Anvil Game Studios

Author Topic: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy  (Read 6273 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Karshaw

  • Petty Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 27
  • Faction: British Empire
  • Nick: Karshaw
Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
« Reply #60 on: September 26, 2017, 07:39:41 pm »
I understand having SOME variation in bullet spread due to using smooth bore muskets, but currently it's WAY to random. Why not tighten it up a fair amount, and in first person / gun sight view (if they eventually make it a real gun sight) give a fair amount of rifle sway depending on stance? In 3rd person view we could keep the reticle and maybe make it bigger giving it a fair representation of where the ball could actual travel (as in spread deviation)? What I mean by that, is that 3rd person grants better field of view and a quicker shot, but is much less accurate. Where as in first person / down the barrel view would take longer to line up shots but be better in terms of overall accuracy, making shooting a little more reliable. Please make this game more skill based rather than RNG in regards to muskets!

Offline CptBiym

  • Ordinary Seaman
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
« Reply #61 on: September 26, 2017, 08:02:35 pm »
Caldwell, you haven't read most of my thoughts in this thread and it shows. You also haven't submitted anything of worth, but I will respond nonetheless.

"Clearly I think at least anyway you 'Ballistic boys' are not seeing the game as I see it or dare I say others too.... "

Do you find the current firearm mechanics acceptable? If not, then we have something in common. If you do, then you are naive and inexperienced when it comes to musket games in general and are doing more harm than good by neglecting a much need d fix to this core element of Holdfast. I have explained why I feel this way many times and you didn't read and respond to my comments then and I see you still haven't done so now.

It's egocentric and ignorant of you to say "others too." I haven't taken a poll of the thousands of players who have clocked significant hours into the game and neither have you. I will tell you what we do know. There are more than a couple threads on this forum and on the steam discussion forums asking for improved musket accuracy and the overwhelming response has been positive in favor for a rehaul. The largest of these discussions is my post on steam which at the moment has over 115 replies, the vast majority agreeing that a fix is necessary. It's more likely that a person with strong feelings AGAINST a change would post than someone who simply agrees with what I and others said and moves on. With that in mind, the few people that have attempted, in futility (with baseless points that you can read for yourself), to argue against the rehaul are drowned out by players' support for this change across all posts asking for it. And in my nearly 30 hours of gametime, I have yet to finish a match in which someone DOESN'T comment on the broken firearms and musket accuracy. However, that's more personal experience than the multiple discussions which you can freely scroll through at any time, here, and on the steam forums.

"However you seem blinded by stats and intolerant of opposing views to your vision of the game."

Blinded by statistics? What statistics have you put forth and for what reason? It seems you are talking about yourself, avoiding the numbers because it would for historical and atmospheric purposes destroy an argument for the current mechanics. Gameplay-wise, you conveniently and willfully ignore the musket spread numbers (which have been confirmed by crochunter) because a rehaul, similar to what has been proposed above, would be a direct fix to an issue nearly everyone with common sense and/or critical thinking can identify.

No one is intolerant to opposing views if you can fully support them with a realistic and gameplay argument. The problem with you "non-ballistic boys" is that you first attempt to play at the realism argument for a bit. Trying to tug and pull at facts supporting real musket accuracy numbers. Then you attempt to say that perfectly real muskets would break the game. Then you say that the developers intended for the game to be an arcade. Never is there any reasonable argument in how a balance between real musket spreads and the currently abhorrent nerf guns would not be beneficial realistically or practically for Holdfast.

The developers have stated they want to find a "proper balance between realism and gameplay." There is currently no mechanic in the game that remotely leans to the realism side. At the moment, Holdfast is, for all practical purposes, an mini arcade game with napoleonic warfare inspiration. They also stated they were looking to work with the community in early access to find that ideal balance. And here we are, the "ballistic boys" trying to get it right and suggest ideas to fix the problem the useless alpha testers were too blinded and inexperienced to notice. In contrast, you are here offering no valuable input and merely complaining about us using the forums and discussion boards as they should be used, to help the developers understand what they got wrong, why, and how they can fix it.

I have already answered others that foolishly use extremes as a way to argue. No one here wants perfect precision at 100m, 200m as you say. Have you bothered to read any of my previous posts? I believe I said negligible spread at 20m, few meter spread at 50-60m and a gradual increase to 100m and beyond. I also answered how it would affect gameplay. It seems you don't read what doesn't suit you, which is very sad considering you ignore potential points that we may agree on and that may prove beneficial to discuss. The better ballistics would make "quick to learn, difficult to master," a reality, because more realistic, tighter spreads would have players adjusting their aim at each distance according to the spread and drop to increase their chance of scoring a hit. They can practice this because aiming would be more skill reliant and less pure luck past 8 meters. Leading your targets becomes feasible. I am repeating myself at this point. You can scroll up and see that I've already made this case a few responses back, and you simply chose to ignore it.

