Jump to content
  • DevDiary 6 - Combat, Part one

    Combat, Part One

    Hello there! I am Boian Spasov and it is my pleasure to welcome you to a DevDiary on a subject that I’ve been wanting to write about for a long time – combat! Yeah, it’s a big one - there is so much to talk about that a single article won’t be enough and you can expect a second combat DevDiary down the road.

    As stated in our first DevDiary “Game Vision” the combat is one of the pillars of Jagged Alliance 3. It is a deep, involved and realistic experience and is the single aspect of the game that we iterated on the most during development.

    Combat in Jagged Alliance 3 is turn-based with your entire team taking a turn, followed by the enemy team. During your turn you are free to activate your characters in any order and intermix action between them.

    DevDiary_Screenshot_01.thumb.jpg.737962c46e79fad3270ba911ea2808f8.jpg

    A typical character turn in many tactical games can be described as simply as “I move to this position and attack with this skill”. This level of abstraction is perfectly fine for these titles and we have seen how it can create deep and engaging gameplay, but for a simulative game like Jagged Alliance 3 we wanted more precise level of control over your character’s actions. How exactly do you move - will you hustle recklessly or carefully crawl to the target location? How exactly do you attack? Do you take your time to aim carefully? Will you attempt to cripple the target shooting a burst at their limbs or gamble for a killer headshot instead? This is achieved with several game mechanics working in concert, the most important of which are the Action Point system, the movement stances, the weapon firing modes and the body parts targeting system.

    Action Points

    All actions that a character takes during their team’s turn are limited by their available number of Action Points (AP). A simple action like crouching may cost only a single Action Point, while a more time-consuming action like a carefully aimed attack with a rocket launcher may consume most of the characters’ AP for the turn. Attack actions may be modified by spending additional AP to aim more carefully, increasing the chance to hit precisely with the net benefit from Aiming also depending on the weapon and the character stats.

    DevDiary_Screenshot_02.thumb.jpg.a93dcfd9f5e3ff6aeae1a3c44574b837.jpg

    An average rookie merc has around 10-12 AP per turn. This number is increased for veteran mercs and when conditions are favorable, like at high morale, but never too much. We intentionally kept the numbers relatively low to ease the mental calculations related to Action Points that players do each turn. However, even though the available number of AP is always displayed as an integer, it is internally stored with higher precision and certain very simple actions like moving at a short distance effectively cost only a fraction of an action point.

    Stances

    Characters are always in one of the three movement stances – standing, crouching or prone. Movement actions have different costs based on the chosen movement stance – crawling takes significantly more time than running the same distance but will realistically hide you from sight when you are behind an obstacle and is generally safer against firearm attacks and explosives. Conversely, if the enemy will attack you with a melee attack you will be at a disadvantage if you are crouching or prone.

    DevDiary_Screenshot_03.thumb.jpg.a0782b201827f31b76dc8f2b2a9c7887.jpg

    When moving you can always lock your chosen movement stance, manage stances manually or let the game manage them automatically, switching to standing when this will optimize AP usage while moving but still ending the movement in your desired stance. This approach is not without risks – your characters are more exposed if they are running around standing between safer spots and if you expect to provoke an enemy attack it might be better to move crouched or prone.

    Firing Modes and Body Parts

    You have three important decisions to make when attacking – how many additional AP you are willing to spend aiming, what firing mode do you wish to use and a what body part to target. Firing modes are pretty straightforward - an automatic weapon, like an AK-47, is able to attack not only with single shots but also with burst an auto-fire attacks, shooting more bullets at the expense of accuracy and AP cost. Since bullets are simulated individually this also tends to create more chaos on the battlefield, but I will talk more about the bullet simulation further down.

    DevDiary_Screenshot_04.thumb.jpg.e2b74d56fdb0dedd63b88efcc201df53.jpg

    With a double-barreled shotgun you can offload both barrels with the same attack, but you will have to reload afterwards. A dual-wielding character may alternate between firing with both weapons or just one of them by selecting the appropriate firing mode.

