Home » PLAYER'S HQ 1.13 » JA2 Complete Mods & Sequels » UC/DL 1.13 & AFS » Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH
Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296083] Sun, 01 January 2012 19:23 Go to next message
Wil473

 
Messages:2861
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada
One of the first measures taken to address the seemingly excessive disparity between plain un-scoped rifles vs. scoped rifles (and related observation that pistols were similarly too accurate vs un-scoped rifles) under NCTH was to give all long arms a 10% bonus to their NCTH Aiming Cap. From the UDB, Percent Cap:
This weapon modifies the shooter's maximum 
accuracy, as a percentage of the shooter's original 
maximum accuracy.

Higher is better.


To avoid simply shifting the problem up by 10%, all scopes have a -10% penalty to Cap. The net result is intended to be, increased number of hits with un-scoped rifles, no change to scoped rifles. A beneficial side effect to this was to decrease the effectiveness of scoped pistols (something my projects allow and encourage through the use of NAS adding attachments/slots).

Now it is time to move on to differentiating the "Iron Sights." Technically in v3.60, there are actually already two levels of "Iron Sights," the in-built 10% Cap all long arms have, and a Tactical Iron Sights attachment which adds an additional 10% to the Cap bonus (along with benefits to snapshot and tracking of moving targets). The Tactical Iron Sights may only be attached to weapons with a RIS optics rail, so based on my plans below, this attachment will not require any changes.

Goals:
- "Families" of rifles will share a common Percent Cap bonus to represent the quality of the Iron Sight
- Scopes will still zero out this Percent Cap bonus - shared scope compatibility implies the rifle "family"
- all rifles with a RIS Optics Rail (ie. FN SCAR) will have a Percent Cap Bonus = 10%

Possible Weapon Families:
AR-15 - possibly with attachment based "iron sight" for "Flat Top" variants
AK - came up in another discussion tread (the HAM 5 one I think) where there was desire to give this one a less effective "iron sight" vs. AR-15; largely representative of opportunity: it has its own scopes, and it has its own RIS Optics Rail attachment
HK G3/MP5 - again it has its own scopes and RIS Optics Rail Attachment
FN FAL - does not have its own scopes, but does have a RIS Optics Rail Attachment (to reset the weapon's Cap Bonus to +10)
Galil - has its own RIS Optics Rail Attachment as of v3.60
Desert Eagle - not a long arm, but it can take scopes and has a RIS Optics Rail attachment


Why I'm posting this instead of just doing it and waiting for feedback
I've got no idea what appropriate values would be to differentiate between the average sights on the above family of weapons. So I thought I'd get feedback on this idea in early. Remember, 10% essentially represents the back-up "iron sights" on a long arm that really should have a scope mounted on its optics rail. Oh and there are also some weapons that simply have no option for optics, so feel free to suggest changes to represent their "iron sights."


Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296085] Sun, 01 January 2012 22:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Action

 
Messages:11
Registered:February 2001
This discussion is probably taking place at a level which is too high for me to fully understand, but I definitely get the impression that we might need to increase the efficiency of the iron sights on full sized rifles and larger carbines that were historically used with iron sights.

Occasionally IMPs will start with a L22a2 Enfield. This has only a 22 range and can only mount 4x scopes. This means that in virtually all situations it will either be out of range or shooting at a range where it is taking a penalty because it is too close for the scope. However, it comes with a 4x scope standard.

This means that it consistently manages a moderate sized orange aiming circle, both when it is slightly out of range when it is in range, but too close for the scope. This lets it get about a 33% hit rate. Considering it can shoot about 3 times per round with full aim, it is highly effective in the early game.

For reference it looks like this:
http://i40.tinypic.com/21njh5g.jpg
Cute, but not exactly a DMR.

IMPs also sometimes start with a Mini-14. It has a beefy 36 range,57 accuracy and it tends to be given to rangers/hunters who get a bonus with rifles. But it doesn't come with a scope. So it never seems to be able to get anything better than a red circle, usually a medium sized one at that. Combine that with slower raising and firing and no automatic fire and it is remarkably ineffective.

Admittedly, the Mini-14 isn't the best rifle in the game, but there seems to be an imbalance here.

