Jump to content


Photo

Walls, Of All Types


  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

#51 xiken

xiken

    Squaddie

  • Forum Members
  • PipPip
  • 1 posts

Posted 07 November 2006 - 10:56 PM

hi people,

First of all i am sorry if my post runs away a bit from the course this discussion has taken. and oh well i'm still a bit "noob" to this game, so it can even make no sense at all. if that is the case please ignore this post. :P

What if... units had some kind of conscience and respect for private property? and when they shot an explosive round without hitting any unfriendly unit their morale just received a -10% bonus (or maybe 20% dunno)? that way, any tactic of flattening the buildings would lead morale closer to 0 and to panicked heavy weapons unit and heavy weapons unit with less accuracy. wouldn't that be a step in the right direction and better gameplay?

#52 Sporb

Sporb

    UFO2000 Staff

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 739 posts

Posted 08 November 2006 - 03:28 AM

i dont agree. Firstly there isnt any civie activity in ufo2k regardless of the arenas it just doesnt feel like there is anyone but you and your opponent. If there WERE civies it would be along the lines of: "we break shuckeroonies to save your life ;P"

#53 7Saturn

7Saturn

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 87 posts

Posted 10 November 2006 - 09:19 AM

Walls and such can stop an explosion if they are not destroyed, but they do not have health, only armor.

Ok, that's the better expression. I think we all thought about the same thing, but health is not right. Better call it armour. :D

The problem with the thousands of bullets is what I meant with "That's the problem I can't figure out exactly."

I guess there must be any similiar soulution. It's not the first game with explosions in it.

I think the explosion-damage should get down by the square of the range, if it is shared like on the surface of a half-ball. (Maybe I'm wrong. 13 years of school and im totally unsure. <_< )

#54 Brick-To-Face

Brick-To-Face

    Captain

  • Xenocide Recruit
  • 150 posts

Posted 10 November 2006 - 10:45 AM

Does anyone think that having walls dampen explosions would help?

#55 7Saturn

7Saturn

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 87 posts

Posted 10 November 2006 - 12:07 PM

Does anyone think that having walls dampen explosions would help?

Yes. I'm absolutely sure, that it's not right, when players are able to blow up a whole house with one grenade. It's not realistic, that a soldier behind a wall is beeing fu**ed up exactly like one without any cover.
I'm currently at the basic training of the German airforce, and I saw pictures of shots with our standard-rifle G36, which get through a wall after hitting the same point more than 5 times. OK, the shots in UFO2K are from a plasma-weapons and so on, so it's neat that they wreck one wall-pice completely. But a 'nade that blows up a great part of a whole house?? Quite heavy weapons without a power-damping modification, aren't they?

#56 th15

th15

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 53 posts

Posted 10 November 2006 - 04:49 PM

For teh explosion algorithm, I'm thinking of using a reverse sequence to figure things out.

Pick all the objects within the range of an explosion and sort them with the objects furthest from the explosion first. Then, go down the list and do damage to each object after checking if there's any intervening objects. Intervening objects would reduce the amount of damage done to the current object.

So, if a trooper is 5 squares away from the centre of an explosion with two walls between, he would take the damage of the explosion, first reduced by range then reduced by the total health of the walls. This may well be a negative number which means that he doesn't take any damage at all.

#57 Oldtype

Oldtype

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 67 posts

Posted 11 November 2006 - 01:20 AM

Ok, that's the better expression. I think we all thought about the same thing, but health is not right. Better call it armour. :D

Not realy, I mean armor in walls does not get reduced, so to destroy a wall you always have to do more damage than the armor-value. Without health a wall is always in top condition, no matter how many bullets/explosions hit it before.
That you were able to destroy walls with a rifle in UFO1 has to do with the randomized damage.

For teh explosion algorithm, I'm thinking of using a reverse sequence to figure things out.

That was one of the optimizations for the 1000-bullets algorithm I was thinking of, no sense in shooting empty air when the bullets have a maxrange anyway. Combine that with a bit of randomization,to see how many bullets hit, with chance reduced by range and cover. But this would have to be done starting at the center to see if some cover is blown up, otherwise walls would always stop damage completely even when destroyed.

#58 7Saturn

7Saturn

    Sergeant

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 87 posts

Posted 11 November 2006 - 06:52 AM

Not realy, I mean armor in walls does not get reduced, so to destroy a wall you always have to do more damage than the armor-value. Without health a wall is always in top condition, no matter how many bullets/explosions hit it before.

I'd prefer to just give it armour, that is reduced like the soldier's ones. If you throw enough 'nades the wall will be destroyed anyway. But it makes a difference if you throw one fragmentation grenade, or if you shoot a rocket into the wall. Health isn't necessary. If the armour is down, the wall is it too. So it might survive the first one or two alien-grenades, but not further ones. This would make it more difficult to blow up a house with one granade, for example. Rockets might be as powerful enough to blow up a complete wall, but they are much more expensive... More balance against the "naders-tactics". An the randomization-part of the damage-calculation is also required. It's a bit more like the random-part of the ordinary rifle-shots. You never know it definitly, if it reaches the walls armour-level.

An additon: If the damage of the explosion is quite less than the armour of the wall (for example 10 damage against 50 armour), the walls armour iss just reduced a bit (for example 5). If it's strong enough then it might wreck it down, or crap it. I'm not sure about this point, but it would be an interesting aspect.

A formula for example:

D = damage in the end
Dn = damage of the Nade
Dr = damage-reduction by range
A = Armour

D = (Dn - Dr)^2 / A (+- random)

A = A - D

The damage is decreasing by range linear.
The more heavy the explosion, the greater the effect.

Numerical example:

Dn = 110 (demolition pack)
Dr = 40 (4 squares distance to the wall, 10 per square)
A = 100 (just an idea of how many armour)

D = (110 - 40)^2 / 100 = 49 (the wall gets 49 damage)

A = 100 - 49 = 51 (rest armour)

So you need at least a demolition pack directly at the wall, a great rocket or a second explosion to get it down.

For the next item behind the wrecked wall you can change the Dr - variable now, because the wall takes a part of the explosion-energy away.

A armour of 90 - 100 would be enough to prevent alien-fusion grenade from blowing a wall up. Only missile launcher with great rockets or the demolition pack may blow it up with one explosion. And the ability of rifles to just do one shot through a wall for getting a walk-way through it would also be prevented. (Plasma-Blaster just makes 64 Damage with one shot, by my formula.)

And yes, it makes sense to just calculate the "virtual projectiles" for the existing objects in the surrounding area. The 1000-bullet-problem is nearly solved this way.

Maybe health would be great if you think about the fire after an explosion or napalm. Fire can also burn a house down or damage walls, but in another way then a explosion does. (So many things to consider, I guess I get off topic :( )