567 replies to this topic

[3rdworld]

Matthew Craig, on 08 March 2013 - 09:06 AM, said:

Bear in mind in the screenshots I'm not zoomed in, zoomed in you should be able to make that shot and advanced zoom will eventually help even more. The goal is not to allow you to snipe all the way across a map though, otherwise what is the point of the larger maps, again if we went for full real world accuracy most Mech engagements even using 20th century technology would begin with some incredibly rapid target detection (throw up a UAV and spot everyone instantly) followed by launching a barrage of devastating nuke like attacks that mean the match is over in about 30 seconds and nothing but scorched earth is left behind. Cool to watch but not necessarily fun to play long term

Could you take a screen zoomed in?

[Jacmac]

Erwiin, on 08 March 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

Night vision is nearly there. Type "army night vision" into Google images for a better idea how night vision really works. You'll notice that the sky is a lot brighter and that shadows seem to be more defined.

Thermal vision looks fairly good.

Magscan should be interesting whenever it is implemented.

You left an important piece out of your google search. It should say search "army night vision year 3050" to get a better idea of what night and thermal vision will be like with year 3000 technology. Who cares what it looks like today? Why would anyone want PGI to roll back the technology to the year 2000?

[wolfmanjake]

This looks like a good direction for vision modes. Heat vision definitely needed a nerf and sniping needed to be more of a normal vision thing. This also makes the camo you chose actually matter.

[Matthew Craig]

Also thanks to everyone for your feedback, enjoying reading all your ideas

[Araara]

Matthew Craig, on 08 March 2013 - 09:12 AM, said:

With respect to the Mechs heat signature that Jenner is at idle heat, I'll try and post some more shots but trust me he glows up bright when close to overheating.

With regards to blurriness for thermal, as I've mentioned if someone has good feedback on how to degrade functionality of thermal at a distance in a different way that looks more realistic/cool we're open to it.

The toggle to invert white-black we'll discuss internally.

Who said you need to decrease effectiveness at range?

Just use another kind of countermeasure for line of sight like smoke canisters (dropped via artillery strikes, airstrike, etc.) to give cover from snipers and allow a group or several mechs to advance. Of course, like your consumable airstrikes/artillery, it wouldn't be spammable so precise smoke covering would be essential against sniper.

Would also allow more depth to the game as it opens nice decoy/flanking/countermeasure strategies and people would have to play with their loadouts.

That way, snipers can still have their long range roles and brawlers can still have their brawling roles. It becomes what mechwarrior online should be : a shooter for thinkers.


That would be my suggestion and I'm sure many people and and mechwarrior groups will like the idea of having more depth to strategy and loadouts since it would force people out of some boating builds.

[JudgeDeathCZ]

StalaggtIKE, on 07 March 2013 - 07:39 PM, said:

Looks great! My only concern is, how will this coincide with the current implementation of ECM. Currently, thermal was the only way to see a group under ECM bubble. Will this result in more successful base rushes? Also, in the River City picture, I can vaguely tell that's a Jenner, so when IFF is disabled through ECM, there will be further confusion.

QFT.
Now it will be even harder to spot ecm fastmovers...not talking that ecm have infinite range but my vision have only 800m range...and with BAP+sensor module my sponsors have over 1000m range and my heat vision only 800m.That make no sense for me...

[Taizan]

Finally a cure to the "Blues". Night vision looks excellent and thermal vision looks much more like what you get through modern (passive infrared) thermal combat optics.

[Thedrelle]

awesome, I love it.

[jay35]

Matthew Craig, on 08 March 2013 - 09:00 AM, said:

Correct there's actually currently a bug with Mechs draw distance in normal vision that is also being fixed as we speak and will probably be in either the 19th patch or if not April 2nd to address that. So normal vision is your option for long range sniping.

So no long range gameplay allowed on night time or visibility reduced (fog, storm) maps, then? Because that's the primary outcome of the proposed changes. You haven't directly addressed my assessments of the changes unless i missed a post, so it's unclear if you're actively sidestepping or simply missing the point.

No one's asking for super thermal vision that allows players unlimited vision ability.

What we're pointing out is that an artificial nerf that limits engagement ranges to within 700m, given the limitations of the random map system, will mean long-range builds are no longer viable on roughly half of the maps (night time and inclement weather maps), because on those maps we will no longer be able to engage beyond 700m except in rare circumstances and then only with LRMs aimed at red squares on the screen because we can't actually see the enemy.

This in turn means that anyone who wants to play a long-range Ballistic or Energy build, so long as we're stuck within the constraint of random maps, will hurt their own ability to compete and their team's ability to win, anytime a map comes up that is a night-time or inclement weather map. ELO and matchmaking can't account for bringing the wrong mech for the job, and you haven't given the players the ability to select the right one.

Given these changes, the only way to ensure your build will work no matter which map you drop into, is to take a "safe" build, and you've just further reduced the range of "safe" builds by hurting long-range builds on any night or weather map. This is further reducing the diversity of builds we'll see fielded in actual matches.

That's preposterous gameplay design and it's another step in that direction, the first of which was introducing larger maps without the ability for the user to filter for or against them, which initiated the same problem though to a lesser degree.

The solution is, of course, to get rid of the silly random map concept so players can select an appropriate build for the map they will be dropping into.

Edited by jay35, 08 March 2013 - 10:03 AM.

[Accursed Richards]

Really happy to see this coming around.

(edit) And to everyone moaning about how modern tech can see this blah blash, see the sig and think of the cat girls.

Edited by Accursed Richards, 08 March 2013 - 10:04 AM.

