Home » PLAYER'S HQ 1.13 » v1.13 General Gameplay Talk » NCTH Scope penalties below optimal range - broken?
NCTH Scope penalties below optimal range - broken?[message #319468]
|
Mon, 13 May 2013 03:51
|
|
sardonic_wrath |
|
Messages:48
Registered:June 2011 |
|
|
Hi,
Can't figure this out... are penalties for scopes at short ranges broken?
I've read all about it in the NCTH thread, however I am unsure what has changed since then...
However, more recent developments (like scopes with changable magnification, the button to change between scopes) indicate that penalties are still in place... I just can't seem to find them :confused:
My test setup: fresh install, the most current of depris SCIs (Rev 6072 on GameDir1673) on top of it, all values untouched.
I hire Lynx with kit 4 I believe, which gives me a M14 with reflex sights (1x) and 4x acog scope.
Whatever range I choose, the scope gives WAY better results.
The scope might have higher AP cost to begin with, and extra aim clicks might not do anything on short ranges, but even without aim clicks its very precise. Only on very short distances & highest aim level I can get a comparable CTH with reflex sights, which then costs more APs.
I tested the same with other weapons/scopes, various other versions, I tested with the "stock data overhaul" and AFS mods, tweaked all the values in CTHconstants.ini... results are always the same, more or less.
NOTE: I tested under the premise that the NHTC crosshairs working correctly... mostly I only looked at them and didn't actually shoot.
Am I missing something important here?
[Updated on: Mon, 13 May 2013 03:53] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Corporal
|
|
|
|
Re: NCTH Scope penalties below optimal range - broken?[message #319480]
|
Mon, 13 May 2013 07:52
|
|
Strohmann |
|
Messages:287
Registered:August 2011 Location: Division Thought Crimes |
|
|
The scope modes feature is likely the source of this behaviour:
Toggle Spoilerstock 1.13, revision 1674 with 6072 exe
Setup Lynx, M14 with ACOG 4x, Reflex Sight and LAM-200
1. 25 tiles with Scope Modes on/off
2. 7 tiles, Scope Modes on/off
3. 7 tiles, both times Scopes modes on, only LAM-200 installed/in second image no attachments, but edited projectionfactor 1.6 on the weapon
4. Scopes modes off, only ACOG 4x installed, at 8/7 tiles.
Notice the weird jump, even the old system had grave errors.
Report message to a moderator
|
Master Sergeant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: NCTH Scope penalties below optimal range - broken?[message #319865]
|
Thu, 16 May 2013 19:54
|
|
Strohmann |
|
Messages:287
Registered:August 2011 Location: Division Thought Crimes |
|
|
(I exclude the possibility that sardonic did stealth-edit his post and screenshots after you answered)
Quote:The only difference I see here is that with scope modes turned on and using the 4x scope, the projection is 4x instead of 1.3x, as with scope modes scopes don't magically adjust to best size. I'm sorry, but how do they magically adjust to best size if the screenshots in this thread show the opposite? If this would be true, the targeting aperture (specifically the inner circle) would be at least equal or smaller with scopes modes disabled.
The old display scheme was:
The displayed numeric magnification in the targeting aperture changes depending on range, purely visual.
If the distance was equal or greater than NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE x ScopeMagFactor, it turned green, indicating the optimal range.
If the distance was lower than NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE x ScopeMagFactor, under the minimal range, the displayed magnification turned red, indicating penalties.
If the distance felt inbetween the optimal range and the minimum range (if the SCOPE_RANGE_MULTIPLIER was below 1.0), it turned white and the displayed magnification stayed static within this range.
Quote:Yes, scopes are almost always better than no scopes, except for very short ranges. But that shouldn't be the case. The screenshots show that with activated scope modes feature the penalties disappear. Scopes having an optimal range and being worse outside of it is one core concept of NCTH. If you don't believe me:Toggle SpoilerHeadrock, thread "New_CTH_System_The_Formula"
Scope Magnification Penalties
Here we come to a peculiar sort of modifier, which as you notice is being calculated at the very end of the formula. This penalty, called a "Scope Magnification Penalty", is one of the unique parts that makes the new CTH system so different from the old one.
As repeated several times in this article, CTH is only one factor in several that determine whether the shot will hit its target. One of the most important factors is the use of scopes. Scopes installed on a weapon provide two important effects - one positive, the other negative.
The positive effect is calculated during the actual shooting of the gun, and will be explained in greater detail below. It is applied whenever the gun is being given extra aim at the target, and is definitely crucial for hitting targets beyond a dozen tiles with any certainty.