At this point you are doing more harm than good if you simply justify, without reason, the current firearm mechanics by pointing to the developers who, have stated themselves, are actually looking for feedback on achieving a good gameplay-realism balance. I suggest you read the last 10 or so posts before replying to understand why, to me, you seem so foolish in your posts.

Offline TooL69

  • Surgeon's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 105
Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
« Reply #62 on: September 26, 2017, 08:57:19 pm »
CptBiym, I was referring to the fact that soldiers of the Napoleonic era had very poor training in terms of accuracy of fire. This is an indisputable fact! An ordinary soldier could count (at best) on 10 rounds per year for training accuracy of shooting! Practically all the time of training was given to practice the skill of quick reloading the musket.

By the way, at the expense of reloading on the move, I will demonstrate another video:

(5:35)

There are two options for the gameplay of the game:
1) A soldier can run at normal speed, but reloading a musket is slow.
2) reloading the musket a little slower than the standard, but the soldier can not escape.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2017, 08:59:48 pm by TooL69 »

Offline Charles Caldwell

  • Regiment Leaders
  • Master's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 203
  • Retired Founder of the SLRN [Naval Action]
  • Faction: British Empire
  • Nick: [1st L KGL]
Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
« Reply #63 on: September 26, 2017, 09:31:24 pm »
lol CptBiym, I'm guessing you find most people who have a different point of view to yours foolish :)

Do you find the current firearm mechanics acceptable? If not, then we have something in common.

Who's now not reading my posts. I've said in every one of mine that the system needs improving, and on other posts too. I think I say 'Tweaked' more than once. And I think I've said I'd back you 100% in WoRs also with your ballistic views. But I stand by the fact that this game does not pretend to be a simulation. We both agree that it feels arcady thats clear, but I never said the Devs intended it to be that way, I just stated their marketing statement 'Easy to learn, difficult to master'.

The contrast from playing WoRs to this is huge. However it doesn't in anyway detract from my enjoyment of both.

My fear is that your ballistic model, despite your assumed assurances... will impact greatly on Gameplay (thats my beef). I think we both have to sit back and watch what the Devs come up with that balances both our views.  I'm sure accuracy will increase and the grouping will be tighter (it needs it) but ranges hmmmmm thats my biggest fear. I just dont think the battlefield is big enough to accommodate your model. We can already shell the enemy spawn with cannon, it'll be a short charge with Cavalry... and perhaps with ranges of 100+ yards well within range of quickly advancing troops too.

We wait with bated breath......


Offline CptBiym

  • Ordinary Seaman
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
« Reply #64 on: September 26, 2017, 09:52:43 pm »
Tool69, what you've said about napoleonic era soldiers having poor training is dependent on many factors and certainly not indisputable. What is common knowledge is that regular line infantry had a limited amount (depending on the nation) of live rounds afforded to them yearly for practice on targets and a higher number of blank shots given for reload practice. This doesn't change the effectiveness of a brown bess or other musket of the era when pointed properly at a target within its range.

I called you out on the pure nonsense of your statement that "it is possible to draw a LOGICAL conclusion that the soldier of Napoleon's age was three or four times worse than the modern reconstructor." No it's not possible. Perhaps they can place shots on target at a distance slightly better than soldiers of the past after months of practice but even amateur shooters with minimal musket experience can hit the numbers and spread patterns that I mentioned earlier with even less time spent conducting accuracy training than soldiers of the 18th century. Now, in your attempt to state that they had poor training and therefore "poor accuracy," what are you trying to prove that would make an argument for keeping or changing Holdfast's projectiles? Please remember the purpose of this thread or you may end up wasting our time.

I will also not risk diverting the purpose of this thread, which is to address the musket inaccuracy and broken projectiles, to talk at length about the current reload of firearms and how it should be changed. All I will say is that the video you posted was a waste of my time and that the two solutions you suggest with much certainty are neither possible fixes realistically or gameplay-wise. A better solution would be a slightly longer reload time, 11 seconds to around 13-15 while standing still and slower movement or slower reload speed when reloading on the move. No running nonsense or removing reload on the move altogether as you stated. I won't give this topic much attention on this thread and I urge you to go post reload suggestions in the reload-related post that you were previously commenting in.

