Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MarcAFK]

Yeah i know who blackadder is, but he doesn't speak like barry white either
That Stargate xcom thing was something i wanted to try ages ago, i got as far as modding 2 weapons and a few badly made skins.
I never worked out how to make the skyranger look like a stargate though.

[Dohon]

New interview over at Joystiq. Has a few new tidbits, one them being that there no longer are different types of shot (like snapshot, autoshot, or aimed shot). Instead, you get accuracy bonuses for flanking aliens.

[Domenique]

New interview over at Joystiq. Has a few new tidbits, one them being that there no longer are different types of shot (like snapshot, autoshot, or aimed shot). Instead, you get accuracy bonuses for flanking aliens.

I mostly only used auto-shot anyway, not a huge deal.

[timferius]

Well, with the removal of TUs, I guess that's the only way to really do it.

[Vherid]

Yeah I would agree without TU's and even with TU's they were kinda pointless it seemed. You would mostly if not always auto shot as much as possible and maybe get a snap if you're lucky after that. I like the FFTA/TO approach of flanking bonuses as such.

[sluissa]

Accuracy bonuses for flanking? What? That would really only make sense if the aliens were actively dodging your shots. Damage, perhaps, but accuracy? I'm all for flanking bonuses, but this sounds silly.

They'll make me like the look of it for a while, and then they'll say something stupid like that.

Also, I used aimed shot all the time with my designated snipers. Auto shot effectiveness tended to go down the tubes at long range. Snap shot really was just a last resort/hope for the best/reaction shot thing anyway.

[Domenique]

Accuracy bonuses for flanking? What? That would really only make sense if the aliens were actively dodging your shots. Damage, perhaps, but accuracy? I'm all for flanking bonuses, but this sounds silly.

They'll make me like the look of it for a while, and then they'll say something stupid like that.

Also, I used aimed shot all the time with my designated snipers. Auto shot effectiveness tended to go down the tubes at long range. Snap shot really was just a last resort/hope for the best/reaction shot thing anyway.

When you flank an enemy he doesn't have any cover, hence the bonus compared to when you're not flanking.

Also, the combat is overhauled: you'll have accurate snipers for the reasons you've just mentioned.

[Mephansteras]

Flanking as a bonus to hit works fine for me. Assumedly the aliens are always trying to dodge, so surprising them with a flank would take that away. A bonus to your accuracy reflects this just as well as if they had a specific dodge chance that you were negating.

[Detritus]

Accuracy bonuses for flanking? What? That would really only make sense if the aliens were actively dodging your shots. Damage, perhaps, but accuracy? I'm all for flanking bonuses, but this sounds silly.

They'll make me like the look of it for a while, and then they'll say something stupid like that.

Also, I used aimed shot all the time with my designated snipers. Auto shot effectiveness tended to go down the tubes at long range. Snap shot really was just a last resort/hope for the best/reaction shot thing anyway.

In vanilla X-Com, range wasn't a deciding factor for chance to hit. So whether you shoot at someone who's standing 10 squares or someone at 30 squares away, chance to hit is identical.

While flanking bonus may not make that much sense if you try to rationalize and compare it to real life, I kind of like it as a game mechanic.

[Sergius]

I play STO regularly, and flanking is a big thing. I like me some flanking goodness.

[MarcAFK]

Flanking kinda makes sense as an accuracy thing, since you're under less stress to fire quickly if your target is distracted or not even facing you, but really i think the most important thing accuracy wise is if you're not under supresssion fire and haven't just been surprised with an enemy popping up from cover you're far more likely to take your time aiming properly.
also, snipers, yeah.

[Pandarsenic]

In vanilla X-Com, range wasn't a deciding factor for chance to hit. So whether you shoot at someone who's standing 10 squares or someone at 30 squares away, chance to hit is identical.

This is incorrect. At closer ranges, a larger deviation will still result in a hit. Something that might hit their arm at five squares might miss entirely at six or ten or twenty.

See http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php?title=Accuracy_formula

[Dohon]

Kotaku has a rather moving blurb. Go read!

[Dohon]

After almost a month of silence, here is something new. Joystiq has a small preview, talking a bit (just a bit) more about aerial combat, a new weapon and research. And for the fans, they have a picture of the firestorm as well.

Well, don't just stand there lookin' all sallivating! Head over there and get your fix!

[Mephansteras]

Well, based on that screen shot it looks like the air combat is going to be a bit more interactive. So that's cool.