'Breathe-holding' is just a convenient term and game-mechanic for all the skill/technique/experience etc a marksman would employ when taking a shot, not just holding your breathe. The higher your skill level, the more accurate your shot. Feel free to suggest a better term

OK thank you for clarifying that. It seems like what your sugesting is the same as what everyone else has been saying just that it should eliminate all woble at the master level, which I dont think is very realistic at all as no ones perfect.

An addition to the circle system that may also integrate your proposal and put a little more player skill would be to have a cross moving in the circle, representing the actual direction where the missile will be shoot at. At first, the arrow will move slowly accross a wide circle as your character focus on his target. The more experienced the character, the more immediately accute will be the shot. Then, as you continue aiming the circle will go smaller, but if you wait too much, the cross will start moving faster and faster making it harder for the player to choose the perfect time.
This cross may also come as the benefit of a perk, making only the best archers really able to know where their missile will go at a given time.
But I also agree with you that making archery more challenging in term of character and player skill should go with a much higher damage value.
The only problem to me is : where will be the circle?
Will it be projected where your arrow will be supposed to hit the ground? Will it take obstacles into consideration? Or will it just materialize the immediate trajectory after shooting, not considering the natural ballistic curve? Such system would not be a problem for "close" combat shooting as in Oblivion, for your arrow can be more or less considered as going straight for a few meters. But if we have to use missile weapons at longuer ranges, it won't help much. Maybe should we have something in between, with a colored figuration of the arrow trajectory allowing both to figure where it will go immediately and after a long flight.
Or, maybe, should this aiming system become the benefit of marksmanship perks? Novices will have no visualisation of their arrow trajectory. Professionals will have the immediate trajectory circle. Experts will have also a projection of the falling point, and masters will have a complete vision of their arrow trajectory.

A complete alternative to this system would be to adopt FO3 targeting system, which allow to consider target moving speed, cover and distance to compute your character probability to hit. Such system would allow to implement realistic ballistic trajectory of missile weapons.

The circle represents the level of accuracy your skill level allows you to achieve. Within that circle, the actual trajectory is completely random. (the actual trajectory will follow physical rules, but amongst the 1.000.000.000.000.000 possible ballistic trajectories available within the blue circle, a random one will be chosen) The circle will be drawn around the cursor, which will act as the "boresight"-mark, much like it is today. This has nothing to do with terrain or distance, as the boresight-line extends indefinitely into space. (And so you will still have to apply manual super-elevation, as you do in Oblivion. This is the "player"-part of the skill - dispersion is the "character"-part")

So the circle only illustrates the DEVIATION from your aiming point. Therefore, it will obviously not take into account obstacles or any terrain features. It is only a matters of how many degrees "off-target" your shot will be when you let go of the string.

With your system and the low time scales for the "circles" to shrink and everybody being allowed an "aimed shot", have you given thoughts on how rewarding the skill progression will be for the player (i.e. would the player notice a difference caused by the progression all along the way - "hey, this 50 skill really feels more accurate :clap: " - or just when comparing the extreme ends of the skill scale)?

As in real life, both skill and benefits increases in small increments. With this system, increasing your marksman-skill will be much more important than it has been so far. As far as to "noticing" it - obviously, it will have an effect, whether you go for the visible circle or not. I can't see how it will be any less noticable than going from skill level 20 to skill level 24 in blade - how does the character notice that?

Please note: There is nothing in this suggestion that suggests removing the perks. The perks stay, or are subject to improvement.

The increased ability to see trajectory as a result of perks is an interesting idea but i don't really like it. I feel like it takes all the RL player (as oposed to an in game character) skill out of the equation and I like that, it makes it much more rewarding. Also it seems like you could work forever to get to master level then when you do the only reward is that there is absolutly no skill left in being an archer. If you automaticly knew the exact flight path and landing position of your arrow it just sounds extreamly boring. As I increase my skill I want to be rewarded with fun and helpful perks but not ones that eliminate the difficulty in the skill. Please feel free to disagree and argue antoher point but thats my opinion take it as you will .

