Jump to content

Killing Zombies/Players/NPCs From Different Heights


CaptKaspar

Recommended Posts

I know this has been talked about before, but this really needs to be addressed IMHO.

 

We should be able to shoot firearms from a higher/lower level to hit targets at a lower/higher level.

 

Can we just have our firearms shoot at whatever our mouse is currently hovering over with a % chance to hit based on our aim skill?

 

With hordes coming back, NPCs being added, and PVP in MP, we need a way to do this.

 

I had a rather pathetic MP experience recently where a player attacked my safe house and I watched from my catwalk above my walls and I could not defend my safe house! Fortunately (or unfortunately) my attacker couldn't fire up at me either. We both had guns and I had the better defensive position, but it didn't matter. There was nothing either of us could do at that moment.

 

This has to be fixed if hordes and NPCs are coming back!

 

PS I would also love to be able to drop rocks (medieval style) from my walls or have a long spear to stab zombies heads with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was fooled by the title too. Anyway i love the idea but i think that your gun accuracy level should play a part. If you have no skil its a 60% shot from below for each level up takes off 10%. Then the top down would be like 70% then go down 10% for each level up. The level 1 is a 70% from below and a 80% from above. Then it goes up to 80% and 90% then it goes to 90% to 95. The the next level is 95% and 99%. that is from second story up and this is just a quick thought. Anyway that's my 2 cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Going up a level automatically takes 10% off' seems a bit arbitrary.

 

Calculating the total distance between you and your opponent using basic math (pythagorean theorem) and putting that into the normal distance-based system seems a bit more accurate, and automatically accounts for the fact that you can be shooting up or down, from any number of levels, over any distances.

 

There's no logical reason that shooting up at someone is harder than shooting down until you get crazy high up or start debating cover, the small influences of gravity on distance combat with these sorts of weapons doesn't seem all that significant... Although I could be wrong, if anyone has experience in the area plz share. (even then the same calculation works with a negative/positive trajectory). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Going up a level automatically takes 10% off' seems a bit arbitrary.

 

Calculating the total distance between you and your opponent using basic math (pythagorean theorem) and putting that into the normal distance-based system seems a bit more accurate, and automatically accounts for the fact that you can be shooting up or down, from any number of levels, over any distances.

 

There's no logical reason that shooting up at someone is harder than shooting down until you get crazy high up or start debating cover, the small influences of gravity on distance combat with these sorts of weapons doesn't seem all that significant... Although I could be wrong, if anyone has experience in the area plz share. (even then the same calculation works with a negative/positive trajectory). 

Again just think off my head and i mean i feel that is is slightly harder to shoot down/up at certain levels but it just depends on the gun, the area, the positioning. I mean a sniper would have no change either scenario but the average Joe would. Its all about how well you shoot and how used to it you are. The variables and such are different for everyone. I cant shoot up very will a shot gun but i can shoot up very well is a pistol. I cant shoot down with a hunting rifle but i can with a shot gun. It all depends of preferences and skill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well some people have difficulties when doing so. If a gun is heavier than they are used to they may not have the right angle or if they are aiming up they may not see the target when the target sees them. Its just how some people shoot. If i am used to my pistol then i wont shoot a shotgun or rifle the same way or with as much skill. I'm just saying its all about how some react. It may be just me but i think there should at least be some sort of decrease on firing upwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going to go against the grain here and say that I do not think aiming upwards is much harder or more tiring and I'm dropping some physics/math to support it.

 

Here's my reasoning:

 

When holding a gun straight out and level to the ground it would feel the heaviest. This is because you will have the center of mass of the gun as far horizontally away from its support or rotation point (CG) as possible. This results in the highest possible torque or moment/arm (lbs/in) force. The horizontal aspect is important because the force applied is a function of mass and gravity (weight), which acts perpendicular to the surface.

 

When held at an angle (up or down) you are decreasing the horizontal distance from the gun's support. Thus decreasing the moment/arm and thereby decreasing the perceived 'weight'.

 

A simple experiment is to hold ANY object out at arms length, then do it closer to your body. You will tire faster and your muscles will strain more with the object held away from your body. You can repeat the experiment while holding the object at a raised or lowered angle. The object will physically feel lighter when held over your head or closer to your body than when held outright perpendicular. I guarantee you can hold it longer over your head or at a 45 degree angle than you can when holding it perpendicular.

 

So when you aim upwards or downwards, even though the gun does not physically get closer to your body or weigh less, you are decreasing the horizontal moment/arm of gravity and centering it closer to your body's center of gravity. ie less torque caused by gravity and thus less force required to keep the weapon level.

 

Just think, why do soldiers march with their weapons on their shoulders and not held outright? Its not to make a tighter grouping, its because its less tiring and they can march longer and be more physically ready to fight when needed. (and so they don't accidentally shoot each other).

 

When it comes to whether it is easier or harder to hit a higher or lower target, I have to say its negligible in most cases. I personally have shot a lot of skeet and sporting clays as well as hunted pheasant and grouse. Virtually every shot you take doing those is at an upward angle to some degree. Next to never is there a level shot. I have also shot a lot of rifle and pistol. I had a rifle range literally in my backyard growing up (pretty redneck I know!) The difficulty in a shot comes from really two/three factors. Distance to target (bullet drop), relative movement of target (lead required based on distance and muzzle velocity), and wind (often an inconsistent and unpredictable variable).