The tiny, short range L22a2 Enfield is highly effective as DMR due to the 4x scope, despite taking penalties at all times. The Mini-14 seems like it should be the weapon that is useful for sitting back and taking pot shots, but due to the lack of a scope it's really almost useless. Unscoped SBRs hit nearly as much despite having 10 less range, plus they shoot faster and have auto fire.

This is with AFS v3.60RC2b-HAM5 Optimized 20111219.
Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296086] Sun, 01 January 2012 23:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wil473

 
Messages:2861
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada
The Ruger Mini-14/30/68 are one of those rifles that comes stock (in-mod) with a RIS Optics Rail but no default scope. As far as this thread goes, the NCTH tag used to represent the quality of the Ruger's "iron sights," must be 10%. Options to improve the un-scoped performance of the Ruger Mini's are:

1) eliminate the built-in Optics Rail and give the Mini's a specific RIS Optics Rail adapter, this allows Percent Cap to be anything in the new scheme, but still 10% when it is ready to accept a scope (and hence becomes 0 with a scope)
2) default attachment = Tactical Iron Sight
3) default attachment = new Mini-14/30/68 Iron Sight that must be removed before optics added


Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296092] Mon, 02 January 2012 01:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Slax

 
Messages:1448
Registered:July 2006
Location: People riding polar bears...
Maybe rifle iron sights could have a higher aiming cost (more levels) to buff that accuracy/CtH at range? Take your time on those longer shots and have it pay off.

Maybe that's what vanilla 1.13 does with NCTH. Seems familiar...

Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296097] Mon, 02 January 2012 02:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wil473

 
Messages:2861
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada
Slax
Maybe rifle iron sights could have a higher aiming cost (more levels) to buff that accuracy/CtH at range? Take your time on those longer shots and have it pay off.

Sure that's an option for particularly hard to use "iron sights." Just remember that in my mods, unlike stock v1.13, scopes not weapon class are already responsible for large jumps in NCTH aiming levels. ie. scopeless, a SVD has the same number of aiming levels as a AK-47, 4 levels; leaving the scopes to add the remaining aiming levels that make DMR/Sniper rifles cost more AP to aim. I would prefer not to mess with this scheme.

Also, I'd prefer to leave the 10% NCTH cap as the basement for long arms. Conversely, the Tactical Iron attachment, which gives a net NCTH Cap of 20%, should represent the ceiling. So basically I want to know how the average built-in iron sight on each of the basic weapon families should fit in the 10-20% NCTH Cap range.

EDIT: Alternatively, instead of a NCTH Aiming Levels penalty, more cumbersome iron sights could make use of either of the two snapshot modifier, negative values are allowed for these.

Slax
Maybe that's what vanilla 1.13 does with NCTH. Seems familiar...
I don't think much of what I'm suggesting is related to stock v1.13, aside being a reaction to it. To the best of my knowledge, I don't even think stock v1.13 uses the NCTH Cap tag anywhere (yeah, I'm not bothering to check). What I'm talking about is refining one of my initial steps to improve on stock v1.13, the 10% NCTH Cap bonus on long arms.

[Updated on: Mon, 02 January 2012 02:48] by Moderator



Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296100] Mon, 02 January 2012 09:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
usrbid

 
Messages:1552
Registered:December 2008
Yo wil, what do you think of adding a user choice of what sights they want to use and have independent calculations / caps / aim levels for each? A hotkey could toggle a symbol on the gun of what sights are active similar to the burst / auto symbol.

For example with a holographic sight, there is really not much aiming one can do, once the dot is on the target (and maybe correct eye to gun positioning to remove the little paralax) all you can practically do is hold the gun steady.

Conversely with mil dot optics, you can spend minutes calculating where you should put the target in relation to the cross (or click the scope and center the cross on the target), and you may still be off by a few inches on the first shot.


Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296103] Mon, 02 January 2012 09:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Slax

 
Messages:1448
Registered:July 2006
Location: People riding polar bears...
I was insinuating that my suggestion felt familiar to the vanilla formula.
No amazing insights from me, I'm afraid. Brain farts is all. Some of them may be worth something but mostly it's just tripe. :badair:

Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296109] Mon, 02 January 2012 10:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3804
Registered:July 2009
Dieter
Yo wil, what do you think of adding a user choice of what sights they want to use and have independent calculations / caps / aim levels for each? A hotkey could toggle a symbol on the gun of what sights are active similar to the burst / auto symbol.
Smeag has been lobbying for aiming modes pretty much since the beginning of NCTH, I don't remember exactly if HR's answer was "can't do" or "don't want", but it amounts to the same result Wink

But yeah, it would solve many problems, e.g. the stacking of reflex sight and scope bonuses by using only one of them in the calculations at any given time.


Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296120] Mon, 02 January 2012 16:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wil473

 
Messages:2861
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada
Giving players a choice of sights (on the gun) is presently beyond the scope of this thread. With the features currently available under rev.4870, best I can manage is having Optics and RIS Adapters zero out the values used to portray the Iron Sight. Right now the only question is what values to assign the iron sights common to each weapon family implied by attachment options.

Basically please order the following based on the quality of the average iron sight found on each group:

AR-15
AK
HK G3/MP5
FN FAL
Galil
Ruger Mini (for now pretend RIS optics do not attach directly to it, but instead via an adapter in my mods)

EDIT: suggesting some values for NCTH Cap between: 10 and 20 for each would be useful too. Other NCTH tags will be considered as well. For instance target tracking recently came up as an entire area of NCTH that has not been exploited yet.

[Updated on: Mon, 02 January 2012 16:21] by Moderator



Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296152] Tue, 03 January 2012 08:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
usrbid

 
Messages:1552
Registered:December 2008
Here it goes, sorted by worst accuracy on top, best on bottom. It is interesting that the least accurate sights also happen to be the fastest target aquisition sights, meaning because there is not much you can do to aim well, you are done aiming as soon as you align the gun with your eye.

AK - v groove on rear, open front post
Galil - ghost ring on rear, trident front post (this is what I have on my Remington 870)
FN FAL - somewhat fat ring on rear, trident front post
HK G3/MP5 - somewhat fat ring on rear, trident front post
AR-15 - somewhat adjustable post with hole in rear, trident front post
Ruger Mini - fully adjustable post with hole in rear, trident front post

I would say the G3 sights are a little better than the FAL because the rear ring of the G3 is closer to the gun, a little smaller, and less "fat" than the FAL, which will produce slightly better results but also take a split second longer to aim.


wil473
Giving players a choice of sights (on the gun) is presently beyond the scope of this thread.


I do understand what you are telling me, but I can't help myself and rip a joke, so here it goes: You know, new reads are not that expensive, you just click on the link on the top... Ok, it was funnier when I was thinking about it. But seriously, the game needs a switch optics ability.


Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296164] Tue, 03 January 2012 10:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
DepressivesBrot

 
Messages:3804
Registered:July 2009
Do the four range settings on the HK sights (100m increments for rifles and 25m for SMG) count for anything? I honestly don't know, but you mentioned adjustable sights for the AR and Ruger.


Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296166] Tue, 03 January 2012 12:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
smeagol

 
Messages:2739
Registered:June 2008
Location: Bremen, Germany
Dieter
But seriously, the game needs a switch optics ability.


Oh... really???


Not gonna happen... I've been asking for this now over a year. People always tell me it's to difficult to add.


Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296173] Tue, 03 January 2012 15:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Hazapuza

 
Messages:264
Registered:February 2009
Location: Finland
IMO, a simple distinction between open and aperture sights could be enough. 10% for open sights and 15% for apertures, for example.

For the most "realistic" result, stat-wise, specific iron sight attachments might offer if not the best solution, at least the most flexible and customisable one. But also the largest amount of work, if I'm not mistaken...


Edit: I've heard and read opinions that it's easier to track targets with open sights, but the general consensus seems to be that aperture sights are the best. Surprisingly they're sometimes claimed to be both the fastest and most precise, but I'm with Dieter on this one; from my own (rather limited) experience I find the former hard to believe.

[Updated on: Tue, 03 January 2012 15:46] by Moderator

Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296176] Tue, 03 January 2012 16:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wil473

 
Messages:2861
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada
How does this sound for net values (ie. some achieved via attachment + stock):

Backup Iron Sights (or the stock long arm bonus) = 10%

AK = 12% Cap Bonus, small bonus to tracking
Galil = 13% Cap Bonus
FN FAL = 15% Cap Bonus
HK G3/MP5, AR-15 = 17% Cap Bonus
Ruger Mini = 18% Cap Bonus

Tactical Iron Sights attachment = 20% Basically I want to keep the aftermarket sight better than stock.

