If I may? A classic:
this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2025
610 points (100.0% liked)
Gaming
4319 readers
22 users here now
!gaming is a community for gaming noobs through gaming aficionados. Unlike !games, we don’t take ourselves quite as serious. Shitposts and memes are welcome.
Our Rules:
1. Keep it civil.
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only.
2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry.
I should not need to explain this one.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month.
Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.
Logo uses joystick by liftarn
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I think the game is meant to abstract away simultaneous actions. So it's like the alien and you are moving at the same time, not like hitting a stationary target next to you.
But still, missing those 99% hits like this hurt.
load more comments
(2 replies)
For every 100 shots you take with a 99% chance to hit you will miss around once. I think the max hit chance was capped at 95% from memory too but I could be wrong.
I'm still re loading that save though.
i don't know how xcom does it, but if you are reloading a save, it is possible that you are always using the same random number generator, so the results would not change
I think that was an option you could enable for your playthrough where it would use a consistent seed. You could get around it still by taking a different action first to use up the bad roll before trying again though.
At least in war of the chosen, the seeds for the round are static. Idk if there was a way to turn it off, but by default they used it to nerf save scumming. So if you know you're going to miss and you want to bother with save scumming you can at least try a different tactic instead of going over and over hoping to eventually hit.
Honestly, just get a mod that buffs your hit chance like the rest of us sore losers lol
I'm Battle for Wesnoth, after clearing a map it showed a statistic about how lucky you'd been in your dice rolls. Which really meant how often you'd rerun dice rolls by saving and loading. When it said something like "370% above average luck", I realized that, oh shit, the game knows?!
"Save scum" is an optional Second Wave option; you can opt in or out either way. I think by default it preserves the RNG on reload.
Save scumming is such a staple of modern XCOM that it's actually a toggle. Just like when I was save scumming in fire emblem, you can probably just mutate the seed differently by taking different actions before attacking though.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I want to say the devs admitted that they increased the reported chance to hit in the first nu xcom because people refused to take a sixty or seventy percent shot.
End result? No 95 will ever hit.
The expansion was wild. Initially the cenobites-alike trio mopped the floor with my guys but I got to a place where my team was made of demigods.
I'm gonna take this opportunity to plug Phoenix Point, an XCOM clone by the original creators of XCOM. It's definitely not as polished as XCOM EU and XCOM 2, but its targeting system feels a lot less bullshit: you get to manually aim with two concentric circular reticles. There's a 100% chance that all projectiles fired will land within the outer reticle, and a 50% chance of any projectile fired to land within the inner one. Though this does mean that you'll never miss a properly aimed point blank shot from one tile away.
Besides that, there's also a lot more to do in the geoscape section of the game than in XCOM 2.
I would like to see a game that calculates the distance to the target, the wind speed and direction, and the mechanical accuracy of the rifle, and the adjust the bullet trajectory accordingly. E.g. an AR-15 should have a mechanical accuracy of about 2-3 MOA on average, and usually has a 50/200 zero (e.g., your optic is zeroed at 50 yards, and height over bore means that you'll hit slightly below your point of aim at less than 50 yards, above your point of aim between 50 and 200 yards, and then below after 200). So you should have to aim, say, about 24" high on a target that's 400y away, but then your point of impact is anywhere within about a 12" diameter circle. 7.62x39mm in an AK? You get a 25/200 zero, 4 MOA mechanical accuracy, and at 400y you have to aim 46" high.
Oh, and calculate velocity for realistic time to impact, and actual damage; at 600y, a 5.56 is doing to be stopped by pretty light body armor with minimal injury.
Essentially I'd like a game to force people to understand real-world ballistics and performance, and adjust their strategies accordingly.
Just play Arma with Ace installed. Already has all that and more
Does anyone really play Arma, or does one person build a mission, and then everyone fucks around until that person gets frustrated and stop trying to direct anything?
load more comments
(1 replies)
Arma 3 did this like 10 years ago.
They also considered thing like the speed of sound, stars in the sky and other stuff i don't quite remember. I wonder if they simulate bullet drift from the earth spinning.
That's a real thing at extreme-long-distance shooting, but not really an issue at realistic engagement distances for small arms. E.g., if you were doing a King Of 2 Miles simulation, you'd want to account for it, or an artillery sim, but probably not for infantry engagements.
I also want the player to slow down if they get pegged in the legs. If they get hit in the arm your accuracy falls or you have to do it one armed and your accuracy really drops. If you get hit in the chest there should be at least a couple seconds where your stunned or your accuracy drops.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Hotdogs horseshoes and handgrenades does all of this.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Eh, Battlefield has crazy bloom (their version of deviation) on most guns except the SMG. The kind where you can stand 6 feet in front of a player and full auto a magazine at them and only hit them once or twice. Been an issue with BF forever. Even the SMGs suck with increasing range. Unfortunately there’s a glut of players exploiting Aim Assist with hardware, so far too many laser beam kills at 60+ meters with full auto tiny guns.
