Your base success(or failure) as a player is fixed on your player skill. Low skill is lowering this base success where high skill is increasing this success over base. This should be clear enough.


I love relativity. Let's disable the animation for the circle, only the circle animation. OMG, auto aim?! It is the same thing. Randomness is a degree. It can be decreased. Then it will be interchangeable with auto-aim. The point of the skill is getting better shots, better shots provided by the character.


That should be a yes then. People role play archers because they like to role play archers. Only a minority will play archers for the sake of aiming skills. Funnily, I am in that minority too. But anyway, let's say you're right, then auto-aim can be a perk just like slow motion perk. Perks are optional.

I actually joined the discussion for those who mentioned auto-aim and those who would at least consider auto-aim. That didn't really go well. :toughninja:

Well, THAT is a matter of perspective. The way I see it, the "base of success" is the character you start out with. Improve your marksman skill, and your success rate will improve.



There isn't supposed to be any animations, the dispersion circles are abstract ideas that represent random deviation from the players aiming point. This isn't the same as physically manipulating the players aiming point to ensure a hit. This doesn't have anything to do with the random deviation, it just moves the area deviation can occur in.



Well, then you really need to take a couple of english lessons.

Saying that the level of interest for one particular challenge is HIGHER in one group than in another is NOT the same as saying that ALL people from the first group will share that interest. Neither does it mean that NONE of the people in the second group will share it. The word "higher" does not mean the same as the word "all", and it does not mean the same as "exclusive". "More men than women are in the army" does NOT mean "All men are in the army". It doesn't even mean "most men are in the army". Neither does it mean that there are no women in the army. Learn this key difference, and read my post again, here it is:

There can be caps to skills and in some cases don't. When both skills are at optimal. What's beyond that point? I am just asking that.


It is a matter of perspective. The area will be smaller and this means the overall randomness will be decreased on the great picture.


You, in both posts, said you think players interested in aiming will play archers(not exclusively, not all, I know that) since according to you they will not want something unrealistic as auto-aim(not exclusively, not all, I know that). So they will not be interested in auto-aim.(not exclusively, not all, I know that) I understood you right then. We don't use most, probable and such that frequently in my language, people understand what speaker is intending. It is strictly about my language and culture. It svcks, yes but hard to learn the other way.

Still, in TES you can reach 100 skill in archery in one way or other. It is open for everyone. I just don't agree with you when you say those people who gets higher skills will be less interested in an auto-aim perk. If you are defining it strictly with a "more realistic archery demanding group" based on yourself then I misunderstood you. I accept the minoritygroup you are defining, but they being less interested in this perk is something I visioned already. They won't use this perk. I didn't design it for them in the first place.

That's a brilliant idea. They really should incorporate it!

"Caps"? At master-level, the accuracy is at it's highest level. Include perks that come with the game(accuracy may be less affected by moving, reduced draw time, less time required to reach max accuracy, for instance), and that's it.



This is semantics. The arrow will strike completely at random within the circle. There is NO modifiers, except for the skill that reduces the size of the circle. No other factors are relevant.



Well, I never said "those people who gets higher skills", I just said those people are "less likely" to be interested, because they are more likely to be drawn to the realistic aspect of archery. I suspect that in general, an auto-aim-feature will be more desirable for players who use bows more casually. These will be less likely to invest the time necessary to improve the skill to the point where they get the auto-aim perk.

Cheers:)

Hopefully, it can be modded in if it isn't included

You can go beyond 100. How would you like to incorporate that? Let's see the perk system. I can choose an accuracy perk to get high accuracy earlier. Let's say my career started with high accuracy and then I improved on my loading skills. See the problem we are getting here.


We can add modifiers. I would. It wouldn't be end of the world. Sensible archery perk for auto-aim?


Casual players will decide what they will do with it. There are still perks to gain, I assume. Perks are the driving force. Plus, auto-aim doesn't have to be constant. It can be scaled. So you can get better assist with improved skills. It will be like randomization is decreasing, what I describe isn't different at all. So I can go with your system just fine and pretend it is auto-aiming. I am mudding the water, ain't I?

I just acknowledge those people who want to play archer characters but don't have the aiming skills themselves.

200+ posts, time to lock this one