Unit Accuracy

[Carcassone]

In all of the RTS games I've played in the past it seems to me that every unit on the field is a marksman. What I mean is this, every archer and such etc seems to never really miss. They might not get a direct hit, but my point is that every arrow fired hits something and causes damage. Will this game be more realistic in the sense that if a group of longbowmen fire off a collective round of arrows that not all of them will hit a target? How about some having some arrows miss badly?

[Jarlabanke]

In M:TW it's quite the opposite, 60 archers kill about 3 guys per volley there.

[G_R]

Originally posted by Jarlabanke
In M:TW it's quite the opposite, 60 archers kill about 3 guys per volley there.

Exactly if he game gets so realistic the archers would be if not then close to useless! Well lets suggest that pikemen also miss or swordsmen!In a real fight anyone can miss and i dont want archers that miss and swordsmen who can't fight!

[Jarlabanke]

Sure, archers canmiss, but not 9 out of 10 shots.

[Jorghan]

Sure archers can miss 9 out of 10 shots, if you are shooting the arrows in an arc, it's really hard to hit something. So a bunch of archers just fires into the enemy army and hope they hit something, it's not like they aim individually, atleast not at a good distance.

I really do hope that battles will be more realistic, on all accounts, that a hit with a sword usually kills or disables, same with arrows, but that you usually miss.

I also hope for realistic unit behavior, I'm tired of all the RTS where the units are just stupid and stand there taking a beating without even fighting back unless you tell them to. It would be really cool if each man on the battlefield fought for his own life.

Realism rules.

[Frujin]

We did totaly new battle system in KoH. I'll give you an example (very very basic and limited of course:)) :



1. Two [b]equal[b] soldiers are fighting.
2. And they fight, and fight, and fight ...
3. Suddeny one falls dead. The chances were 50% - 50%.
4. No way for you to predict who will win.



Are you shoked? :beek:

[Carcassone]

To clarify, I'm not looking for archers to miss 9 of 10 times...but I am looking for archers to be more so realistic. What I mean by this is that archers are more accurate at a closer range yet are more so inaccurate at a distance. It was stated in an earlier post that archers shot high arching shots in hopes of hitting someone in a crowd of soldiers. Ideally, long shots = decreased accuracy while closer range, say somone at the foot of a wall, would equate to a better percentage of accurate shots.