Home » FULL CONTROL GAMES » #JAFDEV » Community Wishlist for JA:F
|
|
|
|
| Re: Community Wishlist for JA:F[message #324927]
|
Mon, 09 September 2013 12:54  
|
|
 Hyrax |
 |
Messages:17
Registered:May 2013
Location: Harjumaa |
|
|
I am not sure if this is somehow implemented in 1.13, but I had a idea how to improve pistols, smgs etc action (short ranged, low damage, low AP cost). In the original JA2 and Wildfire when you where 1 square away from an enemy and shot him with a pistol and the enemy was armored you couldn't kill him very easily (took a lot of shots, even in the head). But the problem stems from the fact that when you shoot at him the armor always takes effect, but in real life when you are against an enemy you know is armored, you try to aim at the unarmored parts of the enemy.
So, basically the idea is to implement special aiming which costs extra AP's and increases the difficulty of the shot (smaller percentage to hit the target or chance to still hit armored part of the enemy), but allows you to target unarmored parts of the enemy ).
[Updated on: Mon, 09 September 2013 16:54] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Private
|
|
|
|
| Re: Community Wishlist for JA:F[message #324932]
|
Mon, 09 September 2013 14:57
|
|
| dzidek1983 |
 |
Messages:92
Registered:June 2009 |
|
|
more realistic granades and explosives
in JA2 a brick of C4 should demolish and destroy a normal house we met all the time
but what it did it destroyed a part of the wall like 3-4 tiles wide
same goes for granades... a noral throwing granade would tear off the legs of a soldier exploding under his feet
Report message to a moderator
|
Corporal 1st Class
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Community Wishlist for JA:F[message #325080]
|
Thu, 12 September 2013 08:26
|
|
| Mauser |
 |
Messages:756
Registered:August 2006
Location: Bavaria - Germany |
|
|
One thing i would actually like to see is, that range and accuracy of a gun are represented as a single value again, with no real restrictions to the max range of guns, since no level will be large enough to really exceed the maximum flight distance of bullets.
But instead, accuracy should be tied to range in order to differentiate the effectiveness of weapons, with pistols simply not hitting anything beyond a certain range, whilst sniper rifles having the full CTH at all ranges.
This would eliminate the 1/10 scale problem completely, as range would no longer matter, only accuracy. So the accuracy value would be the defining characteristic for a guns CTH and effective combat distance.
I know that range and accuracy really are two separate values and needed for a realistic portrayal of weapons, but let
Report message to a moderator
|
First Sergeant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Community Wishlist for JA:F[message #325136]
|
Fri, 13 September 2013 09:50
|
|
| derek |
 |
Messages:147
Registered:April 2010 |
|
|
JA 2 original styled CTH... or make it optional.
Always liked that, never was a fan of shown percentages (like in FOT) or some kind of bars (like JA2 mode - not bitching or anything).
U know if U're in effective range and how accurate your shot is (how many APs U spent).
And realistic humans, not ME or DA (or most of the games) style where everybody is slim and beautiful.
Make them chubby, short, tall, limping, one leg shorter, skinny, buffed, bold...
An NPCs scheduled, like Keith in Cambria (and others)... preserve that.
Add animal - dogs, cats, pigeons, fish, snakes, wolves... they can even attack U (wolves, dogs, snakes, bears - we must have bears  ).
Add a quest - save Shanga the circus bear :happybear: ROFL
Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Community Wishlist for JA:F[message #325168]
|
Fri, 13 September 2013 23:47
|
|
| Akodo Deathseeker |
|
Messages:104
Registered:March 2001
Location: St Paul, MN |
|
|
MauserOne thing i would actually like to see is, that range and accuracy of a gun are represented as a single value again, with no real restrictions to the max range of guns, since no level will be large enough to really exceed the maximum flight distance of bullets.
But instead, accuracy should be tied to range in order to differentiate the effectiveness of weapons, with pistols simply not hitting anything beyond a certain range, whilst sniper rifles having the full CTH at all ranges.
This would eliminate the 1/10 scale problem completely, as range would no longer matter, only accuracy. So the accuracy value would be the defining characteristic for a guns CTH and effective combat distance.
I know that range and accuracy really are two separate values and needed for a realistic portrayal of weapons, but let
Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant
|
|
|
|
| Re: Community Wishlist for JA:F[message #325170]
|
Sat, 14 September 2013 02:30
|
|
| Mauser |
|
Messages:756
Registered:August 2006
Location: Bavaria - Germany |
|
|
Quote:I agree with this that features such as ergonomics and handling characteristics should give minor bonuses or penalties to accuracy while other features should give AP bonuses or penalties. I'm not sure I'd want to alter firing AP penalties much. I'd be fine with different APs based on broad differences such as a single action semiauto vs a revolver being fired double action, but not weapons that are mechanically functioning the same...so an AR-15 and SKS would have the same AP to fire.