EDIT: now where do long arms that don't have optional scopes go in this scheme? I don't think there are that many...

Also, four additional families that slipped my mind:

SKS - doesn't have native optics option, but does have an entire RIS upgrade attachment, meaning it can have its own NCTH Cap
Mauser Karabiner 98k - only weapon to use the ZF-42 Scope there is an opportunity to give this weapon its own NCTH Cap
Mosin-Nagant - only weapon to use the PEM Scope, again an opportunity to have a specific NCTH Cap
M1 Garand and M1 Carbine - both share the No.32 Scope, and RIS upgrade kit so these two can share a custom NCTH Cap

EDIT2: ...and a fifth that needs to be addressed, should the SIG SG5xx weapons come with a removable diopter sight of some sort as a default attachment?

[Updated on: Tue, 03 January 2012 16:35] by Moderator



Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296188] Tue, 03 January 2012 20:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
usrbid

 
Messages:1552
Registered:December 2008
Here we go:

AK - v groove on rear, open front post
Mosin, 98k - adjustable v notch on rear, post with enclosed hood in the front
Galil, M1 Garand - ghost ring on rear, trident front post
SKS - small ring in the rear, post with enclosed hood in the front
FN FAL - somewhat fat ring on rear, trident front post
HK G3/MP5 - somewhat fat ring on rear, trident front post
AR-15 - somewhat adjustable post with hole in rear, trident front post
Ruger Mini - fully adjustable post with hole in rear, trident front post

I don't know how the iron sights on a SIG SG552 etc. look, I have never shot one. I looked on Google but couldn't find anything (spending exactly 60 secs). If you ever find out what sights they have, you should be able to "sort" it into the list above.

The 98k is a more accurate weapon than the Mosin based on manufacturing tolerances, but the sights are almost identical (although the German sights are easier to see). For the small range you have (from 10% to 20%), there would be no significant difference (maybe 0.2% better for the Kar).

Diopter iron sights would always be the most accurate sights, better than the best sights from the list above, but also take the longest time to aim, by maybe 1/4 to 1/2 second more than any other sight listed.


DepressivesBrot
Do the four range settings on the HK sights (100m increments for rifles and 25m for SMG) count for anything? ...


Since I used a G3 in the army, I know about the 100m adjustments. This is why I feel the G3 is better than the FAL, but not as good as an AR. The AR iron sights can be moved left to right, and on the AR the rear aperture allows less light (I believe it is actually no light) to the immediate right and left of it, which is slightly better (and I mean a tiny, tiny, little bit) for aiming.

smeagol
Dieter
But seriously, the game needs a switch optics ability.
... Not gonna happen... I've been asking for this now over a year. People always tell me it's to difficult to add.


I just can't see why this would be "out of the world" difficult, we changed the CTH calculation and the game supports user toggle on burst mode. Aim device selection is a combination of these existing principles but does require completely new code for both of them.

Switching sights would require for the sights to "expose" to the code what is available, like a grenade laucher or trigger group do for the burst mode. Meaning attaching those items makes the gun have additional modes, same with different sights.

We already can change how a gun aims by cycling through the burst modes. Cycling through aim modes will require an additional hotkey to be defined. People may feel choosing a hotkey is a challenging task. I would just use the 'a' key, even if it means to permanently lose first aid. Alternatively first aid can be pinned on a different key, people will get used to it.

Oh, and of course you will lose save game compatibility, something everyone is afraid of. However we occasionally introduce a feature where we decide that the feature is so important that it is ok to lose save game compatibility. Why don't we "bundle" the aim modes with one of these features, or in other words "hide" loss of save game compatibility due to aim modes behind something else which breaks save games anyway.

[Updated on: Tue, 03 January 2012 20:48] by Moderator



Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296189] Tue, 03 January 2012 20:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sam Hotte

 
Messages:2010
Registered:March 2009
Location: Middle of Germany
Dieter, there are IMO good pictures of SIG SG550 on wikimedia (Close-up of diopter and several angles of front post):
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/SIG_550?uselang=en
Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296191] Tue, 03 January 2012 20:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
usrbid

 
Messages:1552
Registered:December 2008
Looks like the SIG has some sort of a fully adjustable post with hole in the rear and a post with enclosed hood in the front, really good sights actually.

