# Aliens move too much, free-aim misses

**URL:** <https://forums.snapshotgames.com/t/aliens-move-too-much-free-aim-misses/558>\
**Category:** Game Feedback\
**Created:** [May 3, 2018, 6:34am UTC](https://forums.snapshotgames.com/t/aliens-move-too-much-free-aim-misses/558 "2018-05-03T06:34:34Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 23

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Potkeny](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex036/user_avatar/forums.snapshotgames.com/potkeny/32/26_2.png) [@Potkeny](https://forums.snapshotgames.com/u/Potkeny)\
**Post date:** [May 4, 2018, 12:22pm UTC](https://forums.snapshotgames.com/t/aliens-move-too-much-free-aim-misses/558/23 "2018-05-04T12:22:44Z")

</div>

> [@Duskmare](#):
>
> or you’ve cut it in half down the middle and placed it end to end, where the centre has 33% chance and the outermost extremities have 33% chance

> [@Shots too random](https://forums.snapshotgames.com/t/shots-too-random/557/4):
>
> The spread within the cone works on a bell-curve with highly inaccurate shots being as unlike as highly accurate shots (meaning that most rounds will tend to fall somewhere close to halfway between the red circle and the bullseye).

[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/Normal\_Distribution\_PDF.svg](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/Normal_Distribution_PDF.svg)

Nobody “officially” said that the “center (yellow line) has 33% chance”. There are numerous “bell-curves”, and mapping that to a target-circle makes it interesting.

You have a small circle and a big circle. You can compare their radius and their area. If the _[smaller circle]_ has a smaller overall area than the _[big circle minus small circle]_ (so the “band” between outer and inner circle) but each bullet still has 50% chance of hitting the inner area, you have a (relative) “accurate” weapon, while if the area of both is the same, you have a “less accurate”.

We can compare the radius of both circles, but while that will tell us the same, it’s harder to imagine for most ppl, because we’re comparing a circle’s area to a “band’s”, which is hard to visualize accurately in your head.

The chance of hitting inside the circle is the sum (integral) of the area (between the curve and the 0 coordinate…line? I’m not native to english math…) of “the” bell-curve from one side to the middle, if the middle is the inner circle. There was nothing saying that you will hit dead-center the most with an accurate weapon, but that 50% of the shots will be inside the inner circle.

Saying that aiming with the inner-circle as “accurate” is a good idea is misleading. If you imagine the inner circle’s area as lots of circles, and every circle has x% chance to get hit, you must calculate with the length of each circle (circumference) too.

Which is better for you, standing in 1m^2 with 50% chance of a bullet hitting somewhere in it or standing in 100m^2 with 100% chance of a bullet hitting somewhere in it?

So I’m just saying that working with a bell-curve is not necessarily bad, if it’s done right. And we should have faith in the devs, we backed them for a reason.

---

_[View the full topic](https://forums.snapshotgames.com/t/aliens-move-too-much-free-aim-misses/558)._