    Body part targeting allows you to try to hit a specific body part and inflict additional effects with the attack. Headshots are often difficult to pull of but deal massive damage, while arm and leg shots are often useful for crippling enemies that you will not be able to finish off during the current turn. Melee attacks may be targeted at the enemy neck, inflicting various crippling effects that depend on your weapon of choice.

    (Note that some of the following screenshots demonstrate some debug functionality available only to developers.  These shots are marked with “Dev mode enabled” in the bottom left corner and are not representative for the game visuals as seen by the players.)

    DevDiary_Screenshot_05_orig.thumb.jpg.7398a3f73d06834779678ccd581c93e3.jpg

    Firing at a particular body part is only possible when you have a clear line of fire to it – as determined by the geometry of the level. Some body parts may be armored, presenting interesting moment-to-moment tactical choices during the battle.

    Body part targeting is never possible when you don’t have clear sight to the enemy like for example when you are firing at an enemy behind a wall…

    DevDiary_Screenshot_06.thumb.jpg.70032cb2635d8ae4f0fae3ca9a53b329.jpg


    Bullet Simulation

    Hitting someone behind a wall – what kind of sorcery is this? I apologize for getting a bit ahead of myself here, but I will explain immediately. Hitting enemies through walls and even through other enemies is possible in Jagged Alliance 3, thanks to our bullet simulation logic.

    The bullet simulation logic involves a set of calculations for each individual bullet fired, based on the caliber and type of the bullet as well as the materials encountered along its path (armor, bodies or environmental objects). Both accurate and inaccurate attacks may have various unexpected effects because of it, like penetrating an enemy body to hit another enemy, grazing an ally by accident or destroying some of the environment on the bullet path.

     

    The bullet simulation and the destruction system took considerable amount on effort to implement and support but all the effort was worth it because at its core combat in Jagged Alliance 3 aims to be a realistic experience, one that would not be possible without a realistic simulation running behind it. Which neatly brings me to the final, and perhaps the most important, point that I want to discuss in this DevDiary…

    No Visible Chance-to-Hit

    Each time you are setting up an attack in Jagged Alliance 3 you will see various factors that affect it both increasing and decreasing the chance for the attack to be accurate. What you will not see is an exact, precise chance-to-hit percentage number.

    DevDiary_Screenshot_08b.thumb.jpg.1fc8917d8bd07ef809989c33f2395311.jpg

    During the early years of development Jagged Alliance 3 displayed visible chance-to-hit, just like XCom and many other tactical games do. What we observed time and time again during our playtest sessions was that people were focusing on this number to the point where they centered their entire gameplay style around it, like never attacking when it is below a certain threshold. It also created moments of frustration and disappointment as in-your-face randomness sometimes tends to do.

    We don’t feel there is anything wrong in principle with visible chance to hit. There are many immensely successful tactical games out there that play exactly like this and CTH was present even in some of the most popular JA mods. It is, however, not the kind of a core experience we had in mind for Jagged Alliance 3, a game meant to represent firefights in their entire chaotic and messy glory. We wanted an experience that allows you develop a sense for certain situations, a game that makes you focus on your surroundings and the unique combat situation instead of a number in the interface. That was our reasoning when we decided to experimentally hide the chance-to-hit number in the interface and observe if the players will approach the combat situations differently afterwards. The first confirmation that we were on the right track came from none other than Ian Curry, the creator of Jagged Alliance, and many more followed in the months after – players were more involved now, found the situations more unpredictable and the game more unique and distinctive. Encounter after encounter, they were gradually developing a sense of mastery and generally had way more fun this way!

    We are fully aware that the decision to remove chance-to-hit will never sit right with some players but still feel that it is the crucial design decision that made our combat “click” and feel right. There are many tactical games with perfect and detailed CTH information out there, but too few where you play “by feel” as was the case with the classic Jagged Alliance!

    Thank you for reading the first combat DevDiary. Here are some of the subjects we might explore in the next one – Weather Effects, Night and Darkness, Stealth and Overwatch/Interrupt Attacks. If you are interested in any other aspect of the combat gameplay, please suggest in in the thread below.

