Aimed shot changes

[Sealab 2021 Duck]

I think that a good change from FO1 and 2 would be to have a different number of AP per section of body on the aimed shot. For example, it would take much longer to aim for someone's eyes than their or their chest. However, with the eye shot, even if you miss their eyes, you would still have a chance of hitting them in the head. It would be a good idea, in my opinion, to give a chance of still getting a head shot in. It would also be nice if you could instruct your NPC's on how frequently to take aimed shots.

 

[Roshambo]

An interesting prospect and one I do agree on. For balance issues, I think there should still be a chance of missing the head entirely when making targeted shots to the eyes.

Akin to this system is what Jagged Alliance 2 uses. You can opt to use more time units point by point, to a limit to increase the chance of hitting a location (instead of the green wireframe, JA2 just relied on you aiming for that body location of torso, legs, or head).

 

[Reaper]

Ah, JA2, what a game.

I agree with Rosh that there should definityl be a chance of missing the head, just like you can miss any part of the body - if you aim for the groin and miss you won't automatically hit their leg, the bullet could go completely wide or go between their legs, whatever.

But the basic idea is sound.

 

[Azael]

Good idea. Missing an aimed shot at the groin should give you a chance of hitting the chests or the legs. I also like the idea of spending more AP's in order to get a greater chance of hitting your target, like in JA2.

 

[slicer]

I think the system works fine. It is not perfect ore realistic, but it still works fine

 

[dragon12321]

Yep, it does! The dice rolls the game makes are fair and solid, I see no reason to change that....
...and if you shot for the legs and hit the groin, well, then you just suck at shooting

 

[Roshambo]

Well, I think an adaptation of JA2's "spend more to be more accurate" fits the current system a lot more than Sawyer's current weaponary BS.

 

[Gophermaster]

The way I see it: If you miss, you miss. Sure it would make the game easier. You have the percentage chance of actually hitting them in the eye which is enough realism for me. If you want REAL realism then everyone should die instantly when they get a .44 to the forehead.

 

[Santa_Claws]

When I was missing someone's eyes, sometimes I was hitting someone behind him, so... And the very fact that it costs you extra AP to aim I think it's enough. I mean you take the same ammount of time to aim at the eyes or, say, the legs, only the chance to hit differs. The current system is realistic enough in my opinion. It's not a bad idea though.