Talk:Weapon Analysis: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 08:19, 22 March 2009

This will be great for any future arguments. Muton commander 20:25, 8 October 2008 (CDT)

Discussion moved to: Accuracy vs TU Efficiency

Spike, are you trying to prod NKF into a discussion of the merits of the Gas Cannon and the Gauss Pistol? ;) Arrow Quivershaft 17:46, 6 December 2008 (CST)

LOL you may be right there! Actually it's as much to prod myself, but I guess anyone can join in! :) Spike 17:56, 6 December 2008 (CST)

Expanding topic scope

I've sometimes wondered if the scope of this section is too narrow. There are lots of room for discussion many other aspects of the game. For example, armour. That could involve articles like damage analysis vs. weapons, survivability rates, etc. For vehicles discussions there could be topics like ship comparisons, how to best utilize the various ships, etc.

Any thoughts on how could this be best be done? My initial thought was a simple renaming of the section. Or perhaps separate analysis sections devoted to such topics would be better? -NKF 04:19, 22 March 2009 (EDT)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-This will be great for any future arguements. [[User:Muton commander|Muton commander]] 20:25, 8 October 2008 (CDT)
+This will be great for any future arguments. [[User:Muton commander|Muton commander]] 20:25, 8 October 2008 (CDT)
-== Debate re Aimed vs Snap vs Auto efficiency ==
+----
-Would it be unreasonable to correct the TU and/or accuracy values of human weapons, so that if we call the efficiency (hits per unit of time)
+Discussion moved to: [[Accuracy vs TU Efficiency]]
-K = accuracy/TUs
-and we have
+Spike, are you trying to prod NKF into a discussion of the merits of the Gas Cannon and the Gauss Pistol?  ;)  [[User:Arrow Quivershaft|Arrow Quivershaft]] 17:46, 6 December 2008 (CST)
-Kai (K - Aimed)
+: LOL you may be right there! Actually it's as much to prod myself, but I guess anyone can join in! :) [[User:Spike|Spike]] 17:56, 6 December 2008 (CST)
-Ksn (K - Snap)
-Kau (K - Auto)
-we correct the game tables to ensure that for any given weapon:
+== Expanding topic scope ==
-Kai > Ksn > 3 Kau
+I've sometimes wondered if the scope of this section is too narrow. There are lots of room for discussion many other aspects of the game. For example, armour. That could involve articles like damage analysis vs. weapons, survivability rates, etc. For vehicles discussions there could be topics like ship comparisons, how to best utilize the various ships, etc.
-( In an unmodified game, this relationship does not hold, in a large number of cases. )
+Any thoughts on how could this be best be done? My initial thought was a simple renaming of the section. Or perhaps separate analysis sections devoted to such topics would be better? -[[User:NKF|NKF]] 04:19, 22 March 2009 (EDT)
-The purpose of this modification would be to ensure that, in terms of delivering hits to the target per unit of time, Aimed fire is more effective than Snap fire, which in turn is more effective than Auto fire.
-Otherwise there are few reasons not always use the fastest available fire rate.
-(3 reasons I can think of are:
-* Conserving ammo - often of minor importance
-* Avoiding "collateral damage"
-* "First shot kill" - killing the target before it can reaction-fire
-But for general combat, there is often no reason to prefer Aimed fire over Snap, or Snap over Auto.
-Having said that, analysis of 20th century battles showed that ordinary soldiers were more effective at killing the enemy when they were given automatic weapons. Resistance to equipping troops with full auto small arms as standard was mainly on ammunition cost grounds (as well as conservatism). This was further refined by studies showing that a burst mode (as used in XCom) was optimum.
-However, this was true only for the ordinary troops, who were found to be too unsettled by combat to fire in a controlled fashion. For the minority who had the presence of mind to fire under control, taking slow, carefully aimed shots was more effective and this is where the bulk of the overall effective firepower of an entire formation would come from.
-Now, which group do we think XCom soldiers fall into?
-[[User:Spike|Spike]] 13:28, 10 November 2008 (CST)