Will you ever fix the basic aiming issues?

It’s been a complaint since early access. Soldiers would rather aim at the wall they’re taking cover behind than step to the side and aim at the enemy behind that wall.

Also, why do the enemy animations still play during the firing animation? I just had a 100% chance to hit shot miss because an alien ducked out the way during the shooting animation. (By 100% chance to hit, I mean both circles were fully encompassed by the alien’s body so that event the most stray shots would hit.)

These are very basic issues that affect the core gameplay. It’s not fun coming up with a strategy, moving your guys into place and then realising that actually they can’t shoot past their cover, so they can’t hit the enemy they need to hit and your whole plan is ruined.
That or soldiers lean out the wrong way, to the right or left when you want them to lean to the left or right.
Seriously, get this fixed… You’ve already had a year or so since the game released. Just add a button or slider that allows you to manually lean your soldier out of cover.


Yep. This is really annoying indeed. If they plan to add proper ironman mode at some point, they have to fix that issue. I know some people like it because hurrdurr realism(?) but this randomness just completely defeats the purpose of having a deterministic aim system. Some also say just time it right: this does not work because sometimes your soldier steps out of cover, meaning the shot is delayed and you’d have to calculate that delay and sit there with a stop watch…

1 Like

It’s not an issue, it’s on purpose. Aimed shots will miss because of enemy movement. However, hit-firing tracks the enemy’s center of mass as you fire, meaning no matter how much they flail the shots will be aimed at it’s center of mass.

Also, the enemy only starts moving after the first bullet hits, so the step-out animation doesn’t matter.


As @Julian said - that’s an intentional part of design. In addition, character animation will often cover volnuerable body parts with better armored one after being his as well. That’s something that diffirenciates one shot precise weapons and burst weapons - which have bigger DPS potential, but are more difficult to be precise with.

1 Like

Oh, well as long as it’s intentionally bad…

As you might have gathered I don’t think it’s bad. After a bit of playing I feel I can pretty well judge how are my chances to kill/hit/disable enemies. If you do bullet simulation, you might as well take advante of it. This way of nerfing spread weapons is… interesting. Again, not something I found a problem, but just something to consider before taking a shot.


I read here somewhere that those moving Animations are a Design decision. the fights are turn based, but in real life it would not be turn based. A snapshot member said that this movement is Part of the Design bringing the realistic Non-turn based fight in a turn based strategy game.
As i remember snapshot had different Design ideas for this and they choosed the one above.
If it is a good decision, well i dont know. But i am missing some words which explain those movements during the tutorial.

Perhaps @Valygar could confirm this. I Think @UnstableVoltage postet that mechanic somewhere…

If you purposefully introduce randomness into a deterministic system (that is advertised as such) then you got yourself a bad game design decision. I know that auto aimed shots track the center mass, but that is no excuse; quite the opposite. It makes it even more inconsistent.

This is not true at all ! Countless of times I missed a shot because the enemy had time to … be animated … after I triggered the shot during the step out animation. This is most noticeable with Tritons that can rear up during their animation, and yes I’m talking single shot weapons.

It is a design decision.

I believe it is intended to reflect the fact that you are shooting at a moving target, albeit in a static turn-based mode.

TBH, it’s pretty easy to compensate for this - much like leading a moving target in real life.

And @Julian is also correct that snap firing will track the centre of mass instead.


If you are interested, explanation on the how and the why:


It doesn’t make sense because that “representation” only applies when aiming manually. Again: the manual aiming is presented as deterministic without artificial percentages. Having it affected by enemies wiggeling about re-adds those percentages, but in a much less obvious and less predictable way. It’s worse than a % hit chance.

1 Like

I don’t think PP goal was every to remove all variables. Even if you land every bullet into enemy you want result will vary depending on what body part you hit. It’s just simulater more, rather then using simple attack vs defence roll.

1 Like

I disagree. But others said enough. Those animations are to simulate some uncertainty related to moving target.

Ironman mode won’t be implemented until before end of year, so until many of next mechanics and balances will be implemented. So you don’t have to worry about your tactics taking into account this mode.


AFAIK it works with snapshots too. The difference is shooter continues aiming at center mass as the target wiggles, so the shots are more likely to hit somewhere.

1 Like