    DevDiary_Screenshot_05.jpg

    DevDiary_Screenshot_07.jpg


    • Like 11
    THQN Roger



    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    @Reloecc: Sure the balancing must be right and the combat results should feel logical. I hope the combat invites you to try different strategies and weapons (that can fail sometimes) but also rewards you if you choose the best logical decision in that specific situation. Total random chaos is not what I want.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    12 hours ago, anon474 said:

    A concise-ish list of requests, to potentially make JA3 more like JA2:

    We should get the list going and keeping it for a modding community. Like making a github and issues already. Even I am afraid modding is very very far away. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Just now, KyleSimmons said:

    I'm a little bit worried about the inclusion of CtH but I have full support behind the dev team

     

    You mean exclusion? As a CTH display is not included.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Just now, Kordanor said:

    You mean exclusion? As a CTH display is not included.

    Yes, forgive me. I mean CtH is probably a good idea to include. It's included in almost every other strategy game right?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    5 minutes ago, KyleSimmons said:

    Yes, forgive me. I mean CtH is probably a good idea to include. It's included in almost every other strategy game right?

    Only modern games, possibly taking XCom as a blueprint.

    Back in the days, CTH was not always shown. JA1 , JA DG, JA2 didnt Show the chance. Neither did XCom (the original) or Terror from the Deep.

    The thing is, that in nuXCom the Hitchance needs to be displayed as you only have 4 characters each with 1 attack (2 actions: 1 Attack + 1 Move). So you need to weigh in chances exactly for every single action. A miss of a single shot might also end up being super frustrating, a downward spiral very quick.

    With old XCom and Jagged Alliance that is not the case. Old XCom you had many more characters, and you had Time Units (TU), same as JAs Action Points. So you could shoot like up to 10-15 times per turn. So each shot has much less of an impact and things start to "average out".

    Edited by Kordanor
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    6 minutes ago, Kordanor said:

    Only modern games, possibly taking XCom as a blueprint.

    Back in the days, CTH was not always shown. JA1 , JA DG, JA2 didnt Show the chance. Neither did XCom (the original) or Terror from the Deep.

    The thing is, that in nuXCom the Hitchance needs to be displayed as you only have 4 characters each with 1 attack (2 actions: 1 Attack + 1 Move). So you need to weigh in chances exactly for every single action. A miss of a single shot might also end up being super frustrating, a downward spiral very quick.

    With old XCom and Jagged Alliance that is not the case. Old XCom you had many more characters, and you had Time Units (TU), same as JAs Action Points. So you could shoot like up to 10-15 times per turn. So each shot has much less of an impact and things start to "average out".

    Not really, CTH was in lots of RPGs going back to Icewind Dale.

    Basically every RPG had CTH

    I'm sorry but none of the reasons you described pan out

    Silent Storm had CTH

    modern jagged alliance sequels like Rage had CTH

    All old and new RPGs have CTH

    XCOM has CTH

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Thank you for your post Boian!

    I in general think that there are reasons for doing everything and anything in JA3, but I think maybe there should be an emphasis to try to capture the tone of JA2.

    I saw somebody else bring up the Grit and Free Move features, and while it's not a deal breaker I do think it's a step away from the essence of JA.

    Strategies have a specific look and sound, and have specific design philosophies that go into creating them.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    @KyleSimmonsYeah I have no idea who the f wouldn't be in favor of showing chance to hit, this is pretty much a staple of all modern RPGs and even non modern ones. I could count the amount of RPGs without chance to hit on one hand most likely.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Just now, Woody said:

    @KyleSimmonsYeah I have no idea who the f wouldn't be in favor of showing chance to hit, this is pretty much a staple of all modern RPGs and even non modern ones. I could count the amount of RPGs without chance to hit on one hand most likely.

    I don't think this is something that needs to be debated very much, there are much better things to debate.

    There should be CTH in JA3 and even if for some reason devs don't want to include it, they should allow people to toggle it.

    I think the developers honestly began trying to come up with new ideas for JA, which is great, but then they forgot to check if these new ideas, despite being new, were also a good fit for JA. Which they are not, some of the time.

