Aim Time Cool Down

Chat about anything and everything Frozen Synapse

Moderator: Admins

Post Reply
Zathri
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:49 am

Aim Time Cool Down

Post by Zathri » Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:57 pm

I'm sure this has been discussed before, but I couldn't find the posting to read. I'm interested in a discussion regarding aim time cool downs.

The scenario is

You can override orders only every 10 seconds

If an enemy unit is spotted behind cover, your uncovered, unspotted (or attention elsewhere) unit will start shooting at it. There isn't enough time to kill the target. The next turn comes, the enemy ducks (or sidesteps), Restands (or sidesteps) and the aim time for both units is reset. The uncovered unit will lose even though it had been aiming at the unit for serveral seconds .5 seconds prior.

What if there was an aim time cool down? As long as the uncovered unit didn't take up aim against another unit during these .5 seconds, it doesn't need to aim as long against the covered target. The longer that covered target was hidden, the less the aim time bonus is.

Did that make sense? It means that a second enemy target would be required to save the covered unit. That's a different discussion.

Thougts?
wonderhero
Posts: 585
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 10:02 am

Re: Aim Time Cool Down

Post by wonderhero » Sat Jan 28, 2012 6:14 pm

It's already a "time cool downs", but 0.2 sec for MG and more than 1 sec for sniper.
I explain why 0.2 sec for MG:
MG get 0.3 penalty for duck and 0.5 for stand, total penalty: 0.8 sec.
The "full" covered MG receive 0.6 bonus against a non covered enemy MG. So covered MG has 0.2 time penalty. Before stand, he must rest 0.3 seconds to win the fight.
Yes, would be interesting to increase the duck's penalty from 0.3 to 0.5 sec for MG.
Zathri
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Aim Time Cool Down

Post by Zathri » Mon Jan 30, 2012 11:25 pm

I mean a cooldown for the other guy. Sure there are penalties for the one under cover, but I mean a bonus for the other guy because he's already been aiming and didn't change his gameplan.
Scorpion0x17
Posts: 508
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 10:40 pm
Location: Cambridge

Re: Aim Time Cool Down

Post by Scorpion0x17 » Tue Jan 31, 2012 12:51 am

Zathri wrote:I mean a cooldown for the other guy. Sure there are penalties for the one under cover, but I mean a bonus for the other guy because he's already been aiming and didn't change his gameplan.
I think the point is, Zathri, well, at least, from playing the single player campaign, it seems to me, that the uncovered guy has the advantage anyway - that is to say, if I have a unit do what you say, in the single player campaign, he'll get shot more often than not, and when not, it always seems to be a question of range (e.g. sniper against mg at sniper range).
trolling [verb]:
Posting with the intention of provoking a reaction.
User avatar
jhawk
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 12:34 pm

Re: Aim Time Cool Down

Post by jhawk » Fri Feb 03, 2012 3:00 pm

Scorpion0x17 wrote:I think the point is, Zathri, well, at least, from playing the single player campaign, it seems to me, that the uncovered guy has the advantage anyway - that is to say, if I have a unit do what you say, in the single player campaign, he'll get shot more often than not, and when not, it always seems to be a question of range (e.g. sniper against mg at sniper range).
You basically just said that a unit behind cover is disadvantaged against a unit that is not behind cover, all other factors being equal.

I'm not sure whether I support this suggestion. I don't think it would even change anything. It would just force units behind cover to duck longer if they're being shot at, giving the attacker more time to run for cover, which is the smart thing to do, because why would you just stand there in the open waiting until the ducked unit stood up and killed you (unless you've got another unit flanking the unit behind cover and know that it will be able to neutralize the target before the suggested engagement bonus expired).

But by moving towards cover the attacker would lose that bonus (I presume—or at least it would be diminished by the movement penalty), and knowing that, your opponent could just stand up their unit behind cover and start shooting at you.

It would be purely a mind game, but not an interesting one, more like rock-paper-scissors.
Scorpion0x17
Posts: 508
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 10:40 pm
Location: Cambridge

Re: Aim Time Cool Down

Post by Scorpion0x17 » Fri Feb 03, 2012 8:19 pm

jhawk wrote:
Scorpion0x17 wrote:I think the point is, Zathri, well, at least, from playing the single player campaign, it seems to me, that the uncovered guy has the advantage anyway - that is to say, if I have a unit do what you say, in the single player campaign, he'll get shot more often than not, and when not, it always seems to be a question of range (e.g. sniper against mg at sniper range).
You basically just said that a unit behind cover is disadvantaged against a unit that is not behind cover, all other factors being equal.
No, I'm saying, from playing the single player campaign, it seems to me, that, the disadvantages of ducking, and then re-standing, outweigh the advantage of being behind cover.
trolling [verb]:
Posting with the intention of provoking a reaction.
User avatar
jhawk
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 12:34 pm

Re: Aim Time Cool Down

Post by jhawk » Sat Feb 04, 2012 6:26 am

Scorpion0x17 wrote:No, I'm saying, from playing the single player campaign, it seems to me, that, the disadvantages of ducking, and then re-standing, outweigh the advantage of being behind cover.
Only if you do it very quickly, but if you wait for the duck penalty to expire (0.3 sec according to wonderhero) and then stand up, you'll win over another unit that isn't behind cover (which makes sense with wonderhero's stats). You would lose the engagement only if the enemy:
  • is a shotgun that's close
  • is a sniper that's far enough away and/or behind cover
  • is a MG behind cover (which could be the same cover as the one you're behind)
  • has the temporary kill time bonus suggested in the OP
Scorpion0x17
Posts: 508
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 10:40 pm
Location: Cambridge

Re: Aim Time Cool Down

Post by Scorpion0x17 » Sat Feb 04, 2012 6:56 am

jhawk wrote:
Scorpion0x17 wrote:No, I'm saying, from playing the single player campaign, it seems to me, that, the disadvantages of ducking, and then re-standing, outweigh the advantage of being behind cover.
Only if you do it very quickly, but if you wait for the duck penalty to expire (0.3 sec according to wonderhero) and then stand up, you'll win over another unit that isn't behind cover (which makes sense with wonderhero's stats). You would lose the engagement only if the enemy:
  • is a shotgun that's close
  • is a sniper that's far enough away and/or behind cover
  • is a MG behind cover (which could be the same cover as the one you're behind)
Yeah, I think that about sums it up.
jhawk wrote:
  • has the temporary kill time bonus suggested in the OP
Which, I, personally, don't think is necessary given all of the above.
trolling [verb]:
Posting with the intention of provoking a reaction.
Post Reply