Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="LordEntrails" data-source="post: 7140564" data-attributes="member: 6804070">@<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=6887393" target="_blank">Soul Stigma</a>,I don't see cover and range being the same. i.e. I wouldn't add cover to adjust for some sort of &quot;range&quot; thing. Agreed that if the bluff, wall, or something else occludes the target, then apply cover as normal, irregardless of range.Range, to me, accommodates two things; the distance off target based upon aiming error (i.e. 1 degree aiming error is not a big deal at 10 feet, but it is at 500 feet), and target deviation due to wind, drag, and imperfect aerodynamics, etc.Does hitting a target high up (higher potential energy/higher in the gravity well) affected by range? Hmm.... thinking about it, I don't think it would affect accuracy, but it definitely would affect maximum range (since max range is dependent upon energy).So, I guess (since I have now put more thought into this than I ever would while playing), I would use the simplest method for calculating if the target is in normal or long range (though hypotenuse would be most accurate). But, I would probably add horizontal distance plus positive vertical distance for max range. Meaning, a bow with a range of 150/600 feet would be at normal range for anything in 150 feet (true distance) in any direction. But, could only shoot 400 feet horizontal if the target was 200ft above the shooter. Or could shoot 800 feet horizontal if the target was 200ft below the shooter.Conservation of energy or calculation of a ballistic trajectory I'm sure would prove those guideline wrong. But hey, that's too much worry for realistic physics!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="LordEntrails, post: 7140564, member: 6804070"] @[I][B][U][URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=6887393"]Soul Stigma[/URL][/U][/B][/I], I don't see cover and range being the same. i.e. I wouldn't add cover to adjust for some sort of "range" thing. Agreed that if the bluff, wall, or something else occludes the target, then apply cover as normal, irregardless of range. Range, to me, accommodates two things; the distance off target based upon aiming error (i.e. 1 degree aiming error is not a big deal at 10 feet, but it is at 500 feet), and target deviation due to wind, drag, and imperfect aerodynamics, etc. Does hitting a target high up (higher potential energy/higher in the gravity well) affected by range? Hmm.... thinking about it, I don't think it would affect accuracy, but it definitely would affect maximum range (since max range is dependent upon energy). So, I guess (since I have now put more thought into this than I ever would while playing), I would use the simplest method for calculating if the target is in normal or long range (though hypotenuse would be most accurate). But, I would probably add horizontal distance plus positive vertical distance for max range. Meaning, a bow with a range of 150/600 feet would be at normal range for anything in 150 feet (true distance) in any direction. But, could only shoot 400 feet horizontal if the target was 200ft above the shooter. Or could shoot 800 feet horizontal if the target was 200ft below the shooter. Conservation of energy or calculation of a ballistic trajectory I'm sure would prove those guideline wrong. But hey, that's too much worry for realistic physics! [/QUOTE]

Verification