|
Post by Aves Dominari on Oct 17, 2012 20:58:05 GMT -5
You know the drill; anything related to items.xt go here.
As for myself, I'm rebalancing the weapon damages in Aggression, and I'm wondering about melee damage. From what I can tell, you either have a straight power number or a negative one; I'm assuming that a negative number is a strength multiplier, but I'd like to be sure.
|
|
|
Post by Aves Dominari on Oct 17, 2012 21:07:37 GMT -5
Bleh, that's not it; can't even hurt people through leather armor anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Kyzrati on Oct 17, 2012 21:10:04 GMT -5
Good question.
Positive number is a straight damage value, obviously (though do note that damage is still randomized within a range based on X-COM rules).
"-1" means base damage on the mass of the object:
damage = (encumbrance * 2) + (strength / 5) This one I used as a general catch all for allowing a unit to use just about anything in a melee attack.
"-2" means the base damage is equal to the strength of the attacker.
|
|
|
Post by Aves Dominari on Oct 17, 2012 21:12:55 GMT -5
Alright, so most of my melee weapons should have a Strength of -2 then. I'll up the encumbrance a bit as well.
|
|
|
Post by Kyzrati on Oct 17, 2012 21:16:38 GMT -5
Encumbrance only matters if you use -1, though.
|
|
|
Post by Aves Dominari on Oct 17, 2012 21:18:24 GMT -5
Oh, derp ;p -1 for all damage values it is (which incidentally means that daggers will naturally deal less damage than mauls, although I'm certain that's exactly what you were thinking of when you put the formula together).
|
|
|
Post by Kyzrati on Oct 17, 2012 21:21:25 GMT -5
Actually, it is, because -1 is mostly for generic items, not weapons!
Straight power values and/or -2 are better for true weapons.
Bladed/piercing weapons or any where strength matters little should use a positive number, while those for which damage varies most by strength, generally blunt weapons, should use -2.
|
|
|
Post by Aves Dominari on Oct 17, 2012 21:24:31 GMT -5
Yeah, I've done testing and I'll just go back to positive values. In other news, it is perfectly possible to give a target critical wounds without actually damaging them in the slightest.
|
|
|
Post by Kyzrati on Oct 17, 2012 21:34:30 GMT -5
Hm, that should be impossible--might it have happened some other way?
The game uses the X-COM formula where there is a damage*9% chance to be critically wounded. So if damage is <= 0, X@COM doesn't even run the critical wound code. Can you actually repeat this?
|
|
|
Post by Aves Dominari on Oct 17, 2012 21:40:50 GMT -5
No, I can't. The situation was that I was using my Archers as testing for melee weapon strength, and one of them got a crit wound without taking damage, I think. I tried it several more times after that, but there was only the one instance; he might have just lost a single hit point or something.
|
|
|
Post by Aves Dominari on Nov 6, 2012 15:46:45 GMT -5
Say, Kyzrati. If I make the power of a ranged weapon -1 or -2, will it behave the same as melee power (essentially making a ranged weapon based on strength)?
|
|
|
Post by Kyzrati on Nov 6, 2012 19:21:45 GMT -5
No, those values don't behave the same way. Right now a negative value for projectile power will probably do... no damage, but many of the core/basic values for objects don't have checks on their values yet to warn you what won't work (unlike the SA system which has lots of checks because it's complicated by comparison).
I'll be adding those checks eventually where necessary once the data loader is overhauled.
As for negative power values, I haven't decided what those should do yet. I could eventually add one to do strength-based damage. Or even other attribute-based damage, like a weapon that shoots projectiles with a power based on your psi power!
|
|
|
Post by strangeguy on Dec 28, 2012 18:06:32 GMT -5
Couple of quick questions- can you set range limits on ammo rather than weapons? While the special shotgun rounds I'm thinking of adding to my mod are different enough to justify making a new weapon for them having it for the standard shotgun would still be nice, at least as an option.
