Will cover be incorporated?

One week "Ask A Dev" event. Closed to new threads.
Locked
User avatar
Mandemon
Adventurer
Posts: 925
Joined: April 5th, 2012, 11:49 am

Will cover be incorporated?

Post by Mandemon » December 14th, 2012, 2:00 pm

Will the combat in Wasteland 2 have cover, ala XCOM: Enemy Unknown, where characters automatically put themselves against a cover and will peek out to take a shot? Or will cover work on basic "Block Line of Sight" system?

Also related: Will characters look around automatically (peek around corners, look behind them, etc) without need to tell them to do so or will they stubbornly stare at one direction(I will keep staring this wall, because I do not have enough Action Points/Time Units/Whatever to turn my entire body), even if enemy is loudly shouting he will now move to backstab them?

User avatar
RangerKeenan
Developer
Posts: 140
Joined: February 27th, 2012, 2:22 pm

Re: Will cover be incorporated?

Post by RangerKeenan » December 20th, 2012, 10:09 am

Hello Mandemon,

We do have cover in the game. It is similar to the way broken cover in the M.S.P.E. rule set works. There is a "block line of sight" system naturally in our game but we also have objects in the play space that the PCs and acceptable enemy AI can use as cover objects. The attackers chance to hit will be reduced when their target is in viable cover. Their animation state will change as well, visually showing them ducking into the cover.

The second paragraph sounds like some cool reactivity. If I'm reading it correctly, is it more of a passive system? I'm in cover, its not my turn, but I'm reacting to the hectic combat around me?
Chris Keenan
VP of Development
@RangerKeenan

User avatar
dorkboy
Master
Posts: 1772
Joined: November 26th, 2012, 10:37 am

Re: Will cover be incorporated?

Post by dorkboy » December 20th, 2012, 1:53 pm

is it an automatic thing like in XCOM, or a manual change of stance type thing like in FOT?
(i'm getting the impression it's the former.)
marmelade & jam

User avatar
Lucius
Master
Posts: 2228
Joined: March 9th, 2012, 6:43 pm

Re: Will cover be incorporated?

Post by Lucius » December 20th, 2012, 2:08 pm

DarkTwinkie wrote:Hello Mandemon,

We do have cover in the game. It is similar to the way broken cover in the M.S.P.E. rule set works. There is a "block line of sight" system naturally in our game but we also have objects in the play space that the PCs and acceptable enemy AI can use as cover objects. The attackers chance to hit will be reduced when their target is in viable cover. Their animation state will change as well, visually showing them ducking into the cover.

The second paragraph sounds like some cool reactivity. If I'm reading it correctly, is it more of a passive system? I'm in cover, its not my turn, but I'm reacting to the hectic combat around me?
The objects that can be used as cover objects, can you fire from cover or do you need to move out fire and move back in?

User avatar
Woolfe
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5625
Joined: March 22nd, 2012, 6:42 pm

Re: Will cover be incorporated?

Post by Woolfe » December 20th, 2012, 2:14 pm

I think he is refering to whether or not you have to pay points to "turn".

As in will a line of sight be a static field in the direction you are facing. This then requires some sort of cost to "turn" and look behind you or even to the side. Also limiting field of fire.

OR will it be more like character uses all senses and knows what is all around him, unless there is a physical object blocking the view. So by default the character looks around and sees everything around him, and can fire all around him as well.

My assumption is the second one. But I understand Mandemon's concern about the first, cause its damn annoying.
It's not too late. Make it Eight!

User avatar
Mandemon
Adventurer
Posts: 925
Joined: April 5th, 2012, 11:49 am

Re: Will cover be incorporated?

Post by Mandemon » December 20th, 2012, 2:17 pm

DarkTwinkie wrote:Hello Mandemon,
The second paragraph sounds like some cool reactivity. If I'm reading it correctly, is it more of a passive system? I'm in cover, its not my turn, but I'm reacting to the hectic combat around me?
Kinda like passive system. To best explain it, I will use old XCOM and new XCOM.

In Old XCOM, if you saved enough TUs to shoot at something, he would not turn around even if Chrysalid was running straight towards him from behind, because he could not "hear or see" it.

In New XCOM, soldiers automatically look around and see around, resulting them having 360 degree field of vision. So when I put them on overwatch, they will keep eye on all activity around them and if they see an enemy they can react to, they react.

Kinda like that. Can you save up AP to allow "interruption" in middle of enemy action, like automatic shot if they enter field of vision and such? Or am I confined to my turn only? Furthermore, if I can, if I tell my ranger to keep eye for enemies, will he only keep staring the single spot I left him with or will he be looking around?

EDIT

Woolfe got it right on line of sight issue. This is especially bad in Silent Storm. I can HEAR enemy walking right behind me, but for some reason my soldier can't turn his head to see him? Why? His sense are working on "enemys turn". Clearly he is not frozen in time.

XCOM gives soldiers 360 degree FOV. You can see animations fo soldiers looking around, keeping eye on things. They are not frozen in single moment. Original XCOM had soldiers wasting TU on simple things such as looking around.

User avatar
paultakeda
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2688
Joined: March 14th, 2012, 2:47 pm
Location: AAAAAARGH!

Re: Will cover be incorporated?

Post by paultakeda » January 7th, 2013, 4:21 pm

I agree with Mandemon here about having a 360-degree view. I do think that while this exists it should be reduced in range for the sides and behind IF the character is not using an "overwatch" mechanism. Likewise, cover only exists when that cover is actually cover, and is negated if a character is shot in the back.

The XCOM:EU overwatch dynamic is a good example of reactive play. However, being able to shoot out of turn needs to be considered along with in-turn action.

Now, if we went with only being able to do one and only one attack per turn regardless and all other AP can only be used for moving and non-attack actions (or even non-USE actions), then an out-of-turn reaction shot could be viable.

Another option, if multiple attacks per turn are allowed, would be that there is an actual "overwatch" action that spends as much AP as the weapon mode in "quick shot" (I would think out-of-turn reaction shots should never be aimed unless maybe there is a high level skill roll involved) would take. This way, the reaction is accounted for in "pre-bought" AP.

It would be interesting if there were different types of reactions other than shooting. You could pre-buy AP (or have a reaction perk if this isn't a mechanic) where a character could try to leap out of the way of a tossed grenade, or turn to another side of the pillar if an enemy shows up behind him, thus allowing the cover to operate (though if afterward another enemy shows up in the new flank the ranger is screwed!).

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest