked units that would allow you to fire at positions you think the enemy is at (maybe allowing for bombarding a place you think there is an ambush at with artillery before letting your units go there).

Now, I voted for C a bit too fast I think, when I think more of it I'm still undecided between C and D.

[Zi-Chan]

Easy: D. Units should be able to fire to wherever your Cursor is, no matter if there is something or not. This is Reality. You don't need to see something to set your Weapon to a Direction. You can push the Button without having the Eyes opened, so D is the only logical and realistic Option.
And Units should be able to fire within their Range and to see more than with their own internal Sensors with the Help of other Sensors (other Units and Structures). This is the primary Sense of them - upgrading the Range of Sight. If Units can't do that, Sensors are almost senseless and only upgrade your Visibility - not very helpful to your Units.

[Per]

I am pretty sure it has been this way always, it is not something we added. The reason why weapons have higher ranges than the internal sensor is probably because you are able to upgrade your internal sensor, and so direct weapons range is dependent on two different variables (the weapon itself, and your sensor range).

The D option is bad - since you can't see the building, you won't know when it has been destroyed. (For the realism fans - you also don't know if you hit, nor do you know how to adjust your aim to hit closer next time. You need some kind of guidance, and I assume GPS is no longer available.)

Also, what is wrong with Wide Spectrum Sensor? It is just another sensor.

A different issue is that no unit can "see" anything outside a certain range (9 tiles) because the code is limited this way (for speed reasons, probably). This should be fixed. We could use grid indexing or a quad tree to remove this artificial limitation entirely.

[Zi-Chan]

The D option is bad - since you can't see the building, you won't know when it has been destroyed.

You need some kind of guidance

This doesn't really speak against the D-Option. It is Reality, that you can shoot something you can't see. No 100% Chance of Success of hitting it, sure - it's about allowing. In real Life you can shoot your 3Kilometer-Range Tank Weapon even if you don't see the Target. Yes, you then maybe don't really know, if you hit, but that's not the Point. The Point is the Ability to set your Weapon to a certain Direction and Height and to push the Button to shoot and this Ability exists in real Life. This is, why the D-Option is the only realistic and logical one.
Noticing anything is not needed for setting up your Weapon and firing. So the Structures and the Units should be able to fire to whereever your Cursor is. You should be able to click beside an Enemy Tank with an Area-Effect-Weapon and you should hit it. Just like the ClusterBombs of the VTOLs already do. This is realistic and so the other Weapons should be.

More Realism to Warzone - think about it and choose D! You don't need to see something to shoot at its Direction - i know, this isn't really *direct*-targetting, but it's realistic!

By the Way: I am for Firing to the Direction of the Cursor, but the Units should only fire automatically within their or other Sensor's Range. The Firing out of their Sight is a manually Firing by you, the allmighty uber blabla Commander.

[Deus Siddis]

Easy: D. Units should be able to fire to wherever your Cursor is, no matter if there is something or not. This is Reality. You don't need to see something to set your Weapon to a Direction. You can push the Button without having the Eyes opened, so D is the only logical and realistic Option.
And Units should be able to fire within their Range and to see more than with their own internal Sensors with the Help of other Sensors (other Units and Structures). This is the primary Sense of them - upgrading the Range of Sight. If Units can't do that, Sensors are almost senseless and only upgrade your Visibility - not very helpful to your Units.

Zi, that is a good point, except that the feature you describe (force fire from command & conquer) is something entirely different from Zarel's option 'D'.

Units of all types, including indirect fire artillery should damn well be able to fire anyplace you tell them to, regardless of what is visible to them. Anything else is just horseshit.


And speaking of horseshit, we come to the next issue- fog of war (horseshit) versus line of sight with optional meteorlogical fog.

Basically the way this should work is you have line of sight detection, where if a line drawn from one your units to another enemy one collides with nothing in between, the enemy unit is visible to you. For old fashioned players who just can't get enough fog of war, this option can be turned on for all maps regardless of their default settings.

This is the default, but some maps can be set to have volumetric or particle fog that besides being visible to the player, create a corresponding visual range limitation for his units, which obviously limits what he and his forces can see and respond to.

So let's call this option E, which is the option I am voting for because I see this as the ultimate solution to this problem and something to put the WRP on the cutting edge of RTS, in addition to making it much more realistic, fun and deep in the realm of gameplay.