Caldwell, you need to choose a point of view and stick with it as I have. Please don't mention WoR as it serves no purpose to this discussion. I never said simulation, I said the game must strike a balance between gameplay and realism. The developers said the exact same thing in one of their posts. At the moment, the game couldn't be farther from "easy to learn and hard to master" because the ballistic system punishes players who attempt to learn shooting spreads and adjust for drop and lead due to the massive variation of shots. We agree then that it needs a tweak but you are still unsure about its effect on gameplay. Read my posts further back on how a better ballistics model would affect gameplay and then reply, similarly to how I put forth my points, on how it may be detrimental. To give answer for the 3rd time on the distances and map size issue, I will say it again that engagement distances would just increase because of better accuracy. Instead of running up and firing from 25m away, players can begin to exchange fire at 40-50m. The maps currently support this. This also helps with the cannon issue where infantry are largely useless against and very vulnerable to cannons unless right on top of them.

Good day

Offline Charles Caldwell

  • Regiment Leaders
  • Master's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 203
  • Retired Founder of the SLRN [Naval Action]
  • Faction: British Empire
  • Nick: [1st L KGL]
Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
« Reply #65 on: September 26, 2017, 11:08:09 pm »
Caldwell, you need to choose a point of view and stick with it as I have.

I have, yes tweak muskets but not at the expense of gameplay, simple, have you not been reading my posts! ;)

Its going to be difficult for the Devs to balance, but currently its fun not knowing if this shot is going to be a kill or miss.

Clearly the mechanics of the muskets and rifles in this game needs looking at, however the overall accuracy of the weapon perhaps should not be overly tweaked...

Look I'm sure the ballistics in Alpha will be constantly be tweaked and for the better, and we as players will adapt with every change...

I'm not saying combat both Musketry or Melee are perfect, they do need tweaking clearly.


My fear is that your ballistic model, despite your assumed assurances... will impact greatly on Gameplay (thats my beef).

Oh and I'll mention WoRs when and how I like, please dont presume to tell me otherwise. For me its a good benchmark with regard to map sizes, game mechanics and ballistic realism in the genre of musketry. Whats your benchmark, M&B NW or something else?


Offline CptBiym

  • Ordinary Seaman
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
« Reply #66 on: September 26, 2017, 11:44:21 pm »
WoR and NW mod are completely different musket games in regards to each other and in regards to Holdfast. They all have different scale and unique mechanics and for this reason I have limited my mention of other musket games and how they compare to this game. I am making suggestions for this game, with its current limitations, to become the best it can be. Not in comparison to NW mod, or BG2 mod, or WoR, but to its current, early access version. I will say it again, do not mention WoR here because it helps no one. You may continue to do so of course but the tiny bit of sense you are trying to make fades into obscurity when you bring that topic up.

This is what you said:
"The random element of the ball is not only realistic but adds to gameplay imo. As mentioned, if we tinker too much with the accuracy then games will end quicker and we'll also end up with 125 snipers camping"

I quickly called you out on the stupidity of what you had just said and you later responded:
"Clearly the mechanics of the muskets and rifles in this game needs looking at, however the overall accuracy of the weapon perhaps should not be overly tweaked..."

A few posts later you then said this:
"But this game I feel, has been designed for the masses, and if that means fudging the ballistics a little then why not."

There's not much I can add because your quotes obviously speak for themselves. I asked you to make up your mind because you obviously have many contradictions and are having trouble comprehending the discussion. Every time you did mention that the game needs some tweaking (but was overall meant to be this way) you failed to mention in what way would you change what's broken and failed to justify the parts that you believe are working as intended. And you clearly have flip flopped on your opinions and with little sense other than what you may be "feeling."

This exchange has become trivial and unfruitful for purpose of my post, which was to suggest an improvement to firearms and musket accuracy. I see you don't care, but I will be reserving my time for discussion on how to improve the game and not for posts such as yours that do nothing but detract from this intent.

Offline Hughes

  • Surgeon's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Faction: Neutral
Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
« Reply #67 on: September 27, 2017, 03:16:47 am »

The overriding consideration is: Both sides face the same handicaps.
I'll trust the Devs to fine-tune accuracy.

I'd like to see Light Infantry buffed a bit.

Offline Charles Caldwell

  • Regiment Leaders
  • Master's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 203
  • Retired Founder of the SLRN [Naval Action]
  • Faction: British Empire
  • Nick: [1st L KGL]
Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
« Reply #68 on: September 27, 2017, 10:56:07 am »
I did that a quick look at your Steam thread, and I see the standard format of some agreement on your ideas, some views that a compromise is needed and some views of keep the current system (much to your disdain). You know my views by now but Im guessing you and forums have never been comfortable friends. Forums are where people post their view and others can freely criticise, agree or give their views.... I think thats where your love affair with forums end. I see the same contempt & condescending responses to posters who do not follow your party line and by the looks if it wasn't for the naysayers your posts would fade into the background, as you are the most active on them all.