    New ideas are good, but if the new ideas suck or are better suited to another genre (and almost every new idea is good in some way or has something going for it, but it doesn't mean it should be implemented in every genre or franchise), and it doesn't mean every new idea should be implemented in the current project being worked on.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    6 hours ago, Reloecc said:

    That's the brute-force approach I mentioned. But don't get me wrong.. I am not saying you'd need to manipulate trajectories. I wrote that statistically distribution is shifted. Because if you ommit all miss shots, that would otherwise hit a target, you are changing a shape of distribution - shifting it away from the target. See image below, if you ommit all misses that could hit a target in other body part and your miss shots may land in the green area only, your distribution of where misses can go is highly altered.

    Aiming a chest is the worst scenario because a ratio of green to red is enormous (in this particular accuracy, defined by the blue circle).

    Actually.. I just realized while drawing this masterpiece that if the misses are related to accuracy (see bellow) it may be harder to hit a chest than head in certain accuracies (circle sizes) because of the rule "miss can't hit other body part". We saw on the streams (and it has been said on this forum multiple times) that headshots are too easy to land, thus op.

    By saying "misses are related" to accuracy I mean there's no flat % predefined on misses. Like for example head allways have -30 % CtH and CtH is calculated without bullet simulation. And it also means there is not CtH cap (95% e.g.). If CtH is capped and your bullets may fly out of the accuraccy circle (because there's no accuracy circle) I am out.. that would be really bad 😞 so hoping that's not the case.

     

    hit.png

    I don't think this is a good idea, or necessary, or the best way to do tactical strategy.

    Just assign hit percentages to body parts, if they don't hit, oh well.

    You don't even have to do what you're proposing, all you have to do is to ask "this body part is within 1 feet of this other body part, which means there's a corresponding amount of chance to hit another body part. No fancy cone based calculation necessary.

    If you really want to be 400 IQ and intelligent, what you should really be thinking of, not just "what body part I can hit" but instead of that, organ modelling, and body part modelling like "I want to hit the bones of the arm" or "I want to hit the knee", which would obviously lead to vastly different results.

    Also create accompanying conditions, due to, for example, bullets hitting a knee, bullets hitting a leg bone and shattering that leg bone, bullets not doing any of the above and only hitting the muscle, bullets grazing the skin and fat layer which should be mildly uncomfortable but otherwise alright, bullets hitting the eye and disabling or limiting vision, bullets kicking up dust that can go into the eye without adequate eye protection...these are the ideas you should be thinking of, imo.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    52 minutes ago, KyleSimmons said:

    Not really, CTH was in lots of RPGs going back to Icewind Dale.

    Basically every RPG had CTH

    I'm sorry but none of the reasons you described pan out

    Silent Storm had CTH

    modern jagged alliance sequels like Rage had CTH

    All old and new RPGs have CTH

    XCOM has CTH

    I think our definition of "modern" is a bit different 😄

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    49 minutes ago, Woody said:

    I don't think this is a good idea, or necessary, or the best way to do tactical strategy.

    Just assign hit percentages to body parts, if they don't hit, oh well.

    You don't even have to do what you're proposing, all you have to do is to ask "this body part is within 1 feet of this other body part, which means there's a corresponding amount of chance to hit another body part. No fancy cone based calculation necessary.

    If you really want to be 400 IQ and intelligent, what you should really be thinking of, not just "what body part I can hit" but instead of that, organ modelling, and body part modelling like "I want to hit the bones of the arm" or "I want to hit the knee", which would obviously lead to vastly different results.

    Also create accompanying conditions, due to, for example, bullets hitting a knee, bullets hitting a leg bone and shattering that leg bone, bullets not doing any of the above and only hitting the muscle, bullets grazing the skin and fat layer which should be mildly uncomfortable but otherwise alright, bullets hitting the eye and disabling or limiting vision, bullets kicking up dust that can go into the eye without adequate eye protection...these are the ideas you should be thinking of, imo.

    I am sorry, but I am not sure how to get you. You are saying "I don't think this is a good idea" .. but I am not sure what you mean, as I didn't propose anything. I am just pointing to flaws current implementation could have. Please explain.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    19 minutes ago, Reloecc said:

    I am sorry, but I am not sure how to get you. You are saying "I don't think this is a good idea" .. but I am not sure what you mean, as I didn't propose anything. I am just pointing to flaws current implementation could have. Please explain.