How exactly do accuracies other than 100 work for melee weapons? At 100 it seems to be about the melee skill accuracy (which with ranged weapons having great close range accuracy and it being lowered when wounded seems a bit problematic when I want melee fairly viable but melee skill to matter) but the stun rod with 150 doesn't seem to follow so simple rules, I believe someone with around 60 skill had about a 75% chance with it, while someone with around 80 skill had a 99% to hit.
The way to set certain ammo for weapons seems a bit odd, and I've ran into cases where I couldn't name the ammo what I wanted to because of it- and having to keep names short so you can actually see how much ammo is left didn't help.
|
|
|
Post by Kyzrati on Dec 28, 2012 21:24:58 GMT -5
The way to set certain ammo for weapons seems a bit odd, and I've ran into cases where I couldn't name the ammo what I wanted to because of it- and having to keep names short so you can actually see how much ammo is left didn't help. You are absolutely correct, the way ammo is matched to weapons is not at all ideal right now. It was a hack, really, one that will be changed later so that it has nothing to do with the item name itself. That and many other data issues are things I can't really mess with until I get to the point where I'm going to rewrite much of the data format to improve it. An alternative ammo compatibility system is on the to-do list. I find the limit on item/ammo name length fairly annoying myself, but that'll change once I modify the HUD to use half-width fonts that will allow for much longer names. That and the improved HUD will support names that don't even fit. For now we just have to rely on short names or abbreviations. Couple of quick questions- can you set range limits on ammo rather than weapons? While the special shotgun rounds I'm thinking of adding to my mod are different enough to justify making a new weapon for them having it for the standard shotgun would still be nice, at least as an option. Hm, good idea. I should move range control from the weapon to the ammo (for those weapons that use ammo). Not possible to do that just yet, unfortunately, and this'll have to wait until the data revision phase mentioned above. How exactly do accuracies other than 100 work for melee weapons? At 100 it seems to be about the melee skill accuracy (which with ranged weapons having great close range accuracy and it being lowered when wounded seems a bit problematic when I want melee fairly viable but melee skill to matter) but the stun rod with 150 doesn't seem to follow so simple rules, I believe someone with around 60 skill had about a 75% chance with it, while someone with around 80 skill had a 99% to hit. For melee combat calculations I used the exact same calculations as projectile attacks (minus modifications for distance). The only difference is that you have a 15% penalty to melee attacks while kneeling (as opposed to the 15% bonus it affords projectile attacks). Remember that handedness (1/2) and critical wounds also affect accuracy, as does overall unit health. See UFOPaedia for an overview. The stun rod in particular I gave an exceptionally high accuracy to make sure that it pretty much always hits except in the hands of someone who really sucks. This was to reflect the fact that in the original the stun rod actually always hits, but I thought that was a bit excessive and decided to make it *almost* always hit. I'll be changing up melee combat a bit later. I see in my comments that melee combat still needs more detail, taking consideration of facing (backstabs?), relative target speeds, etc. At the time I simply copied the mechanics, so it's not an amazing system, or all that viable, as you say. Overall your questions/comments are very helpful, since this will help shape what changes go in when I overhaul the system. So by all means tell me what you want, even if it's unlikely I'll be able to implement it in the short term. When the time comes I'll also be asking for any essential features modders would like to see, once I can more freely make new additions.
|
|
|
Post by strangeguy on Dec 29, 2012 11:30:38 GMT -5
Hm, good idea. I should move range control from the weapon to the ammo (for those weapons that use ammo). Not possible to do that just yet, unfortunately, and this'll have to wait until the data revision phase mentioned above. Preferably I'd like the option of either, so for instance you could have a shotgun and sawn off shotgun using the same ammo with different range or having slugs and buckshot for a shotgun with different ranges. Best case scenario, though I suspect harder to implement, would be offering both options but it also being possible to combine them. Not sure how that would work, perhaps taking average range of the weapon and ammo. Making one of them range modifiers rather than range values would be better, but means that one wouldn't work on it's own.
|
|