Idk what BF you've last played but BF1, BFV and 2042 have crazy accurate DMRs that are piss easy to use even at sniper ranges.
Also no need for aim assist to control the smgs with how little recoil they have anyways, with a bit of practice you'll hit most of your mag at 60m+
load more comments
(3 replies)
I could never stand the way recoil works in counterstrike, in any other system your crosshair is moved around and its intutative to compensate for recoil, in counterstrike you just have to memorise the pattern in which the bullets come out of the barrel sideways.
Not true. Players who memorize the spray pattern choose to turn off the dynamic crosshair. By default it is pretty standard with other games.
That's actually an option you can turn on.
Except the bullets come out of the player's eyes, not the gun.
That's what's shown for Rainbow 6.
The bullets also come out of the players eyes in Counter Strike. I don't know how it is in the other games.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
and then there's Fallout 3 & NV, where low skill points in Small Guns makes bullets bend away from the crosshair
And your gun sways all over the place. Worse in 3, your character just moves their neck forward instead of using the sights when aiming. That just magically makes the bullets spread less despite not actually aiming... thank fuck for Tale of Two Wastelands.
Meanwhile cod is a straight line at 500+ meters with an smg
Well yes, SMG means Sniper-Mega-Gun
i'm missing ARMA here
Needs one for Halo where the bullet does go to the target but it doesn't originate from the weapon barrel. lol
Are we pretending this wasn't an issue in the previous XCOM: Enemy Unknown? Or is it just that much worse in 2?
Also I don't know which of these is the most ridiculous. Maybe R6.
Shoutout to the original STALKER games for having good ballistics.
Part of the issue is there's a disconnect from what's being shown and what's already happened. So, XCOM, and I think XCOM2 (it's been a while since I played both) create a table with "random" values on map load. This means, you can 100% save scum the shit out any encounter because cause and effect will always be the same, it's not a live "dice roll". Part of this sucks, because what happened is hidden from the player. Something like BG3, you can see "Oh, I swung, rolled a 3, and these modifiers, my total was 14 and they have an AC of 15". Also, some games help by using a pseudo-random where the probability of something happening, actually increases over time. Example would be Dota2, where something like bash, shows a given percent, but it's actually on a scale. Each attack changes the % chance the next bash may happen, eventually getting to a point it's nearly a guarantee. This type of random is often used to make the game feel more fun for the player (to nudge the numbers one way or the other). However, with a pre-seeded table, this likely isn't happening.
Then you add the visual component. Point blank range, it'll say "99%" and you miss. Or the number will seem low, despite point blank range. And you have the visual of the %.
So you add those together, the game likely not helping the player and just using a pre-seeded table plus the visuals with the human notion of really only remembering the extremes and you get the overall feeling of "game not fair". You made 10 shots in a row with only 30% chance, but you only remember the single 99% chance you missed
cause and effect will always be the same
Actually no. Mostly, but some actions affect the PRNG and when loading saves they haven't remembered to reset the effect of those, so the results can change a bit between loads. It has been a while, so I don't remember the specifics. But you can abuse this property to get out of really tough spots by gaming the PRNG across loads.
I have probably save scummed too much.
That's probably the best explanation I've seen, thanks.
It's never really been an "issue". The rolls have always been accurate, and the XCOM devs have even said in XCOM 2 they gave an invisible "buff" on hit chances on some difficulties.
The problem is we as people assume that something like 90% is a guarantee, and a miss in XCOM always feels so much worse, especially when they changed from time units to just a flat "do a shot, hit or miss them all" approach. So even though statistically you're going to miss 1 of every 10 on a 90% shot, when it happens twice it's "bullshit". But that's just odds man, gamblers fallacy is real.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
I hate the PRNG of XCOMs. For anyone suffering from that I recommend Hard West. It's a buggy game, but the luck mechanism is interesting. Basically when missing, your luck increases, and eventually that helps you hit. So missing a good shot isn't that bad, because you can build a strategy on it regardless.
Basically when missing, your luck increases, and eventually that helps you hit
XCOM 2 has that same mechanic, in case you didn't know. It's just not advertised to the player. So this is purely psychological on your end :P
load more comments
(2 replies)
Yeah, the deepstate definitely rigged those guns
If you want this image to be more accurate, put the alien head right next to the muzzle.
The shooting in R6 feels so fucking bad now. It's also quite unbalanced :(
Wait til you try to hit a target 25 yards away with a FN 5.7 with no sight... IRL
I mean, if there's a pistol cartidge it's easy to shoot with precisely at medium range it's a 5.7x28. Recoils like a 22 with downright stupid velocity. A good shooter can do a 2-3-inch 5-shot group at 25 yards without an optic on an FN FiveSeven. With a red dot, they can get 1.5 inches pretty easily.
Some would say it's grossly underpowered, and only really useful tactically in the armor-piercing variety. But there's no arguing it's a breeze to shoot.
load more comments
(4 replies)
view more: next ›