    First I don't think its a good idea because it just generates random misfirings or random hits even when you missed the part you were aiming for, like Boiyan said. I mean I actually don't think this is the worst case in the world as long as you clearly communicate why a shot didn't hit a particular body part but still hit another body part. But the cone approach is unnecessary. Just ask how close the hand is to the chest, if it's not close enough, then you can't miss by hitting the hand but hitting the chest.

    It appears that you're doing circle based measurements, but this is just unnecessary and may be very expensive computationally (or may not).

    And the second part of what I said was that what people should be thinking about is potentially having an organ impact system, where you can aim at specific organs, or things like joints, and then model that.

    Because if you think about it, hitting the hand, hitting the leg, this is just so silly, imo, if you think about it. There's no reason why hitting the hand just through the virtue of hitting the hand should do anything, inherently.

    But hitting the joint of the wrist? Yes, absolutely will have massive consequences. While if you hit the muscle, well now it's lesser consequences. Organ modelling would be the cool and correct way to make JA more complex etc.

    Edited by Woody
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, KyleSimmons said:

    CTH was in lots of RPGs going back to Icewind Dale.

    Basically every RPG had CTH

    I don't mean to be rude, but this is fundamentally incorrect and not applicable to type of hit system used in JA3, described in this very update!

    IWD, Fallout, and most of the renaissance-era cRPGs used probabilistic hit systems rooted in rolling dice. In IWD and all of the Infinity Engine engine games, "chance to hit" is never displayed! All except IWD2 use something called THAC0 - To Hit Armor Class 0, a threshold reference value by which you understand your chance to hit something based on the roll of a 20-sided die. Fallout 1 & 2 used a GURPS-like system loosely based on d100 rolls.

    Rather than get bogged down in the minutiae of exactly why you're incorrect, I'd rather focus your attention on the fact that what was determining hits or not was the roll of dice, that's the probabilistic component.

    JA1, JA2, X-COM 1 & 2, and JA3 don't use this type of system. They use ballistic modeling, which computes bullet trajectories. There is a "random" component, owing to how they account for marksmanship skill and what it does to the sway of the firearm, but it is a fundamentally different system than the games you are trying to compare it to. Those fundamental differences are precisely why it makes sense for JA3 to not show CTH, and why if they wanted to show it, it isn't a simple matter of "just" displaying the value. It doesn't make much sense that way, and has a lot of pitfalls associated with it. Those pitfalls are described in this very dev diary! Rather, for a displayed CTH to make sense, it would be part of an alternate game mode involving probabilistic (nuXcom) style to-hit mechanics.

    That isn't JA, and I think is a waste of their time and resources. The developers are being brave, in comparison to their peers, to do something different than the current trends. I would hate to see their resolve flag and them design and implement a parallel system which dilutes their uniqueness and pushes the game more in the direction of nuXcom, away from JA.

     

    1 hour ago, Woody said:

    Just assign hit percentages to body parts, if they don't hit, oh well.

    Woody, I think this comment reflects a lack of understanding of how the JA3 bullet trajectory and hit system works. You should re-read this Dev Diary and ask some questions if you need clarity, but what you've suggested here is not really compatible with the underlying mechanics. The existing bullet simulation system is why it's "easy" for the devs to compute when targeted shots miss whether they hit other body parts - it's already being computed by their bullet trajectory calculations used to determine the hit/miss! It's part of the same system that lets bullets pass through enemies and material, potentially hitting others. What's different with their targeted shots is that they've disabled the missed shot striking other parts, even if the computed trajectory says it would have. They say this could confuse players, but I don't think that's the case.

    Edited by agris
    • Thanks 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I just read the Rock, Paper, Shotgun article about JA3 where the author criticizes all the vague informations shown in the current combat system. They say that the informations are very confusing and do not tell you exactly what they mean in the overall context.

     

    I am open in this discussion, because maybe there is no right or wrong. For me I appreciate every aspect that tries to go away from the typical nuXCOM formula. But I know that the shown numbers in JA3 can also be confusing. I am just afraid that the people are too used to the nuXCOM combat that they can not try something different but I want more freedom.

