Friendly fire and accuracy

[SavageWhiteDude]

1) Fix the friendly fire... among other things, I prefer to feel like I'm commanding other captains on where to go and who to focus fire on.. they would know well enough to not blow their own countrymen out of the water.

2) Curious thing about accuracy... you will hardly hit a single shot at range BUT, if there is a ship directly in front of the ship you are trying to shoot at, you will absolutely slaughter it with at least a 75% hit chance. Something is broke here.

Try it out... just aim at a ship and make sure another ship is in the line of fire and you will decimate it.

[gigamelon1981]

I kinda feel the point no.2
As there is a logic,
IF the shot = miss THEN make it fall short by RND(X) meter.
The fall short here means if it should made 1000m distance, but it travels 995m for instance. A few meters short.

[Vuld_Edone]

I'm kind of afraid of (1). On AI mode, yeah, they should avoid friendly fire (and bring your shoes). But with AI off, the risk is the AI still insists that there is a risk of friendly fire despite you knowing it should be fine. By rule of thumb, "AI off" should leave us in total control, for better and worse.

[AlterEgo45]

Originally posted by Vuld_Edone:

I'm kind of afraid of (1). On AI mode, yeah, they should avoid friendly fire (and bring your shoes). But with AI off, the risk is the AI still insists that there is a risk of friendly fire despite you knowing it should be fine. By rule of thumb, "AI off" should leave us in total control, for better and worse.

This.

They have a "can't fire because friendly is obstructing" thing in RTW and those of us who play RTW know how fun that is, particularly with torpedoes. At least once in every large battle I can't take an easy, crucial torpedo shot because of this.

I do think in this game that maybe the arc of shellfire is too low and there are times when I've had friendly fire incidents on ships which I thought the shells should be passing over.

[FroehlicheForelle]

Added today in betapatch:
*New Friendly Fire System for guns:* Ships will stop firing at targets that are blocked by friendly ships in front of them and too close, risking being hit instead.

[Soylent_Greene]

I have been torpedoed by a friendly ship when I was between him and the enemy

Almost thought I was playing World of Warships again! LOL

[[BFs]Karaya 1]

The nr 2 thing is 100% a thing. Ive used it repeatedly to murder enemies that stray too close to each other. Its also a thing that happens when you pass close by to your own ships and the enemy murders you all of a sudden.

[AKD]

Originally posted by gigamelon1981:

I kinda feel the point no.2
As there is a logic,
IF the shot = miss THEN make it fall short by RND(X) meter.
The fall short here means if it should made 1000m distance, but it travels 995m for instance. A few meters short.

There is no logic here, but there is an explanation. The ballistic trajectory of shots is "fake." Hits are determined solely by hit probability at the moment of firing, then forced misses are shown with an arbitrary ballistic path. Where they are landing in relation to the target ship does not accord with the calculated probability of hits. BUT the visual ballistic trajectory of the shells *is* used to determine whether those shells hit any other ships.

If the rate of hitting something at a given range is 5% for the target, and 75% for a ship immediately next to the target sailing alongside it (should be the same or almost the same factors for probability of hit), something is clearly not logical.

[AlterEgo45]

Originally posted by AKD:

Originally posted by gigamelon1981:

I kinda feel the point no.2
As there is a logic,
IF the shot = miss THEN make it fall short by RND(X) meter.
The fall short here means if it should made 1000m distance, but it travels 995m for instance. A few meters short.

There is no logic here, but there is an explanation. The ballistic trajectory of shots is "fake." Hits are determined solely by hit probability at the moment of firing, then forced misses are shown with an arbitrary ballistic path. Where they are landing in relation to the target ship does not accord with the calculated probability of hits. BUT the visual ballistic trajectory of the shells *is* used to determine whether those shells hit any other ships.

If the rate of hitting something at a given range is 5% for the target, and 75% for a ship immediately next to the target sailing alongside it (should be the same or almost the same factors for probability of hit), something is clearly not logical.

I think it's because the ballistic trajectory is too low. There's almost no arc, and I get the time setting was before plunging fire but I don't think the arc would have been this extreme. I also believe that misses land closer to the target than is probably accurate. Nearly all of the missed shots land uncomfortably close to the target, which means anything within 100 feet is going to get plastered by missed shots.

It does make sense that if you have 2 ships in a very confined area there is a good chance that the 2nd ship will get hit, particularly if it is in front of the target ship, so I like that aspect of it. That factor shouldn't go away entirely, just toned down.

[AKD]

Originally posted by AlterEgo45:

Originally posted by AKD:

It does make sense that if you have 2 ships in a very confined area there is a good chance that the 2nd ship will get hit, particularly if it is in front of the target ship, so I like that aspect of it. That factor shouldn't go away entirely, just toned down.

Yes, but the chance of the intervening ship being hit if near the target should be about the same as the target ship, maybe marginally higher in relation to the difference in range, so like fraction of percent difference given typical naval gunfire ranges.

There should, of course, be a chance for a miss to hit something else (there used to not be), but it should be calculated and applied the same way as the chance to the hit the target, not a probability roll for one and a 3D trajectory (that has nothing to do with an actual ballistic calculation) for the other.

[AlterEgo45]

Originally posted by AKD:

There should, of course, be a chance for a miss to hit something else (there used to not be), but it should be calculated and applied the same way as the chance to the hit the target, not a probability roll for one and a 3D trajectory (that has nothing to do with an actual ballistic calculation) for the other.

That's fair enough.

[SavageWhiteDude]

Originally posted by AlterEgo45:

Originally posted by AKD:

There is no logic here, but there is an explanation. The ballistic trajectory of shots is "fake." Hits are determined solely by hit probability at the moment of firing, then forced misses are shown with an arbitrary ballistic path. Where they are landing in relation to the target ship does not accord with the calculated probability of hits. BUT the visual ballistic trajectory of the shells *is* used to determine whether those shells hit any other ships.

If the rate of hitting something at a given range is 5% for the target, and 75% for a ship immediately next to the target sailing alongside it (should be the same or almost the same factors for probability of hit), something is clearly not logical.

I think it's because the ballistic trajectory is too low. There's almost no arc, and I get the time setting was before plunging fire but I don't think the arc would have been this extreme. I also believe that misses land closer to the target than is probably accurate. Nearly all of the missed shots land uncomfortably close to the target, which means anything within 100 feet is going to get plastered by missed shots.

It does make sense that if you have 2 ships in a very confined area there is a good chance that the 2nd ship will get hit, particularly if it is in front of the target ship, so I like that aspect of it. That factor shouldn't go away entirely, just toned down.

Yes, the current issue is, all other factors being equal, I have a MUCH higher chance of hitting a target if I aim at the target behind it, than if I attempt to aim directly at it.

It's early in development so I'm sure this is just another thing that will get addressed in due time, but eventually it will need to be addressed.

I try to avoid taking advantage of it when possibly but my God is it tempting.

---

As far as the friendly fire goes, I'd prefer three levels of control. AI - AI Assist - and total manual.

Manual = no collision avoidance, no friendly fire avoidance. Assist = friendly fire and collision avoidance on. AI = entirely AI controlled