[Dennis de Koning]

BlueSanta, on 07 March 2013 - 08:35 PM, said:

Why is PGI not more honest with us when it comes to what is in development? In at least two Ask the Devs, questions were fielded concerning nightvision and if any improvements were being worked on. We were initially told no, then maybe after we complained enough. Why can't you just TELL US when you're working to improve something that we're unhappy with? This nightvision improvement is much better, and the thermal may be too. Thank you, but I don't understand why everything is a well-kept secret until it's released.

Nobody is keeping anything from anybody.
If we're not working on something, it's because there is no bandwidth at that time to dedicate to that specific detail. If it works but needs improvement, then other tasks of higher priority must be addressed.
Matt found a small window in his otherwise crazy list of to-do's, and took advantage of it.
Believe me, we hear EVERYTHING you guys say and are in constant debate on how, when and to what degree they should be addressed.
MWO will never be on a shelf in shrink wrap; it will always be in a constant state of flux and we all are bent on making it better and better every day.

[Damien]

Thermal: Of, relating to, using, producing, or caused by heat.
Vision: 1.Something that is or has been seen. 2. The manner in which one sees or conceives of something.

If with our technology now, we can accomplish this: http://www.imaging1....mal%20image.gif
Then why in the year 3050 is thermal vision so bad?

If you do leave it as posted, please rename it to PGI vision.

[JudgeDeathCZ]

Also guys think about this: I had no use to any other vision mode than normal one until MWOECM came out...Where should be a mistake?

[BlueSanta]

You kept coolant from us. Garth told us in Ask the Devs 18 that the coolant pod idea was dead, which we assumed to mean that the whole idea of coolant would not be making an appearance. But oops, look now. We're having coolant forced upon us when 2/3 of the community doesn't want it, and the 1/3 that do prefer the coolant pod idea as opposed to a module. So don't feed me that company line. You're also implementing airstrikes and artillery strikes as modules when 90% of the community wants them to require the Command Console equipped in your mech, too.

[Tarman]

Dennis de Koning, on 08 March 2013 - 10:01 AM, said:

Nobody is keeping anything from anybody.
If we're not working on something, it's because there is no bandwidth at that time to dedicate to that specific detail. If it works but needs improvement, then other tasks of higher priority must be addressed.
Matt found a small window in his otherwise crazy list of to-do's, and took advantage of it.
Believe me, we hear EVERYTHING you guys say and are in constant debate on how, when and to what degree they should be addressed.
MWO will never be on a shelf in shrink wrap; it will always be in a constant state of flux and we all are bent on making it better and better every day.

PGI, thanks again. This is the kind of feedback most of us (barring some folks >___> ) want to hear; this thread for sure, and this post in particular. I think beyond any specific details, just jumping into a thread and seeing a few skull icons in the list is a big big help. It keeps the community from its own devices. You should know by now we are not to be trusted with rampant speculation.

Your thought processes and design concepts are as important to us as to you. Many folks have been waiting for a re-tool of this IP since forever and we want you guys to succeed not only for us, but for you.

For vision modes specifically, this is great news. These vision modes have needed some TLC for a while now. The new tweaks look much nicer at first pass than Colourblob Mode and Green Shiny Blindness Mode.

Again, major bonus points for comms, guys. This is the way to do it.

[Blackie Flawless]

Can we get visual range raised so we don't have to suspend belief when playing on the larger maps?

[Noth]

Blackie Flawless, on 08 March 2013 - 10:18 AM, said:

Can we get visual range raised so we don't have to suspend belief when playing on the larger maps?

Use the normal view mode. I believe the max view distance with the proper settings is something like 2000 meters. As they said, the view modes are for long range sniping. They will be adding things for that.

[Almeras]

Matthew Craig, on 08 March 2013 - 08:53 AM, said:

As mentioned I don't disagree Scipio but we didn't want thermal to have unlimited range this falls in the gameplay category of considerations. If anyone has better ideas of how to reduce it's effectiveness rapidly after a certain distance while keeping it more realistic looking I'm all ears.

Strobing. Just as a sparkler leaves a trail a mech should leave a 'wash' of heat behind/around it which becomes more obstructive the further away a target is.

[Seanamal]

BlueSanta, on 08 March 2013 - 10:13 AM, said:

You kept coolant from us. Garth told us in Ask the Devs 18 that the coolant pod idea was dead, which we assumed to mean that the whole idea of coolant would not be making an appearance. But oops, look now. We're having coolant forced upon us when 2/3 of the community doesn't want it, and the 1/3 that do prefer the coolant pod idea as opposed to a module. So don't feed me that company line. You're also implementing airstrikes and artillery strikes as modules when 90% of the community wants them to require the Command Console equipped in your mech, too.

Look. How about you try something first before you decide it's broken. If I see the consumables are unbalancing the game I'll rant about it. But until I get to see it's actual impact on gameplay firsthand that sort of criticism is premature. The same with the proposed changes to the vision modes. I see positives in this already because I can't tell you the number of times I've started on the water side of forest colony and started to receive sniper fire 15 seconds into the match from some gauss sniper on the other side of the map targeting my heat signature.
But maybe once I play with it I won't like it. The point is give it a chance to succeed or fail FIRST. Then criticize it.

[Skyscream Sapphire]

StalaggtIKE, on 07 March 2013 - 07:39 PM, said:

Looks great! My only concern is, how will this coincide with the current implementation of ECM. Currently, thermal was the only way to see a group under ECM bubble. Will this result in more successful base rushes? Also, in the River City picture, I can vaguely tell that's a Jenner, so when IFF is disabled through ECM, there will be further confusion.

^This. Thermal does need a serious nerf, probably even more of a one than this proposal, considering I probably spend 90%+ of combat in it. As others have already said, let me see the pretty graphics without hampering my effectiveness!

However, nothing substantial has been done to curb the extremely overpowered 1.5 ton module known as ECM and a nerf of thermal is going to exacerbate this.