     

    I would like to see a combat that is chaotic (where things can go wrong like jamming weapons, where the own bullets can hit team members or civilians/the environment, where mercs do unexpected actions, where the bullet trajectory is not predictable every time) but at the same time the combat result should be plausible at the end.

     

    I hope the chaotic approach and the shown informations in JA3 make sense and that tutorial menus help to explain everything in detail. Sure all this is useless when there is no logic behind the current combat system/crosshair menu.

    Edited by WILDFIRE
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    7 minutes ago, WILDFIRE said:

    I just read the Rock, Paper, Shotgun article about JA3 where the author criticizes all the vague informations shown in the current combat system. They say that the informations are very confusing and do not tell you exactly what they mean in the overall context.

     

    I am open in this discussion, because maybe there is no right or wrong. For me I appreciate every aspect that tries to go away from the typical nuXCOM formula. But I know that the shown numbers in JA3 can also be confusing. I am just afraid that the people are too used to the nuXCOM combat that they can not try something different but I want more freedom.

     

    I would like to see a combat that is chaotic (where things can go wrong like jamming weapons, where the own bullets can hit team members or civilians/the environment, where mercs do unexpected actions, where the bullet trajectory is not predictable every time) but at the same time the combat result should be plausible at the end.

     

    I hope the chaotic approach and the shown informations in JA3 make sense and that tutorial menus help to explain everything in detail. Sure all this is useless when there is no logic behind the current combat system/crosshair menu.

    I definitely think there's very little point to not having CTH, it's so silly

    @KyleSimmons said it correctly, developers were thinking of new ideas and new ways to change the formula, but not all new ideas are good. Sorry. Or even if they are good, then maybe they should be developed further, or maybe used in another context. Or maybe they're just not good ENOUGH to justify being implemented, and while the new idea might be good in some way, it's not good ENOUGH to be used.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    11 minutes ago, WILDFIRE said:

    I just read the Rock, Paper, Shotgun article about JA3 where the author criticizes all the vague informations shown in the current combat system. They say that the informations are very confusing and do not tell you exactly what they mean in the overall context.

    But their argument was basically: XCom and Into the Breach (lol) set the standard, and everyone else got to follow it.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    19 minutes ago, agris said:

    I don't mean to be rude, but this is fundamentally incorrect and not applicable to type of hit system used in JA3, described in this very update!

    IWD, Fallout, and most of the renaissance-era cRPGs used probabilistic hit systems rooted in rolling dice. In IWD and all of the Infinity Engine engine games, "chance to hit" is never displayed! All except IWD2 use something called THAC0 - To Hit Armor Class 0, a threshold reference value by which you understand your chance to hit something based on the roll of a 20-sided die. Fallout 1 & 2 used a GURPS-like system loosely based on d100 rolls.

    Rather than get bogged down in the minutiae of exactly why you're incorrect, I'd rather focus your attention on the fact that what was determining hits or not was the roll of dice, that's the probabilistic component.

    JA1, JA2, X-COM 1 & 2, and JA3 don't use this type of system. They use ballistic modeling, which computes bullet trajectories. There is a "random" component, owing to how they account for marksmanship skill and what it does to the sway of the firearm, but it is a fundamentally different system than the games you are trying to compare it to. Those fundamental differences are precisely why it makes sense for JA3 to not show CTH, and why if they wanted to show it, it isn't a simple matter of "just" displaying the value. It doesn't make much sense that way, and has a lot of pitfalls associated with it. Those pitfalls are described in this very dev diary! Rather, for a displayed CTH to make sense, it would be part of an alternate game mode involving probabilistic (nuXcom) style to-hit mechanics.

    That isn't JA, and I think is a waste of their time and resources. The developers are being brave, in comparison to their peers, to do something different than the current trends. I would hate to see their resolve flag and them design and implement a parallel system which dilutes their uniqueness and pushes the game more in the direction of nuXcom, away from JA.