Agree with you, with such a system a single invisible circle (representing the space the aim can fluctuate in)would suffice where a cross move faster/slower/nearer the centrer depending your conditions (damage/fatigue/how long your aiming), the weaponry condition(damaged /quality), more or less as Day of Defeat that the more breathless / moving you are / the more your weapon aim swing. The invisible circle would expand decrease around the fix aim (the classical aim) but you don t know that. If gravity is implemented, then you would have t take care of ballistic too.
In such a system i can visualise that skill + condition reduce the cross (aleatory) wandering area, while the player can still exerce some control over the shot trying to compensate the cross offset to try to hit, it would require Character skill + Player skill.

Agility speed would influence your bow skill.
Strenght would only allow you to use heavyer bows (pull 100% of the string)
This last would only be good if a material vs material is implemented, which at this point of technology, i consider it a must have.

If anyone has played Mount and Blade, this is how archery works in it. But it's still worthwhile to use bows.

The game engine is probably already finished so really there is not much to discuss

Why couldn't the skill improve BOTH accuracy and damage/other perks...

This thread isn't restricted to TES:V, it is just as valid once Bethesda starts planning TES: VI. And that argument might as well be applied to every single topic in this forum.

That doesn't mean anything, the game engine isn't going to prevent this from being implemented.

Game engine finished mean no major change will be made, it does not mean it is set in stone, or if stone it is you can still work it togive it the desired shape.

So yes there is room to discuss even if blindly, even more because we have no idea of the engine limitation capability.

Noone's saying it couldn't. The original post only said that post only COVERED accuracy, it never said any other change was denied.

I'd also like for them to acknowledge that strength is important in bow damage. Sure the Bosmer might be the most accurate archers in Tamriel, but a Nord or Orc could certainly send an arrow farther and with more power.

I like this. It's realistic and balances well player skill and character skill.

Strength is only important up to a certain point, if the bosmer can pull the bow back as far as it goes then it doesnt matter how much stronger the nord or orc is they can never increase the distance beyond the bows maximum capacity. I think there should be a minimum strength requierd to use each bow although it shouldnt never be so high that an archer character like a bosmer can never reach it just that it adds an extra consideration.

Only one circle seems fine, otherwise I believe we start getting too much into detail and archery, which is fun, might end up... boring....

Great Idea! I like the idea of getting better over time.

There's a lot going on in this thread I like to hear. Dispersion is something that should have existed long ago. Remember the old FPSs where guns were perfectly accurate, and then games like Counterstrike started introducing inaccuracy (esp from prolonged fire, moving, being shot etc.) This adds much. Why are we only now talking about this becoming the defacto feature of bows...
Anyways critiques are more interesting.



A "circle" to show dispersion rates: NO. More GUI is unimmersive, have a "circle" for game calculations but don't show it on the UI. Let the accuracy of an aimed shot be apparent in the animations of the bow draw -- the character should "relax" into a state of concentration at the moment the circle is smallest. The game doesn't have to SHOW you exactly how accurate you are, you should learn that empirically.
A slider where the player has to stop it at the most accurate point: NO. Don't introduce Mini-games in lieu of fully developed features. Mini-games are unimmersive. More UI is unimmersive, not to mention clutter the view and distract from that nasty looking ogre. Do you seriously want to play http://freegames.1up.com/games/launchgame.html every time you equip your bow.
You should have nothing to base your aim off of except what you can see of the bow and your character. No crosshairs, no "cross", no Circle. Just you and your bow.


As I said, the addition of this concept in FPS was groundbreaking. Also, Mount + Blade has been out for a while. Its archery is very well appreciated by everyone. There is nothing more satisfying than landing a lucky head shot from impossibly far away. There is no reason to think people are to dumb to appreciate a little challenge.



Mostly yes. accuracy should definitely vary by movement. Bow type should affect the speed of the arrow on leaving the bow (I'll talk about damage later). The density of the arrow's material, its straightness, and its rigidity should affect trajectory. cheap bone/ wood arrows should/can curve unpredictably mid flight. etc. wind should be taken into account. (It's Skyrim, if they don't develop weather, they're missing half the province, and if weather then why not weather effects.)


functional practice ranges: YES
An NPC to hold your hand and tell you your doing it wrong: NO.
Long range shots add more XP: YES. Scale Practice XP down as skill increases, so people don't level to master without seeing a mob.
You answered your own problems. If there's a range, XP should be given for your range in relation to the target (even "is it moving?" or "are YOU moving?"). If people want to stand 6 inches away, give them .001% of the XP value of the shot. But don't tell them they CAN'T do it. Simple. Also, pulling the bow is half the task. It takes a good deal of physical effort. You should get XP just for pulling it as well as for hitting a target. (This can be scaled down as skill increases). This will alleviate the "I didn't pick archery so now I CAN'T develop archery" concern.