It follows a pattern when people give their views: "Yadda yadda your stupid... yadda yadda for these reasons... yadda yadda I refer you to my original post!"

Anyway back to the 'discussion' and despite your preening response that this thread you deem trivial and unfruitful. You'll be back, you cant resist! ;)

I want to hear your views in more detail and how you came to the conclusion on how extended realistic effective ranges will improve gameplay, without using a point of reference and after only 30 hours of actual play time. From what I understand of the pre release Alpha a number of experienced NW players and youtubes were invited to playtest the mechanics. Why do you feel that these veterans and devs have overlooked what you feel is an obvious oversight? Why without extended playtesting do you think your vision will play out, as you assume? Perhaps the Devs could have saved a lot of time and effort and just consulted you...  ;)

Quote from: AGS
This overhaul came into effect after consulting the community. We invited some of the current closed testers who have been very involved in related competitive scenes (and possess a depth of knowledge in this period) with direct feedback. Together we have spent many hours engaged in a discussion on firearm mechanics and directly adjusting values for each and every firearm in the game.

Are they stupid like the rest of us plebes?  :P

We do agree however on these points I feel:

I think for me and after discussing with other players in game, we all agree that a tighter grouping or cone, as someone said, at 20m would help a lot. Currently it seems the spread favours bottom left or right outside of the reticle at 30m-50m. I however dispute the claim you have to raise the sight by a reticle every 15m with the current bullet drop... I've not found this through gaming. My average range at hitting players in around 30-50m with the adjustments mentioned and very little elevation.

Muskets had around a 1/3 meter grouping at 50 meters meaning that a shot at an enemy 50 meters away nearly always delivered a hit. Beyond this distance, the grouping increases slightly and at 100m a soldier could still expect his shots to land within 1-3m of one another.

On to map sizes, you say that you'd only slightly adjust the spread at 100m to a 1-3m cone. You also say that current maps accommodate your increase accuracy and ranges. Thats what concerns me a little! I think its called 'Spanish Farm' a short stroll to either left or right, up to the wall shows the enemy 'French' artillery emplacements on the hill. Just beyond that the French Spawn. I assume the distance of that is slightly beyond the 130-150m mark, could be more (forgive the fact I've not provided FACTS). Could this prove a problem for gameplay with your mechanics? Its seems that it would only need a small advance to the cornfield for the emerging French to be in range of vastly improved accuracy/range mechanic. For me and some of the other players I note in your steam thread and here on these boards, the get up close and dirty combat is actually a strength of Hold Fast: NaW not a weakness.

... I'll repeat, it needs improving clearly but perhaps not to your extreme (In my view that is).

 


Offline Chadman

  • Regiment Leaders
  • Able Seaman
  • *
  • Posts: 50
    • YouTube Channel
  • Faction: Neutral
Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
« Reply #69 on: September 27, 2017, 11:29:57 am »
FYI, there is a mode on the server where the devs can turn on showing bullet drop for all weapons.

Too much firing and it looks like a scene from Star Wars :)

If the devs are willing, I could look at recording a video showing the bullet drops in detail for you guys to see the actual trajectories?

Offline Charles Caldwell

  • Regiment Leaders
  • Master's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 203
  • Retired Founder of the SLRN [Naval Action]
  • Faction: British Empire
  • Nick: [1st L KGL]
Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
« Reply #70 on: September 27, 2017, 01:28:52 pm »
I'll get in before you are 'Biym Slapped'. ;)

Thanks Chadman but I think Crochunter already purchased a server and highlighted this himself on page 4.

Cheers anyway.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2017, 01:39:25 pm by Charles Caldwell »


Offline Chadman

  • Regiment Leaders
  • Able Seaman
  • *
  • Posts: 50
    • YouTube Channel
  • Faction: Neutral
Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
« Reply #71 on: September 27, 2017, 02:04:22 pm »
I'll get in before you are 'Biym Slapped'. ;)

Thanks Chadman but I think Crochunter already purchased a server and highlighted this himself on page 4.

Cheers anyway.

doh, no worries :)

Offline CrocHunter

  • Master's Mate
  • *
  • Posts: 30
  • CavGF Co-owner
  • Faction: Neutral
Re: For Devs | Urgent change | Musket accuracy
« Reply #72 on: September 27, 2017, 04:07:49 pm »
Chadman, Charles Caldwell: Actualy there is no need to buy or rent a server if you want to test features. The server documentation provided by the developers has enough info on how to set up a server. Link to this forum's thread containing the documentation.

Also would be nice if people resorted to stop with the brush painting of each side of the argument with various names. 
« Last Edit: September 27, 2017, 04:10:17 pm by CrocHunter »
Nr3 "Griff's Own" Husaren & Infanterie Regiment
Rittmeister Sernis Thausten