I would put the SIG between the AR-15 and the Ruger Mini.


Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296224] Wed, 04 January 2012 17:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wil473

 
Messages:2861
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada
The "iron sight" NCTH Cap scheme is now to be:

BUIS/Default =10%

AK = 11%
Mosin, 98k = 12%
Galil, M1 = 13%
SKS = 14%
FN FAL = 15%
HK G3/MP5 = 16%
AR-15 = 17% - New Attachment needed for Flat Top variants
SIG SG = 18% - New Attachment needed
Ruger Mini = 19% - New Attachment needed

Tactical Iron Sight Attachment = 20% Net


Once I sit down and figure out a scheme to impact (penalize) target tracking with scopes, I'll work these sights in as well. Probably reverse the order, the AK will have a tracking bonus the Ruger/Sig probably none. Keeping the tracking bonus on the Tactical Iron Sight as there is probably marketing/web hype that these do help with moving targets.

[Updated on: Wed, 04 January 2012 17:33] by Moderator



Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #296639] Fri, 13 January 2012 16:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wil473

 
Messages:2861
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada
I was too tired to post this last night. The Iron Sights discussed above make up the bulk of changes to: 20120112 Alrulco Folding Stock v3.60RC3-HAM 5 Optimized


Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #300945] Sun, 04 March 2012 19:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Tobias

 
Messages:33
Registered:July 2006
Location: Munich, GERMANY
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b1/Kimme.Korn.Arten.svg

[Updated on: Sun, 04 March 2012 19:02] by Moderator

Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #302584] Fri, 30 March 2012 20:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wil473

 
Messages:2861
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada
I think we've fundamentally been missing a key piece to fixing the whole pistols vs long-arms "problem" here: making pistols hit less.

Many elements of NCTH have been badly communicated, and it is necessary to reinforce that under NCTH more bullets will be required for a kill vs OCTH. It appears that the intention to reduce hit rates for long-arms via single shots has been wildly successful. Now the same should be applied to pistols.

From what I understand pistols are actually harder to aim, especially at range due to the short distance between sights. Therefore I'm thinking in the next round of NCTH re-balance efforts I am undertaking for UC-1.13/DL-1.13/AFS something will be done to pistols. Options include:

- increasing the number of aiming levels of pistols, more levels = more AP for max aim (this seems to be fundamental mistake from original NCTH as pistols have generally less aiming levels than long arms)

- inherent penalty across the board for the NCTH base for all pistols (sort of like what this thread's been talking about but in reverse for pistols)

- increase the handling penalty for pistols so that on average it is higher than for long arms (right now the handling rework separates consideration of one handed and two handed weapons, with both types averaging about the same)

- Moving target bonus for pistols and pistol attachments, I'm rather sure this tag isn't even used in the v1.13 XML's


Based on "game" logic, I think we've missed the point here with how stats between weapons should relate to one another. Pistols shouldn't be thought of as early game only weapons, and should have their place from start to finish.

Related to this, I am considering another round of increases to Burst/Auto penalties, though I do not really buy the argument that NCTH makes bursting too powerful. In my games, I am using burst/auto fire more, but once I have scopes I'm back to aimed shots, both single shot and bursts after max aim is set for the burst.

EDIT: remember the mandate of my projects is to "fix" NCTH using existing tags and code.

[Updated on: Fri, 30 March 2012 21:00] by Moderator



Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #302585] Fri, 30 March 2012 21:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Biernath_J

 
Messages:181
Registered:August 2003
Location: Poland
Quote:
From what I understand pistols are actually harder to aim, especially at range due to the short distance between sights.

So very, very true.
Not having a stock to support your weapon against the mass of your body is a disaster for firearms in general.
Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #302668] Mon, 02 April 2012 02:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wil473

 
Messages:2861
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada
Quick and dirty pistol "neuter" plan:

- increase Handling by 1 for all pistols
- standardize NCTH aiming levels to 4 for all pistols, 5 for pistols with particularly bad sights...

EDIT: Guiding principle of pistols have lower AP costs for single, un-aimed shots, but shall not be inherently easier to aim as a class, and indeed should be harder to aim as a class.

[Updated on: Mon, 02 April 2012 02:28] by Moderator



Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #302703] Mon, 02 April 2012 19:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Biernath_J

 
Messages:181
Registered:August 2003
Location: Poland
That could work nice for those big-ass handcannons like Grizzly, Encore, Anaconda or Wildey.
Those are heavy things with long barrels, should be faster to aim than those plastic wondernines. Like, 2-3 clicks for heavy pistols, 4 for normal ones.
Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #302705] Mon, 02 April 2012 20:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kaerar

 
Messages:2050
Registered:January 2003
Location: Australia :D
Plus wouldn't the bigger pistols keep their accuracy over a greater distance than anything with a 4" barrel (like most of the 9mm semi's...). Seeing as the bigger guns are usually 6" or longer...


Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #302708] Mon, 02 April 2012 20:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wil473

 
Messages:2861
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada
With that odd map/item bug in DL-1.13, I think I'll release another version of AFS with the re-balanced (for NCTH) pistols. Here are some minor notes on my intentions:

In general:
- +1 to existing NCTH Handling for all one handed weapons, so while pistols will be cheaper to shoot, don't expect to hit anything at range (this will hopefully take out most of the weirdness with pistols, machine pistols, and SMG's in my mods when the stock is folded). On average, one handed weapons will end up having a higher handling penalty than two handed weapons.

Case: Average Pistol
- keep low single shot and draw AP costs
- 4 NCTH Aiming Levels (remember more aiming levels = more AP to aim)

Case: Hand Cannons
- will be affected by the Handling penalty increase
- 3 NCTH Aiming Levels to account for longer sight radius

Case: AR-15 Pistols
- will be affected by the handling penalty (making them even more unwieldly
- choice between dual wielding as pistols or turning them into very small long arms (two handed) with the attachment of a stock
- 4 NCTH Aiming Levels

Case: Compact Pistols
- lowest AP costs of all
- generally low handling, even after the +1 to handling
- 5 NCTH Aiming Levels to reflect the worse in-general sight radius (due to size)

Case: Machine Pistols (no stock)
- brought in-line with pistols

Case: Machine Pistol (with stock)
- generally left alone


Attachments: with the base number of aiming levels up to approximately four for all weapons, I am considering setting all reflex type sights to grant a NCTH aiming level decrease of 1. The problem are still those S.T.O.M.P. traits that decrease aiming levels for a particular class. Right now with certain traits the merc has an automatic decrease of up to 2 levels. Not sure if it is too overpowering to have a half dozen or so optics potentially allow up to 3 levels to be removed.

ie. Desert Eagle Hand Cannon + RIS Rail (my mods only) + Reflex sight + Merc with Gunfighter (2x Gunslinger or is it the other way around) = 0 Aiming Levels, or always max aim...


Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #302712] Mon, 02 April 2012 21:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Biernath_J

 
Messages:181
Registered:August 2003
Location: Poland
Is there a list somewhere, for those NCTH STOMP effects? I'm not familiar with them at all.
Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #302717] Tue, 03 April 2012 00:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Strohmann

 
Messages:288
Registered:August 2011
Location: Division Thought Crimes
*here* (incomplete)
Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #302745] Tue, 03 April 2012 20:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wil473

 
Messages:2861
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada
I'm really pressed for time, but I did manage to get these done, with some fixes. Not much testing was done besides making sure they don't CTD on game start.

Alrulco Folding Stock v3.64 20120403

AFS-HAM5 Optimized v3.64 20120403

The new pistol NCTH scheme has been implemented - portray the conceptually worse iron sights of pistols vs long arms via existing Handling and Aiming-Levels

Also includes:
- Xubor's two guns are
- a Tac Rail covered FG42
- some bug fixes

EDIT: note, I have not done anything with reflex sights, there is no decrease to aiming levels granted by these attachments.