The negative effect will be explained here. Its purpose is to DIMINISH the effectiveness of the gun when used below the scope's "optimal" range. A gun with a scope mounted on top is harder to aim properly when the target is too close. This is reflected by a categorical penalty on Aiming CTH.
To understand how this effect works, we'll need to understand the concept of the NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE. This is another coefficient, externalized to the INI file, and one which has a massive impact on everything that has to do with scopes.
NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE effectively determines the optimal range of any scope based purely on its magnification factor. A 2x scope is therefore optimal when the target is at 2*NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE. A 4x scope is optimal at 4*NORMAL, and a 10x scope at 10*NORMAL. When no scope is installed, the normal distance is largely irrelevant except for purposes of 3D maths.
The default NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE value I'm currently using is 7 tiles. This means that a 2x scope is optimal for 14 tiles, a 4x for 28 tiles (sightrange), and a 10x scope is optimal at 70 tiles. Please remember that with the new system, decimal magnification scopes (like 1.5x) are possible.
While calculating CTH, we use this "optimal distance" to determine the range at which our scope becomes a LIABILITY - making shooting harder. In realism terms, this is related to the fact that a large device is obstructing our ability to aim the weapon at close targets, using the weapon's build-in Iron Sights as we would if no scope was installed. It impedes visibility of that target, and forces us to either aim with too much magnification, or aim by feel. Both of which are treated by the CTH system as being equally detrimental.
Let's see how the code deals with this:
Code:
Scope_Mag_Factor = a value derived directly from the scope we are using. A 2x scope would put this value at 2.0.
Best_Scope_Range = NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE(7) * Scope_Mag_Factor
if Range_to_Target is less than Best_Scope_Range, then
Scope_Ratio = Best_Scope_Range / Range_to_Target
Aiming_CTH is divided by (Scope_Ratio * AIM_TOO_CLOSE_SCOPE(-1))
This bit of code is best illustrated as an example:
Scope is a 2x, giving us a mag factor of 2.0
Best scope range is 7 tiles * 2.0 = 14 tiles.
Target is at 10 tiles distance.
Scope Ratio = 14 Tiles / 10 tiles = 1.4
Aiming CTH is divided by 1.4
In other words, when shooting a scope at this distance, we suffer a 40% decrease in Aiming CTH due to the difficulty of aiming a 2x scoped gun at a target that isn't at the best range for that scope. Naturally, the more powerful the scope, the worse the ratio would be at this distance. A 10x scoped gun is barely aimable at all at this distance, causing Aiming_CTH to plummet sharply to just a few points if any.
This is further complicated, as you'll soon see, by the fact that at sub-optimal range we don't even receive a 2x benefit from the scope, but rather a 1.4x benefit. These two factors combine to make short-range use of scopes very unrecommended. In fact, it's probably better to spend the APs to remove the scope, then fire, if the shooter has enough APs to do so at all.
The benefits from such a system should be obvious - it constrains long-range weapons to be used as long-range weapons. It forces us to either carry extra sidearms or other small weaponry, or have some of our mercs equipped with such weapons and dedicated to close-combat. A sniper caught at close-range would be unable to shoot accurately at his assailant. On the other hand, weapons equipped with no scope would obviously be extremely ineffectual at anything more than NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE.
----
After some quick testing with 6078, the displayed magnification turns green, if you are within laser range and viewing through a scope, but still shows the scope magnification. So the display is green within the scopes optimal range, then white and then green again at close range, that could be confusing for newbies. I propose reverting the display scheme to be closer to the old system:
If within optimal range, turn green.
If below minimum range, turn red (with reintroduced penalties).
If within the range of an installed laser and viewing through a scope, the projection factor overwrites the scope magnification in the display.
[Updated on: Fri, 17 May 2013 00:39] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Master Sergeant
|
|
|
|
|
Re: NCTH Scope penalties below optimal range - broken?[message #319880]
|
Fri, 17 May 2013 00:03
|
|
Flugente |
|
Messages:3509
Registered:April 2009 Location: Germany |
|
|
Eh... no. Using a scope when to near is even more stupid now, as magnification doesn't magically adjust, but one can simply not use the scope in that instance by selecting to aim with the iron sight/some other sight.
Laser boni that do not come from sights/scopes are applied all the time, regardless of scope used.
In the above pictures, the colour might indeed be wrong... have to check. :blah: Bleh, this is ugly.
[Updated on: Fri, 17 May 2013 00:07] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: NCTH Scope penalties below optimal range - broken?[message #319928]
|
Fri, 17 May 2013 15:01
|
|
sardonic_wrath |
|
Messages:48
Registered:June 2011 |
|
|
I agree that the old system (with scope modes off) isn't all that logical and has a lot of room for improvement.