I think one of the biggest places design and ergonomics would impact is how fast it is to change a magazine (or reload, if not magazine based) A gun were the magazine is released with a button that can be reached without moving your hand is going to be faster than one where you have to move your hand far. A magazine that drops straight out and the replacement slapped right back in is faster than one were a mag has to be rocked out then the replacement rocked back in, etc.
Agreed. Generally, the main characteristics to differentiate various guns should be:
- accuracy
- damage potential
- handling&ergonomics (+-AP for aiming, reloading and changing stance etc.)
- firing speed
- ruggedness&reliability
- customizability
- value
Quote:I agree with most of this, however I think it would be very hard to differentiate between doing regular preventative maintenance such as oiling and cleaning vs repairing damage.
I rather see this as a dual-value system.
You have one status value for general cleanliness and maintennance, which deteriorates with different speeds depending on gun type, climate and usage.
This one can always be raised from 0% to 100% by simple maintennance and repairs.
The second value represents a permanent wear&tear status, which cannot be fixed by normal means and drops permanently alongside the first value through usage and received damage. And it drops the faster, the lower the first value gets, raising the risk for catastrophical failure alongside. It could also be enhanced by additional status marks, ranging from broken to perfect, according to a certain % treshold. Once its status drops below that treshold, it permanently changes status and according denomination. Expert repairs may be able to improve the overall status to the upper maximum value for the current treshold, but not above, except maybe by using spare parts to replace key components. Maybe even a Fallout New Vegas like repair system would be thinkable, where you can scavenge parts from items of the same type to repair one more effectively?
Both values influence reliability and accuracy. Because even a relatively well maintained but worn out gun will always be less reliable and accurate than a brand new one, but a badly maintained new gun may become just as unreliable and inaccurate than a well maintained worn gun, until it is properly taken care of.
Body armor is different though, because once damaged and penetrated, most body armor becomes useless or at least significantly less protective. And all body armors deteoriate over time, depending on usage and climate. And the fewest of them can actually be mended and fixed up again, but always have to be discarded and replaced.
A punctured steel plate insert cannot be reforged, a shattered ceramic plate cannot be glued back together, a penetrated Kevlar fabric cannot really be stitched back together and regain its full strength.
The key to this system is: the better you take care of your equipment, the slower it will deteoriate through usage.
You may be able to fix a broken or heavily worn gun up well enough to function again, but you will never be able to make it work as good as new. Wear and tear should have a permanent component with limited repairability, in order to make ruggedness, reliability and quality a much more important tactical factor for equipment choice.
Prime example: M-16 vs. AK47. A well maintanied and pristine M-16 may be more ergonomic and accurate than the AK, but the AK will take a lot more punishment and neglect, almost never fail and be much less affected by the environment, whilst the M-16 will greatly suffer from less than optimal conditions and be generally much more maintenance-heavy to field.
We are talking of a scenario and timeframe, where the most available guns will be Vietnam-era stuff and older, with only very few significantly more modern models and higher quality components.
Also, this permanent wear system will force the player to change equipment more frequently, instead of allowing him to acquire it once and use it for the rest of the game, as long as he only has the repair ability. Thus also allowing for another factor to balance out the ingame economy and item progression.
Report message to a moderator
|
First Sergeant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Community Wishlist for JA:F[message #325199]
|
Sun, 15 September 2013 16:08
|
|
| Mauser |
|
Messages:756
Registered:August 2006
Location: Bavaria - Germany |
|
|
Sam_HotteNevertheless, range (effective, normal, average, combat - whatever you choose to call it) of a gun is a value a player should be presented to enable comparison of different guns in this respect. 
Agreed. But it merely should be an average value for evaluation and comparison purposes, but not actually artificially restricting or limiting concerning game mechanics.
It should merely show the player a base value, at which ranges the gun can still perform with maximum effectiveness under optimal/regular conditions, with the currently loaded ammunition type, modifications and operator skill influencing this value dynamically.
Sam_Hotte
Ah, forgot: In order to differentiate between influence of the gun and influence of the shooter on where the bullet goes, it might be helpful to use different terms, e.g. accuracy and precision.
Also agreed.