[Updated on: Tue, 03 April 2012 20:39] by Moderator



Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #302834] Thu, 05 April 2012 20:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Strohmann

 
Messages:288
Registered:August 2011
Location: Division Thought Crimes
i don't quite understand this new directions with pistols.

most pistols now take the same time/ap-cost to aim like most two-handed guns and some as long as machine guns and sniper rifles? why should bad/nonexisting sights increase the time to aim?
this new approach also seems to contradict the mechanic that scopes increase the number of aim levels of the weapons they are attached to; with this new logic it would be the opposite.

in my opinion they should negate some of your aiming effort. why not something like this

oversized pistols (desert eagle/large revolvers etc.): 4 aimlevel
regular pistols: 3 aimlevel, -5 PercentCap, +5 PercentTargetTrackingSpeed
pistols with very bad/nonexisting sights (HK P7M8, .38 Special etc.): 3 aimlevel, -10 PercentCap, +10 PercentTargetTrackingSpeed

in line with the rebalancing you previously did with two-handed weapons by adding +10 PercentCap (numbers above made up)?

i also fear they start to loose their nich
Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #302835] Thu, 05 April 2012 20:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wil473

 
Messages:2861
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada
Bad Iron Sights = more AP to reach the NCTH Max Aim limit, due to just being bad equipment

Scope = more AP to reach the NCTH Max Aim limit, due to increased complexity/skill needed for their use

Yes, I see your point that both poor sights (a clear bad thing) and scopes (usually a desired attachment) have the same result: more clicks to reach Max NCTH Aim. However I do not see a problem with this. As I said in the other thread, there's nobody forcing you to max out aim on each shots, and indeed with pistols I am making it less desirable to do so.

Tracking speed: yeah, I need to do something about giving these guns more of a bonus

While I am very reluctant to have Reflex Sights decreasing NCTH Aiming Levels (like it is in stock), I think it would be in order to have the Match Pistol Sights reduce levels. That is once I, remove all pistols that aim in 3 levels from the scheme. I really think that being able to reach Max aim in one click or less is an exploit caused by STOMP NCTH Traits being developed in isolation from NCTH itself.

EDIT:
Strohmann
the only main appeals left are the low draw and fire cost, but is that enough if i just can take a random fast two-handed weapon that can go full auto instead and can fold its stock for more speed for the same purpose?


This is the rise of the Short Barrel Rifle vs. traditional side arm that we are seeing being argued by some circles.

EDIT2:
Actually this brings up something important to test. Can someone report back on pistols vs. SBR's with their stocks folded please. I'm still thinking that the number of penalties I impose on rifles with their stock folded will give pistols the edge in terms of hitting things at CQB ranges. Overall picture, pistols will lose out to SBR's/PDW's when damage/armour piercing is taking into account, but really the stock should be extended on the SBR/PDW for this. The MP7 of course has qualities that put it at the intersection of Pistol/PDW.

EDIT3:
One more thing I thought of before heading off to work, under NCTH aiming levels work backwards to how it is in OCTH: More Aiming Clicks = a Bad Thing under NCTH vs being a Good Thing under OCTH. Therefore, by giving pistols in general a low number of Aiming Clicks under NCTH, we've all (stock v1.13 and myself up until v3.64) we've actually got it backwards for pistols in NCTH.

Right now, weapons of all sorts in my mods have on average 4 default NCTH aiming levels. Some sniper rifles and LMG's have 5 aiming levels, not because of poor sights (as they were set to 5 before this discussion) but because of size hampering minute adjustments to aim. So in effect, I'm bringing pistols in line with how other weapons work for aiming levels.

However, I am suspecting that giving larger pistols a 1 aiming level advantage may have been too much. Perhaps raising them back to 4, and simply giving them a 10% NCTH Cap bonus as is found on long arms.

I don't like the idea of giving small pistols a negative NCTH Cap penalty as:
1) to lower hitting potential, it would be easier, and cleaner, to just lower the NCTH accuracy value - these guns already have a low NCTH Accuracy
2) I'm just trying to make these pistols costlier to aim

Right now with only slightly more than 20 downloads between the standard and HAM5 versions of the mod, I should gather some actual feed back from in-game before I proceed with more adjustments.