But if it's going to be improved, it should be done consciously, and it should be documented, explained and discussed. Whereas this seemed more like an accident...
Basically, the usage of high powered scopes at close ranges should be discouraged, I think we can all agree on that.
Flugente
This is very reasonable when you think about it... if you have a 10x scope and aim on a guy ten feet away, he'll fill the entire view through your scope... so the scopes indicates are sure hit (as he fills the entire view). The NCTH target cursor is based around this idea - so in the NCTH idea: small circle - good CTH.
Just because the scope indicates a sure hit, doesn't mean the cursor should. The cursor represents the chance that something goes wrong with your aiming - which is quite likely in a scenario like the one you described.
But I can understand what you are getting at... a CTH penalty reeks of arbitrary balancing decision.
In reality, you should be able to get a sure hit on a static target. But it shouldn't be easier than doing so with iron sights.
Personally, I think an additional dynamic AP penalty (maybe something with aiming levels, haven't quite understood that concept yet) is the way to go.
You have to figure out what exactly you are looking at - not only is everything too big, but also blurry/out of focus. If the enemy is not in your view you don't know in which direction you need to correct. Basically, you get poor visual feedback on your aiming movements - you have to be very skilled to compensate for that.
Realistically, moving targets would be extremly difficult to hit. Have to reread that part of the NCTH thread to see how it works now.
Regardless of that, I think small movements (within one tile) should be accounted for. If an enemy is so close that you can't even see his entire head trough your 10x scope, even a small head movement could throw your aim way off.
Generally I think whatever penalties should be applied exponential rather than linear.
Report message to a moderator
|
Corporal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: NCTH Scope penalties below optimal range - broken?[message #319972]
|
Fri, 17 May 2013 22:08
|
|
sardonic_wrath |
|
Messages:48
Registered:June 2011 |
|
|
hmm... is that it?
Headrock
The Shooting Radius in this case is determined by the location of the target, rather than the scope. In other words, in the example above, our 2x scope is behaving the same as a 1x scope. It does not "push" the red arch further back as it did before, even when aimed to full extent. It could be summed up like this:
Distance at which the shooting arch is placed = Scope's Optimal Distance OR Target's Distance, whichever is LOWER.
("bold" effect done by me)
http://www.ja-galaxy-forum.com/board/ubbthreads.php/topics/249912/Headrock.html#Post249912
anyway, the way I understand it its done for calculation purposes only... the player should still treat magnification factor as a fixed value rather than a maximum value.
While you are a working on that stuff - would it be a lot of work to introduce a new modifier for CHTconstants.ini, like discussed here?
Basically, the idea is to allow for a higher NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE (= more effective iron sights) without giving 10x scopes too high of a range to be useful even on bigmaps.
A global scaling factor for all magnifcation factors would work, so with the factor set to 0,7 a 4x scope would have an optimal range of 2,8 * NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE
(effectively making it a 2,8x scope for CTH calculation purposes)
Report message to a moderator
|
Corporal
|
|
|
Re: NCTH Scope penalties below optimal range - broken?[message #319974]
|
Fri, 17 May 2013 22:14
|
|
Flugente |
|
Messages:3509
Registered:April 2009 Location: Germany |
|
|
Nah. I dislike coding NCTH.
Edit: Sounds like its not much work, but I'm not interested to find out.
[Updated on: Fri, 17 May 2013 22:17] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Re: NCTH Scope penalties below optimal range - broken?[message #319977]
|
Fri, 17 May 2013 22:29
|
|
Strohmann |
|
Messages:287
Registered:August 2011 Location: Division Thought Crimes |
|
|
...But you are just claiming that, while the screenshots and the description of the creator of NCTH indicate the opposite.
So if the magnification magically adjusts, why does the inner circle of the targeting aperture grow if the target is too close instead of shrinking (scope modes off)?
Why did Headrock write:Toggle SpoilerQuote:Scope Magnification Penalties
Here we come to a peculiar sort of modifier, which as you notice is being calculated at the very end of the formula. This penalty, called a "Scope Magnification Penalty", is one of the unique parts that makes the new CTH system so different from the old one.
As repeated several times in this article, CTH is only one factor in several that determine whether the shot will hit its target. One of the most important factors is the use of scopes. Scopes installed on a weapon provide two important effects - one positive, the other negative.
The positive effect is calculated during the actual shooting of the gun, and will be explained in greater detail below. It is applied whenever the gun is being given extra aim at the target, and is definitely crucial for hitting targets beyond a dozen tiles with any certainty.