Breathe-holding perk: meh. I Can hold my breath. Can you? I can't shoot a bow. Can you? Why do I have to have experience with a bow to learn something babies are born knowing? I understand it takes a little know how to shoot and hold your breath (I can shoot a gun) but still. I like perks, but perks for the sake of perks ... I'd rather gradual "perks" instead of the classic "level up and get this shiny new combo". Breathing technique is a part of the 'skill' of it, if perks are included, they should be new abilities (zoom in Ob was a nice touch tho should have been scaled to skill instead of "here, have 4x zoom" ) not something you should already have.

As for damage. I don't really care too much. My main concern is 1) balance and 2) physics. Without balance any game svcks. Playability is paramount. After that Physics is the new graphics. An arrow shouldn't have a arbitrary number for damage. It should have weight, density, size of the head, size of the shaft, hardness, sharpness type stats. The bow shouldn't have an arbitrary number either. It should have output in Joules (the weight of the arrow affect how fast it goes as force = mass x acceleration). your character shouldn't have an armor value or a 'resistance to arrows' value. His armor should have hardness, sheer strength, tensile strength, thickness. These determine how fast your arrow flies, how hard it hits, how deep it penetrates, or if it just bounces or glances away. Characters shouldn't have hit boxes on their skin. They should have hit boxes on their organs (skin is an organ too). If you hit a heart, he's dead. Graze his peck from the side, he bleeds a little. I don't expect to see this type of damage calculation for several years. But I do expect to start moving in that direction now. I thought this was going to happen years ago when they started using hit boxes for body parts (headshots etc.) but like with the HP system we have stagnated every opportunity we get.

They wouldn't be able to use bows as strong as the strongest nords or orcs.

Wow Bob I think you just summed everything up very well thank you. Although since I doubt we'll get the kinda or organ box damage to the degree it needs to be to work well I would definitly apreciate an increase in just sheer damage of the bow. And Mango just because a Nord may be initially stronger theres no rule that says a bosmer can't catch up and I think it'd just be rediculous to put bows in the game that only Nords or Orcs can use when then probability of them being in the archer characters is very low.

The idea of "your not strong enough to use this bow" is troubling with this game. Realistically, pulling a bow requires strength, but I'm loathe to make TES into a "you don't have the stats to swing that sword, but you can carry it around just fine " kind of game. Mount and Blade did this best, but that games mechanics don't fit snugly with TES. We could say you unlock bows like you unlock spells in OB, but I don't really like that kind of perk system (I think perks should be gradually introduced abilities, not a boost to skill or a wall to progress). "I should be able to cast what ever I can cast".
You could say that STR refers to a persons general constitution and bow skill refers to a persons ability to wield bows. In which case bow skill would include the muscles mass and tone that is required to draw a bow, but then that would leak into ability to swing a sword too, but not necessarily ability to lift weight. Its a complicated mess that current TES systems can't address so I would be content to say that your skill solely determines what you can or can't do with the tools of your trade.

@Ianray: TY nice to be appreciated. I know organs won't show up for a while, but they SHOULD be here already and I'm going to say so so maybe someone will start developing them. I don't need complicated "you shot lungs, so now he can't breathe and he loses fatigue and blood slowly" tho it would be nice. I just want damage to be calculated off of a solid hit, and not glancing flesh wounds. Tip of nose =\= brain damage. An arrow shot thru a man's hand into his chest should do chest damage, not hand damage. Also, armor should protect from injury, not just mitigate injury, but that's getting off topic.

I wasn't aware that we could level our marksmen in real life, I've never gotten the "marksmen increased" when i shoot my bow ...

Anywho, I think bow should have a required marksman level, like in NV, so if you use one above your skill level there will be a noticeable sway in the aiming.