     

    Woody, I think this comment reflects a lack of understanding of how the JA3 bullet trajectory and hit system works. You should re-read this Dev Diary and ask some questions if you need clarity, but what you've suggested here is not really compatible with the underlying mechanics. The existing bullet simulation system is why it's "easy" for the devs to compute when targeted shots miss whether they hit other body parts - it's already being computed by their bullet trajectory calculations used to determine the hit/miss! It's part of the same system that lets bullets pass through enemies and material, potentially hitting others. What's different with their targeted shots is that they've disabled the missed shot striking other parts, even if the computed trajectory says it would have. They say this could confuse players, but I don't think that's the case.

    Didn't you just get accused of being a bot in another forum thread?

    "I don't mean to be rude, but this is fundamentally incorrect and not applicable to type of hit system used in JA3, described in this very update!" You not being rude, you're being hysterical and mad.

    Nobody was even talking to you.

    Chill and relax. You already got accused of being a bot on this forum once, don't make me think you're going to be a permanent problem now.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    9 minutes ago, Woody said:

    Didn't you just get accused of being a bot in another forum thread?

    "I don't mean to be rude, but this is fundamentally incorrect and not applicable to type of hit system used in JA3, described in this very update!" You not being rude, you're being hysterical and mad.

    Nobody was even talking to you.

    Chill and relax. You already got accused of being a bot on this forum once, don't make me think you're going to be a permanent problem now.

    I'd like to see JA3 succeed in its goal of being a JA2 successor, not nuXcom 3 with a south american coat of paint.

    Yes, one of the other forum members is unwell and perceives coordinated bot attacks against their opinion when disagreed with.

    Re: "hysterical and mad", anything but. It's good the community is debating things, where I can I'd like to help us do it from a common set of facts, not vague recollections and imprecise assertions. Many JA2 successors have failed chasing a mythical "wider audience", using trendy mechanics of the day. None have tried using JA2's mechanics, and as much as I think it's correct, I'll do my best to highlight why I think they're appropriate in 2023.

    Edited by agris
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    12 minutes ago, Woody said:

    Didn't you just get accused of being a bot in another forum thread?

    "I don't mean to be rude, but this is fundamentally incorrect and not applicable to type of hit system used in JA3, described in this very update!" You not being rude, you're being hysterical and mad.

    Nobody was even talking to you.

    Chill and relax. You already got accused of being a bot on this forum once, don't make me think you're going to be a permanent problem now.

    Yeah honestly this @agris guy is being kinda troll-y.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, Woody said:

    First I don't think its a good idea because it just generates random misfirings or random hits even when you missed the part you were aiming for, like Boiyan said. I mean I actually don't think this is the worst case in the world as long as you clearly communicate why a shot didn't hit a particular body part but still hit another body part. But the cone approach is unnecessary. Just ask how close the hand is to the chest, if it's not close enough, then you can't miss by hitting the hand but hitting the chest.

    It appears that you're doing circle based measurements, but this is just unnecessary and may be very expensive computationally (or may not).

    And the second part of what I said was that what people should be thinking about is potentially having an organ impact system, where you can aim at specific organs, or things like joints, and then model that.

    Because if you think about it, hitting the hand, hitting the leg, this is just so silly, imo, if you think about it. There's no reason why hitting the hand just through the virtue of hitting the hand should do anything, inherently.

    But hitting the joint of the wrist? Yes, absolutely will have massive consequences. While if you hit the muscle, well now it's lesser consequences. Organ modelling would be the cool and correct way to make JA more complex etc.

    Now I am sure you didn't get what my image represents. It's NOT a PROPOSAL. I am not suggesting it should work this way! I draw how I think it's working now and what's a statistical outcome of a rule "miss can't hit another body part".. key?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Just now, Reloecc said:

    Now I am sure you didn't get what my image represents. It's NOT a PROPOSAL. I am not suggesting it should work this way! I draw how I think it's working now and what's a statistical outcome of a rule "miss can't hit another body part".. key?

    Dang is your name Agris?

    Why are you yelling? :classic_laugh:

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Just now, KyleSimmons said:

    Dang is your name Agris?

    Why are you yelling? :classic_laugh:

    A lot of very interesting people on this board, let me tell you.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...