[Zarel]

First of all, I'm glad no one's voting B - that's what I tried to implement first (in patch #97), and it really slowed down the game.

I am pretty sure it has been this way always, it is not something we added. The reason why weapons have higher ranges than the internal sensor is probably because you are able to upgrade your internal sensor, and so direct weapons range is dependent on two different variables (the weapon itself, and your sensor range).

You can't upgrade your internal sensor past 11 tiles, though, and weapons range goes out to 31 tiles.

So while currently, 2.x is using A, I still think I remember 1.10 using D.

The D option is bad - since you can't see the building, you won't know when it has been destroyed. (For the realism fans - you also don't know if you hit, nor do you know how to adjust your aim to hit closer next time. You need some kind of guidance, and I assume GPS is no longer available.)

I know you mean realism, but 1.10 implemented unseen buildings by having them disappear if they got destroyed (but not reappear if they were rebuilt).

Also, what is wrong with Wide Spectrum Sensor? It is just another sensor.

Sorry, I meant Satellite Uplink Sensor.

A different issue is that no unit can "see" anything outside a certain range (9 tiles) because the code is limited this way (for speed reasons, probably). This should be fixed. We could use grid indexing or a quad tree to remove this artificial limitation entirely.

I'm not sure if raising the range to 10 is really going to slow it down all that much - structures can see up to sensor range already.

Units of all types, including indirect fire artillery should damn well be able to fire anyplace you tell them to, regardless of what is visible to them. Anything else is just horseshit.

Well, indirect fire artillery currently uses option B, as you may have noticed. They can't shoot very far without sensors to help them target, and sensors can't target anything they can't see. If we were to let artillery fire anywhere, they would be far overpowered.

ABasically the way this should work is you have line of sight detection, where if a line drawn from one your units to another enemy one collides with nothing in between, the enemy unit is visible to you. For old fashioned players who just can't get enough fog of war, this option can be turned on for all maps regardless of their default settings.

This is the default, but some maps can be set to have volumetric or particle fog that besides being visible to the player, create a corresponding visual range limitation for his units, which obviously limits what he and his forces can see and respond to.

So let's call this option E, which is the option I am voting for because I see this as the ultimate solution to this problem and something to put the WRP on the cutting edge of RTS, in addition to making it much more realistic, fun and deep in the realm of gameplay.

Currently, Warzone has both LoS and fog of war - units can only see things they both have LoS and is within range. This is most obvious with a fully upgraded WSS - there are usually a lot of spots within range that you can't see because you don't have LoS to.

[Per]

I think we actually all agree. Units should not be targeting direct fire outside their own sensor range, but should be able to force fire there. So if a player assigns a target that is outside sensor range but within weapon range, it will fire, but if the droid lacks a target, it won't find any outside its sensor range. Does this sound ok?

As to "real life" and "realism"... Pfffft. This is a game! As long as we can get away with it (ie does not break the suspension of disbelief), realism is not important.

[Zarel]

I think we actually all agree. Units should not be targeting direct fire outside their own sensor range, but should be able to force fire there. So if a player assigns a target that is outside sensor range but within weapon range, it will fire, but if the droid lacks a target, it won't find any outside its sensor range. Does this sound ok?

As to "real life" and "realism"... Pfffft. This is a game! As long as we can get away with it (ie does not break the suspension of disbelief), realism is not important.

Actually, I'm talking about structure targeting. Structures should be able to target outside their own sensor range.

[Per]

Why should structure and droid targeting be any different?

[Zarel]

Why should structure and droid targeting be any different?

Because you can't manually control structures. And even if you could, you shouldn't need to.

[Zi-Chan]

Why should structure and droid targeting be any different?

Because you can't manually control structures. And even if you could, you shouldn't need to.

I find, you should be able to as the "Commander". Reality.. bla bla

[Zarel]

Because you can't manually control structures. And even if you could, you shouldn't need to.

I find, you should be able to as the "Commander". Reality.. bla bla

I know, I know, hence "Even if you could, you shouldn't need to." I agree that it'd be a good feature to make structures controllable (although a bit unbalancing), but you generally shouldn't have to explicitly tell a structure to shoot something to get it to shoot a tank if that tank's already within range and shooting at it.

[elio]

do commander-assigned units adopt the sensor range of the commander?