The negative effect will be explained here. Its purpose is to DIMINISH the effectiveness of the gun when used below the scope's "optimal" range. A gun with a scope mounted on top is harder to aim properly when the target is too close. This is reflected by a categorical penalty on Aiming CTH.
To understand how this effect works, we'll need to understand the concept of the NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE. This is another coefficient, externalized to the INI file, and one which has a massive impact on everything that has to do with scopes.
NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE effectively determines the optimal range of any scope based purely on its magnification factor. A 2x scope is therefore optimal when the target is at 2*NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE. A 4x scope is optimal at 4*NORMAL, and a 10x scope at 10*NORMAL. When no scope is installed, the normal distance is largely irrelevant except for purposes of 3D maths.
The default NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE value I'm currently using is 7 tiles. This means that a 2x scope is optimal for 14 tiles, a 4x for 28 tiles (sightrange), and a 10x scope is optimal at 70 tiles. Please remember that with the new system, decimal magnification scopes (like 1.5x) are possible.
While calculating CTH, we use this "optimal distance" to determine the range at which our scope becomes a LIABILITY - making shooting harder. In realism terms, this is related to the fact that a large device is obstructing our ability to aim the weapon at close targets, using the weapon's build-in Iron Sights as we would if no scope was installed. It impedes visibility of that target, and forces us to either aim with too much magnification, or aim by feel. Both of which are treated by the CTH system as being equally detrimental.
Let's see how the code deals with this:
Code:
Scope_Mag_Factor = a value derived directly from the scope we are using. A 2x scope would put this value at 2.0.
Best_Scope_Range = NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE(7) * Scope_Mag_Factor
if Range_to_Target is less than Best_Scope_Range, then
Scope_Ratio = Best_Scope_Range / Range_to_Target
Aiming_CTH is divided by (Scope_Ratio * AIM_TOO_CLOSE_SCOPE(-1))
This bit of code is best illustrated as an example:
Scope is a 2x, giving us a mag factor of 2.0
Best scope range is 7 tiles * 2.0 = 14 tiles.
Target is at 10 tiles distance.
Scope Ratio = 14 Tiles / 10 tiles = 1.4
Aiming CTH is divided by 1.4
In other words, when shooting a scope at this distance, we suffer a 40% decrease in Aiming CTH due to the difficulty of aiming a 2x scoped gun at a target that isn't at the best range for that scope. Naturally, the more powerful the scope, the worse the ratio would be at this distance. A 10x scoped gun is barely aimable at all at this distance, causing Aiming_CTH to plummet sharply to just a few points if any.
This is further complicated, as you'll soon see, by the fact that at sub-optimal range we don't even receive a 2x benefit from the scope, but rather a 1.4x benefit. These two factors combine to make short-range use of scopes very unrecommended. In fact, it's probably better to spend the APs to remove the scope, then fire, if the shooter has enough APs to do so at all.
The benefits from such a system should be obvious - it constrains long-range weapons to be used as long-range weapons. It forces us to either carry extra sidearms or other small weaponry, or have some of our mercs equipped with such weapons and dedicated to close-combat. A sniper caught at close-range would be unable to shoot accurately at his assailant. On the other hand, weapons equipped with no scope would obviously be extremely ineffectual at anything more than NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE.
[...]
APPLYING SCOPE MAGNIFICATION
Scopes work by dividing the size of the sway circle, essentially making shots more accurate. However, scopes only work best at a certain distance. Below that distance, the scope becomes less and less useful. Beyond that distance, the bonus loses its effect because the original size of the circle is bigger. Let's see how this works:
Code:
If at least one Extra Aiming Level has been added to the shot, then
Scope_Best_Range = NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE(70) * Scope_Magnification_Factor
If Range_to_Target is greater than or equal to Scope_Best_Range then
Final_Magnification_Factor = Scope_Magnification_Factor
Else
Final_Magnification_Factor = Range_to_Target / NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE
If Final_Magnification_Factor is less than 1, then
Final_Magnification_Factor = 1.