[Updated on: Thu, 05 April 2012 22:11] by Moderator



Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #303118] Tue, 10 April 2012 02:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Gambigobilla

 
Messages:714
Registered:July 2008
I was thinking about this iron sights situation. A gun using no scope is considered using iron sights. So base cth for a gun without any scopes are for iron sights. When you attach a scope, scopes cth modifier gets added to base cth. That means scope's cth modifer gets added to iron sights cth. What i'm suggesting is a code change for "base cth not equals iron sight cth" when a scope is not attached gun should get an "iron sight bonus". So base cth should be as weapon has no scope nor iron sights. I know it sounds like a mess but i think it's a good solution.

Another solution would be that all guns having default iron sights attachments which should be replaced with scopes. This shouldn't require a code change but much more messy.

P.S: I don't get much of the NCTH calculations but AFAICS there is no value for iron sights cth bonus. If i missed it forgive my babblings.
Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #303131] Tue, 10 April 2012 08:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wil473

 
Messages:2861
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada
There is not a designated "iron sight" tag in NCTH, unlike the NCTH Scope Magnification factor, and the NCTH Laser Projection Factor. Instead there are a whole bunch of modifiers that may be used to represent "iron sights." In my mods (UC-1.13/DL-1.13/AFS) the NCTH Percent Cap tag, used to modify the shooters maximum accuracy, is used to represent a gun's built in sights. Attachment sights use more tags. Along the lines of what you're thinking needs to be coded, scopes simply negate the NCTH Percent Cap bonus see ( my first post for more information )

For more information on existing NCTH Tags see: NCTH Discussion on What Exactly We Have Right Now (as far as XML Tags)


Again, not finding time to work on the DL-1.13 map/items issue, I've done some more quick and dirty modifications:

- enforcing minimum NCTH Aiming Levels = 4
- longish pistols having lost their NCTH Aiming Level bonus vs. normal size pistols; instead they have a NCTH Percent Cap = 10% and NCTH Flat Aim = 1% bonuses
- Match Sights: now Flat Aim = 5, Percent Tracking = 5 (I'll look up the old values for the documentation)
- all Reflex Sights (not scopes): -1 NCTH Aiming Levels (again), between the sight and the S.T.O.M.P Traits there should be still 1 NCTH Aiming Level left for all cases; haven't decided what to do with the modifiers used in lieu of the -1 Aiming Levels bonus.




Re: Iron Sight (Built-in) Differentiation under NCTH[message #303278] Wed, 11 April 2012 21:36 Go to previous message
Wil473

 
Messages:2861
Registered:September 2004
Location: Canada
I've made a decision on the Reflex Sights under NCTH:

Basic Reflex Sight:
- back to the way it is in stock v1.13 NCTH, -1 Aiming Levels only
- this sight only quickens aimed shot, by reducing the number of aiming clicks to reach Max Aim, it does not change the actual Max Aim of the merc/weapon pairing

Holo Sights (Advance Reflex Sight, Compact Holo Sight, Kobra...)
- combines the bonuses of the basic Reflex Sight with the bonuses of the Match Sights: -1 NCTH Aiming Levels, Flat Aim = 5, Percent Tracking = 5

Remember the Reflex/Holo sights do not neutralize the Aiming Cap Bonus found on the base gun/granted by the RIS adapter. For both RIS equipped rifles and longish pistols this is a 10% bonus to the Cap that is neutralized by magnifying scopes, but will be present with the reflex/holo sight so in effect these sights will have an additional 10% bonus on the right guns.


Will be proceeding with AFS v3.65 to see how these changes work. UC-1.13 will probably be brought up to v3.65 standards for NCTH implementation and items (I'm adding the HK 121 to justify the revision change to v3.65).

Work on DL-1.163 v3.6x is now stopped:
- do not have time to track down the weird item bug, if people don't care about map drops being empty 4 out of 5 game starts, I may release what I have
- I really should be moving on v4.xx as HAM 5 code seems to have been integrated (Madd Mugsy mentioned the XML Editor in the SVN now supporting HAM 5 tags, which I presume is the fragmentation tags, hopefully the transforming items XML is also covered by his last post).
- Downloads don't seem to justify it when it will be replaced by the end of summer if all goes well with v4.xx.

[Updated on: Wed, 11 April 2012 21:42] by Moderator



Previous Topic: 1.13 UC HAM 5 aiming aperture shot distribution
Next Topic: Deidranna Lives! (with 1.13) problems
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue Sep 17 16:00:07 EEST 2019

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01261 seconds