Cover system extremely one sided

[Astillia]

I don't know if there's maybe a game design reason behind this, but why is it that 90% of combat scenarios give the enemy a partial cover object, but the other side of the fcking box doesnt give a cover bonus? I've seen this probably a dozen times already where literally being on the other side of a barricade doesnt give cover. a barricade built to block bullets. its like if XCOM made the side of cover you approach not work.

[skaudus]

Can you give more specific examples?

It's easier for the devs to make changes to specific encounters if you point out where.
Making one-sided encounters isn't intentional and the vast majority of fights either have cover for everyone or no cover at all.

The only counterexample I can think of is the second part of the Junction F14 fight, which is a big fight with plenty of allies who usually get killed first.

[LArc7thHeaven]

I think the problem dude points to protector combat mission when you ambush the brotherhood from left/right sided if you pick the infiltration option, the cover only works when you stand behind the barrier wall (the brotherhood position) while sitting in-front of it don't have cover sign

[LDiCesare]

That happens a lot with objects that have been designed that way. The 3D models are usually taking one full square and are low on one end and high on the other, explaining why they only protect from one side.

[skaudus]

Originally posted by LArc7thHeaven:

I think the problem dude points to protector combat mission when you ambush the brotherhood from left/right sided if you pick the infiltration option, the cover only works when you stand behind the barrier wall (the brotherhood position) while sitting in-front of it don't have cover sign

That's the Junction F14 fight, but it's one fight out of about 100, not 90% of combat scenarios.

[wizard1200]

Originally posted by skaudus:

Making one-sided encounters isn't intentional and the vast majority of fights either have cover for everyone or no cover at all.

I guess that you are just trolling, because otherwise you should really pay more attention while playing the game. These are only a few examples, where one side of an object does not grant cover for some weird reason:

Fight in the Armory against the scavengers
Fight in the Armory against Sharp Face
Fights in the Courthouse
Fight in Mission Control against the ambushing thugs
Fight in Mission Control against Knurl

[skaudus]

Thank you for your insight! I was referring to places where enemies have an unfair cover advantage over your party, not on places where objects with unequal cover distribution exist. Obviously, one cannot hunker down on objects with an unequal geometry, such as a crate with its large lid open towards you.

Fight in the Armory against the scavengers -> There are three crates with unequal cover, both facing the enemies and facing you

Fight in the Armory against Sharp Face -> While there are spots with unequal cover, the player has quick access to cover in the back of the room where they are not easily flanked, and you can always start combat from stealth in an area with unequal cover in *your* favour. Even though only your character can enter stealth in that area, everyone joins in for the combat.

Fights in the Courthouse -> The crates have literal bundles of barbed wire, and they are spread throughout the arena. Your opponents do not have an advantage, and while I generally don't recommend hunkering down in barbed wire, I don't mind being contradicted if you provide photographic evidence.

Fight in Mission Control against the ambushing thugs -> Good catch, though you are explicitly being ambushed. That one's on me.

Fight in Mission Control against Knurl -> The desk can be freely used as cover by both you and Knurl

So thanks, we are now up to two fights where there is an unequal cover advantage for the enemy. It's still far away from 90% of all combat encounters.

[wizard1200]

Originally posted by skaudus:

I was referring to places where enemies have an unfair cover advantage over your party, not on places where objects with unequal cover distribution exist.

This means that you are either trying to derail the thread or lack the necessary reading comprehension to understand the question of the OP:

Originally posted by Astillia:

... why is it that 90% of combat scenarios give the enemy a partial cover object, but the other side of the ♥♥♥♥♥♥ box doesnt give a cover bonus?

Originally posted by skaudus:

Fight in the Armory against the scavengers -> There are three crates with unequal cover, both facing the enemies and facing you

Fight in the Armory against Sharp Face -> While there are spots with unequal cover, the player has quick access to cover in the back of the room where they are not easily flanked, and you can always start combat from stealth in an area with unequal cover in *your* favour. Even though only your character can enter stealth in that area, everyone joins in for the combat.

Fights in the Courthouse -> The crates have literal bundles of barbed wire, and they are spread throughout the arena. Your opponents do not have an advantage, and while I generally don't recommend hunkering down in barbed wire, I don't mind being contradicted if you provide photographic evidence.

Fight in Mission Control against Knurl -> The desk can be freely used as cover by both you and Knurl

I was referring to the sides of the first crate next to your starting position, which should grant partial cover.

I was referring to the platform in the room with the locked door. This platform is not 'unequal' and should grant partial cover.

I was referring to the side of the crate close to the door with the sign. This crate should grant full cover.

I was referring to the sides of the desk, which should grant partial cover.

Wanna try it again?

[skaudus]

Thank you for your insight! My reading comprehension is not what it used to be, and certainly at a lower level than yours.

My interpretation of OP's complaint was that they were upset that the enemy got cover while their own party did not.

Originally posted by Astillia:

90% of combat scenarios give the enemy a partial cover object, but the other side of the ♥♥♥♥♥♥ box doesnt give a cover bonus?

Originally posted by Astillia:

its like if XCOM made the side of cover you approach not work.

Given that at least two XCOM titles I've played have instances of asymmetrical cover, I assumed OP meant the problem was the enemy had an unfair advantage. My assumption that OP was referring to the 2010s XCOM games by Firaxis was my own, and vulnerable to scrutiny. Of course, I don't know if there was asymmetrical cover in the other XCOM games.

My response to you was referring to how the asymmetrical cover affects the positional aspect of the tactical encounters, not whether or not there were objects with asymmetrical cover in the combat arenas.

We seem to often have divergent definitions. Perhaps it would help if I was more explicit in the definitions I used. It would be hypocritical of me to hold you to the same standard, as you've always clearly defined your stance and remained resolute and steadfast in your interpretations.

[wizard1200]

Originally posted by skaudus:

My response to you was referring to how the asymmetrical cover affects the positional aspect of the tactical encounters, not whether or not there were objects with asymmetrical cover in the combat arenas.

Yeah, obviously ...

Originally posted by wizard1200:

These are only a few examples, where one side of an object does not grant cover for some weird reason:

[skaudus]

Originally posted by wizard1200:

Yeah, obviously ...

Thanks for agreeing with me! I'm glad we've had this productive and civil conversation.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Asymmetrical cover appears to be intentional to force the player to come up with a strategy to deal with it. Just diving for the nearest cover every time would get pretty boring.

[Vince]

Pretty much. Not to mention:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gne8v9aj45w

[wizard1200]

Originally posted by Wrath of Dagon:

Just diving for the nearest cover every time would get pretty boring.

Yep, but this is exactly the issue with -for example- the fight against Knurl, and the following video describes the corresponding fight -sadly- perfectly ...

Originally posted by Vince:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gne8v9aj45w

[skaudus]

I like your solution -to- add more partial -cover- in the corners of the furniture so that -the- fight -becomes- less cramped and unlike the Naked Gun -clip-.

[Pink Eye]

Originally posted by Vince:

Pretty much. Not to mention:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gne8v9aj45w

Bro that movie is older than me.