This is more simple than it sounds, but deserves an example:
Scope Mag Factor = 2.0 (a 2x scope)
Scope Best Range is then 2.0 * 70 = 140 meters (14 tiles)
If Target Range is 14 tiles or more, then the Final Mag Factor is 2.0
If Target Range is 10 tiles, then the Final Mag Factor is (10 tiles / 7 tiles) = 1.42
If Target Range is 7 tiles, then the Final Mag Factor is (7 tiles / 7 tiles) = 1.0
If Target Range is 6 tiles or less, then the Final Mag Factor is 1.0
Example #2:
Scope Mag Factor = 10.0 (a 10x scope)
Scope Best Range is then 10.0 * 70 = 700 meters (70 tiles)
If Target Range is 70 tiles or more, then the Final Mag Factor is 10.0
If Target Range is 10 tiles, then the Final Mag Factor is (10 tiles / 7 tiles) = 1.42
If Target Range is 7 tiles, then the Final Mag Factor is (7 tiles / 7 tiles) = 1.0
If Target Range is 6 tiles or less, then the Final Mag Factor is 1.0
Finally, we apply the Mag Factor to the size of the Muzzle Sway:
Code:
Muzzle_Sway is divided by Final_Magnification_Factor
So we can see that the scope actually makes the muzzle sway much smaller, assuming of course that the target is at the correct distance. If it is closer, our scope doesn't provide the same bonus. If it is more distant, the Muzzle_Sway itself is larger, while the magnification doesn't grow, making the shot harder.
In addition, you can now refer back to the CTH formula, where I've explained that scopes below their optimal distance also decrease CTH considerably. This means that a shot with a 10x scope at 10 tiles is actually harder than a shot with a 2x scope at 10 tiles, despite them both giving the same magnification factor (1.42 for both).
Is that outdated codewise, or why are sure the scope magnification magically adjusts? Until you give sound (a) reason(s), i have doubts like sardonic.
Edit: that was directed at post 319963.
[Updated on: Fri, 17 May 2013 22:30] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Master Sergeant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: NCTH Scope penalties below optimal range - broken?[message #320010]
|
Sat, 18 May 2013 05:37
|
|
sardonic_wrath |
|
Messages:48
Registered:June 2011 |
|
|
On my last playthroughs, I went for OCTH because of some negative things I picked up in various threads, AIMNAS not supporting NCTH, and so on.
Only in the last few days, in preperation of a new playthrough, I decided to give NCTH a go and test it to get a feel for it and find the best values for the experience I want.
Looking at CTHconstants.ini, this was one of my first thoughts... setting the iron scope range to something that felt right to me would result in unusable optimal ranges for highpowered scopes.
A few lines down in the ini, I was happy for a moment and thought that problem was covered... but it turned out that SCOPE_RANGE_MULTIPLIER was doing something completely different.
I too think NCTH would greatly benefit from this. And having only very limited experiences with coding, it looks so simple in my imagination... like if the variable is defined like this:
magnification_variable_used_in_calculations = value_read_from_xml
and it has to be merely changed to:
magnification_variable_used_in_calculations = value_from_from_xml * value_from_cthconstants.ini
Please excuse if I am way off there, I'm not trying to trivialize the great work you are doing
If that ini value defaulted to 1.0, no harm would be done.
StrohmannNot to forget lack of continued support/correcting remaining issues likely causes increased player disinterest, which results in unwillingness to code for it , completing the circle. Accounting for the possibility that Headrock may never return, it would be a damn shame, if the whole NCTH project would remain in an unfinished state. Very well put. The fact that this behaviour of scope modes was in place for almost a year kinda proves your point, people just accept NCTH oddities like it is determined by fate and don't even discuss them anymore... or rather they just stick with OCTH
Of course I respect the decision not to code stuff you aren't interested in. No hard feelings there.
Report message to a moderator
|
Corporal
|
|
|
|
|
Re: NCTH Scope penalties below optimal range - broken?[message #320081]
|
Sun, 19 May 2013 19:17
|
|
Strohmann |
|
Messages:287
Registered:August 2011 Location: Division Thought Crimes |
|
|
Uhm, look in the first posts at the two screenshots at the lower end i posted. The used formula was always erroneous in a sense, that the penalties didn't continue below 8 tiles (=NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE). As noone seems to want to mess with NCTH, this will likely stay.
As for testing:
- The displayed magnification with ACOG 4x only is always green, even below optimal distance (only turns white when reaching NORMAL_SHOOTING_DISTANCE)...
- There still seems to be no penalty in place, at all. The targeting aperture now does only shrink slightly instead of strongly as before if approaching the target, but it doesn't grow below optimal range like it should.
- Iron sights/reflex sight still give a worse, larger aperture size than ACOG 4x at close ranges...
- LAM-200 laser projection factor display seems to work correctly, the displayed magnification stays white from 1.0 till 1.5, then becomes green with 1.6.
So i get the impression, that this fix wasn't tested extensively or the concepts discussed in this thread weren't fully understood or not agreed with.
[Updated on: Sun, 19 May 2013 20:58] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Master Sergeant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Apr 18 05:26:42 GMT+3 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02423 seconds
|