[Updated on: Sun, 15 September 2013 16:12] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
First Sergeant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Community Wishlist for JA:F[message #325234]
|
Mon, 16 September 2013 19:38
|
|
| Sam Hotte |
 |
Messages:1966
Registered:March 2009
Location: Middle of Germany |
|
|
DerekBP
plus I dislike having cth presented in JA game (like % or some sort of bar).
So you prefer having showing it in colour of crosshair or size of a circle or whatever. Matter of taste.
Anyway, showing it somehow you'd have to; players assumingly wouldn't like it if they purely had to 'trail and error' this.
Quote:No, no... "short range, medium, long"... no.
So we agree on this.
Quote:So, this 50m is just some sort of "framework" (or whatever) so that player can have easier time to figure things out. But because of quoted part - Len will have 75m, Igor 50m and Fox 35m effective range 'cause of their skill.
No. I don't think, Mauser meant this way. And I would dislike this.
(effective) Range is not dependent from shooter but inherent to gun and ammo. hence shooter's skill should influence CTH (and or probability of critical hit, hitting unprotected body parts or such).
So in your example it should be like Len has good CTH with a full damage hit if shooting at target at 75m whereas Fox would likely not hit or just score a graze.
And at 35m Fox has good CTH and can score a full hit, while Len has "sure" hit and high probability for critical, score more damage or something like this.
And at 50m Fox has not that good CTH, but if she hits, the bullet should still have its full potential as it is within effective range. So she could score full damage hit, but likelihood of hitting is reduced because its out of her range (to far for her to aim well) not beyond guns effective range.
If you meant, there shouldn't be any CTH at all because it should all be "translated" into effective range (?) - I don't think that'd be good idea ...
Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant Major
|
|
|
|
| Re: Community Wishlist for JA:F[message #325238]
|
Mon, 16 September 2013 21:18
|
|
| derek |
|
Messages:147
Registered:April 2010 |
|
|
No, I prefer having it like original jagged Alliance 2 has it - no mark of any kind. U only have circle that can "contract" by right mouse clicking and become yellow at the and, but this doesn't show any cth chance only how accurate/precise U are trying to hit enemy (by spending more APs)- it's just that U aim better. There is no indicator that will show that your attack has 80% chance on hitting the target. U have that in, let's say, Fallout or in JA2 mods but not in original game. And THAT is what I prefer (and what I meant).
I know he didn't meant that.
And U had it wrong what i meant... sorry for not being clear.
I meant that,drown by his statement "Because an exeptionally skilled operator may still hit its target way beyond nominally effective range, whilst a bloody amateur may struggle to hit a rather close target even with the best gun.", Fox will have harder time hitting the target at range of 50m with Glock 17 then Len would. As we all know, Fox has harder time hitting enemies then Len because of her lower skill but I'm not certain that her skills affect guns effective range (maybe I'm wrong but as far I know JA2 combat mechanics don't take that into consideration).
So... U have Glock 17 with "base effective range" of 50m and "base damage" of 20, but these stats can vary from merc to merc and other factors (like attachments and crit hit...). Thus Len has an advantage over Fox because he is more skilled and thus has easier time hitting the target at bigger range (with the same weapon) and has more chance to deal more damage or to make critical hit because he is more skilled ergo more accurate and knows how to "operate" that weapon better.
Furthermore, since I said that "effective range" for Fox is 35m, this means that for every meter beyond this 35m Len has an advantage over her in terms of hitting the target.
Of course dmg is another topic - it depends on bullet type, armor, if the target is moving, stance (and movement) of the shooter, bullet trajectory, merc accuracy and skill also... and so on. Many factors. And, of course, dice roll for critical ('cause every hit should have some crit chance if U ask me).
Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Community Wishlist for JA:F[message #325258]
|
Tue, 17 September 2013 03:35
|
|
| Mauser |
|
Messages:756
Registered:August 2006
Location: Bavaria - Germany |
|
|
Sam_HotteNo. I don't think, Mauser meant this way. And I would dislike this.
(effective) Range is not dependent from shooter but inherent to gun and ammo. hence shooter's skill should influence CTH (and or probability of critical hit, hitting unprotected body parts or such).
Well, i partly meant it that way.
The inherent base accuracy and effective range of any gun is determined on a shooting range in a controlled environment and mounted in a fixed firing rig, with calibrated and standardized ammunition.
But in the field and depending on the operator, this accuracy may not be reached at the nominal range, or be even exceeded due to exceptional skill, luck or favorable environmental influences.
So the effective range value for any given gun is always just a middle value, which represents the distance at which a gun has, let's say, at least a 90% or 95% sure CTH and do at least 90% of its base damage potential under otherwise ideal circumstances.
But there are many examples in firearms history, where shooters have hit and killed their targets effectively far beyond those nominally determined values. Like snipers killing their marks over extreme distances.