 

Shooting up and down only effects the slant distance (the previously discussed Pythagorean theorem/hypotenuse) to the target. In most cases the difference is negligible, but it could come into play the closer it is to a 45 degree angle shot.

 

ex. a target fired at from 100ft on top of a 10ft wall. A2+B2=C2 , 100ft2+10ft2=C2  , 10000ft+100ft= C, 10100ft= C2 , 100.4988ft = C

 

So in that example your target is about 0.5ft farther away. The additional distance that the bullet drops in that distance is negligible. The bullet is falling at 32ft/s and traveling at lets say a subsonic 1000ft/s (low end muzzle velocity of a 9mm). So the bullet covers the additional 0.5ft in 0.0005seconds. In that time it falls an additional 0.016ft or about 0.2ins.

 

So a shot from 100ft at an object 10ft up would hit 0.016ft (0.192ins or less than 1/4 of an inch) lower than a target level with the shooter.

 

A shot from 10ft at an object 10ft up (45 degree angle) would hit about 1.5 inches lower, and I suppose that could make a difference if a large hit area isn't in play, but still isn't a big difference. Good thing your arms won't be as tired holding your weapon at that angle ;).

 

All in all, not a big enough difference to program anything into the game from a realism stand point. IMHO anyways.

 

BUT, we do need the ability to shoot up and down!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CaptKaspar I'm not sure I follow you there. It's not a difference of holding the gun out farther from your body or closer (as in your paragraph where you mention to try that). That's not relevant at all. What makes holding the gun aiming upwards harder and lower easier is that muscles are more relaxed the closer they are to your sides, and more tense the higher up they are. Your math wasn't wrong, but your physiology was. You use more energy the farther your muscles are from their resting state. Thus, you fatigue much quicker when aiming upwards. Like I said in my original post- it's not that much. Your right arm (assuming you're right handed) doesn't change much whether you're up or down, but your left arm moves considerably and should be your primary aiming means. Holding the gun up does shunt some of the weight towards your right arm and body (which is nice), but holding the left arm up alone is enough to negatively impact aim.

 

I think most people here already know my qualifications well enough so I'm not going to spout them again XD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*snip*

 

Rathlord, I generally agree with most things that you post and I can say you've earned my respect here on these forums. But I respectfully have to disagree with you.

 

Take a pistol and aim it level in front of you. Then raise it to a 45 degree angle. You will note how your muscles are under less stress when they are raised at a 45 degree angle.

 

Take a rifle/shotgun and do the same. When raising the weapon your right arm stays in roughly the same position and your left arm is raised significantly. Again it is more tiring to keep your arm out in front of you than it is to raise it to a higher angle. Furthermore, your left arm will be holding the gun which is now partially supported directly by your shoulder and not solely held in place by your arms. The gun actually acts as a partial support for your arm. Your left arm is used less for support than a level shot.

 

Just try the experiment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been doing the "experiment" for years in the form of real shooting. I've shot sporting clays (and learned) from one of the best shooters in the world (source: http://www.willfennell.com/about/ he's an old friend of my family). Again, like I said, your math isn't wrong it's the biology. If it were just a matter of holding a dead weight fully extended from your body you'd be right, but that's not what we're talking about. Anyways, we'll just have to agree to disagree- there's nothing more I can say other than what I have about the physiological and real world evidence provided. Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ehm... I think you two guys take this quite much too serious. If you feel like duelling your knowledge of physics and prestige in gunmanship, you might want to discuss this in a more private place. 

 

 

Just try the experiment.

 

 

I just tried the experiment! Well I tried some kind of an experiment. A different experiment:
I just shot 60 zombies with 200 bullets  in 2 minutes... ...thats one shot per 1,5 second and my arm didn't really care about ballistic, gravity or my biology.

Its just a guy shooting around while running, just as people do who just found a gun and spray-and-pray as people in games or panic use to do. Just wished the gun jumped on his nose after the first 3 shots, but it didn't. But in the end no little bird cared about the ancle I held my gun. Just wish one day we can fight the height

 

 

 

I've shot sporting clays (and learned) from one of the best shooters in the world (source: http://www.willfennell.com/about/ he's an old friend of my family). 

 

 

You are the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been doing the "experiment" for years in the form of real shooting. I've shot sporting clays (and learned) from one of the best shooters in the world (source: http://www.willfennell.com/about/ he's an old friend of my family). Again, like I said, your math isn't wrong it's the biology. If it were just a matter of holding a dead weight fully extended from your body you'd be right, but that's not what we're talking about. Anyways, we'll just have to agree to disagree- there's nothing more I can say other than what I have about the physiological and real world evidence provided. Cheers.

 

I agree to disagree! Cheers!

 

I think we can both agree that its not worth the trouble to program any +/- difficulty level when aiming up/down, but that we should have the function to actually shoot up/down at different heights.

 

I like the idea that the game will shoot at whatever your mouse is pointed at. This will account for the height differences. (would love for the cursor to change to cross-hairs when aiming a firearm!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...