Of course one could also simply focus on the purely physical aspects and say, that effective range is entirely determined solely by the gun's and ammo's frame characteristics like barrel length, bullet shape and muzzle velocity. But it would also be possible to take this base value, display it as info for the player, and then modify it according to which operator uses it, with what attachments and what ammo type (match ammo), so the player always knows at which range he can effectively engage the enemy with this particular configuration, but still not to impose any artificial limits on anything, other than the chance to hit the target and do adequate damage.
Exceptions would be special weapons with actually very limited max ranges, like launcher grenades, RPG rounds and flamethrowers etc., although i guess map size will never be large enough to actually make that truly count, if no arbitrarily reduced scale is used for limiting effective ranges as in JA2.
My entire point being: effective range should merely be an approximate orientation value for the player, but no limitation to the practical effectiveness of any weapon regarding the scale of the maps. So a shot from a handgun may go wide and high and go all across the map, perhaps even hitting something important. The sniper rifle will merely hit the same target at the other side of the map more accurately and more powerful. And the burst from the assault rifle may have one bullet fall short of the medium ranged target, one hit it and one deviate and go way wide and perhaps hit something entirely unintended. Same goes for shotguns, where the pellets of a shot will merely continue to spread out and lose energy, until they either hit something or drop to the ground from gravity. So a buckshot shell from a regular sized shotgun may shred a target at 5 tiles distance, graze and wound 2 targets at 10 tiles, but still be able to hit something at 15 or even 20 tiles and beyond, albeit without much effect. And if you wanted to hit a target on the other side of the map, out of actual visual range of the shooter with a shotgun slug, he should still be able to take the shot regardless (by using a ballistic arc), but with a very, very low chance of success.
So effective weapon ranges should merely help the player to better determine and control, at which engagement ranges a certain weapon (with a certain firing mode) will (mostly) reliably do its intended job, whilst minimizing unintended and potentially catastrophic damage from misses/stray bullets. And maybe it would be practical, if this orientation value would incorporate also the skill of the operator and other fixed influencing factors, being displayed dynamically to the player (in the weapon's description panel). But all without artificially limiting the actual range any shot from any gun CAN potentially reach on any given map.
CTH is an entirely different value though, which of course also factors in values from the effective range, but also additionally calculates things like stance of the target, elevation/angle, cover and movement and of course aiming effort etc. and thus is much more dynamic and accurate.
Did i now make it somewhat clear what i want?
Report message to a moderator
|
First Sergeant
|
|
|
|
| Re: Community Wishlist for JA:F[message #325264]
|
Tue, 17 September 2013 09:09
|
|
| derek |
|
Messages:147
Registered:April 2010 |
|
|
"Well, i partly meant it that way.
The inherent base accuracy and effective range of any gun is determined on a shooting range in a controlled environment and mounted in a fixed firing rig, with calibrated and standardized ammunition.
But in the field and depending on the operator, this accuracy may not be reached at the nominal range, or be even exceeded due to exceptional skill, luck or favorable environmental influences.
So the effective range value for any given gun is always just a middle value, which represents the distance at which a gun has, let's say, at least a 90% or 95% sure CTH and do at least 90% of its base damage potential under otherwise ideal circumstances."
Agreed!
But...
"Of course one could also simply focus on the purely physical aspects and say, that effective range is entirely determined solely by the gun's and ammo's frame characteristics like barrel length, bullet shape and muzzle velocity. But it would also be possible to take this base value, display it as info for the player, and then modify it according to which operator uses it, with what attachments and what ammo type (match ammo), so the player always knows at which range he can effectively engage the enemy with this particular configuration, but still not to impose any artificial limits on anything, other than the chance to hit the target and do adequate damage."
I'm "against" displaying modified range (and accuracy), when it considers mercs skill.
There can be "general" info of one weapons range and "modified" info depended on attachments, but not "modified" info depended on mercs skill.
What i always liked in JA2 original is that U didn't know/have all the "combat info". No cth, crit chance, bonus from attachments (although I like that in 1.13 very much and think it's good feature), skill involvement in terms of using guns/explosives/med kits etc...
And defiantly am against any cth info (bar, percentage, whatever)... even in my 1.13 I removed that.
And no exp bar for lvl or skills (like 1.13 addition has - also removed that in my 1.13) - if I want that I'll play Diablo or BG or something like that. And, for me, that "ruins" realism (that we all want).
(Sometimes I dislike the knowledge I have about JA2 mechanics - like how cth works, how skill progression works and so on. That's why I would change some things regarding those mechanics in new Jagged Alliance game).
Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Community Wishlist for JA:F[message #325335]
|
Wed, 18 September 2013 10:20
|
|
| derek |
|
Messages:147
Registered:April 2010 |
|
|
Don't know from where the "sudden change of hearts" towards realism comes from?! :whoknows:
Most of the stuff in 1.13 are drown from that "drive" for realism...
@Hyrax
U can have fun, challenging game with great story and cool characters and have great deal of realism (that doesn't ruin gameplay) if done properly.
Don't know abut other JA fans but I always liked those stuff in the game - not knowing cth, skill progression etc.
As much JA is tactical turn-based game it is in same amount RPG game. But not in BG or ME way, but completely different. As far as I see it; U take a role of a commander hired by Enrico and U can have 1 IMP as "your alter-ego" (that's why I newer use more then 1; plus I look at it as cheating if one has more IMP chars). And all mercs and RPCs in the game are already complete persons with their own agendas and points of view and skills and principles and feelings - U can't just make them have the skill U'll like them to have or make the like somebody or to fall in love with somebody or change ideals they have (Len won't shoot civilian or another merc, Buns already hates Steroid, Raider already has a wife, Buzz has it's heart broken, dr Q will always like Len because of his calm and ideals and principles)... (It's not like ME where U can choose with whom U'll have sex and help Garrus and Tali fall in love).
Although I would change that "feelings constant" that JA2 has... OK, if U hate somebody it's really hard to unhate or if U like somebody it's not easy to dislike that person. But there are those mercs that can learn to like/hate, but it's also a constant of a sort - and I would change that, but under some rules. When U look at Len and dr Q it's completely understandable that they will eventually start liking each other, but... Fox hates Steroid 'cause he is "dumb" and buffed, but if he "plays by her rules/principles/ideals" she should be able to overcome her shortsightedness and not hate him (not like him also, but stop bitching about him); or whatever relationship.
And would like for IMP to have/gain relationships.
I mean, I always liked all those stuff in orig JA... not knowing what, how and why (to put it that way).
Never will forget my 1st game - normal/scifi/unlimited turns/save anytime...
1. Flo was fed up with me 'cause she was a "hard" mule... had no combat, no action, no shot fired, wasn't teaching militia (witch she is quite good at actually) and always had 200-250% of carrying weight (well, that just a couple of LAWs for her)... had only Skyrider so she was mainly on foot, constantly over-exhausted and bitching about having no action... So she was fed up and just left (although I paid regularly her fee). Really killed her body and spirit ROFL
2. Two of my mercs died so Blood and Hitman always had a bit lower moral, plus I had Magic so Blood was all over him but in combat his moral was always dropping (as far as I could figure it out it was because of his own poor combat performance in front of Magic - sissy  )
3. Crepitus attacked Drassen and everybody was like "wtf man?"... had an enormous battle where they had almost no hth, low moral, no ammo, destroyed armor and so on...
4. Day 100 (yes, that's right)... Still have Alma, Belime and Meduna. No hummer or Hamous. Whole county is whining 'cause my poor progression, Enrico is bitching, my mercs are tired and few of them in hospital, still have military base and Meduna (don't count Belime)... Income is getting lower and lower and one mine (Gurmm) is dried out. And some of AIM merc won't get hired because of all that and my 2 KIAs. And one of my merc quite 'cause all of that and Buns is bitching about Reaper threatening to quite and Fox is whining about Steroid (but surprisingly they are on their 100 day in the field). Only good thing I killed Kingpin (stole money form him) and killed half of San Mona (witch also was fucked up for my 6 merc team I sent).
... ahhh... that were the good old days ROFL :drool:
So, don't know abut others but this my point of view towards JA and the reason that is my no 1 game ever...
I REALLY like all the improvements done in 1.13 by the community and our "god" Flug :rulez: :clap:
but some things, for me, are the best as in vanilla :rulez:
Of course, there can be cth bar or something and skill progression bar (even "cheats" where U put one AK47 and few clips in one backpack and then that backpack into another that has 2 AK47 and few clips and grenades)... but make it OPTIONAL (on/off check box in menu - better yet in some sort of ini file like we have now).
And don't know about skills and exp... I know that for every action done by merc he has a chance to gain exp points, but as far as I could figure it out it only works when that action is ("success" so to speak); not sure if they have that chance when they fail to combine tnt and detonator (for instance)?! I think that they need that chance for fails also... U learn from Your fails too.
Anyways, that's my way of thinking.
Cheers! :cheers:
Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Apr 18 12:01:58 GMT+3 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.03401 seconds
|
Blog
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
