74 replies to this topic

[Targetloc]

I've heard of few games that have variable spread for different weapons. Gunnery modifiers per weapon, with +2 to hit if you're running or +1 if you're walking.

I think they were called Counter-Strike... Battlefield... and Call of Something. But I guess they were never really popular because weapons aren't 100% accurate unless you stand still or crouch.

[Ralgas]

Just called this out in another thread so i'll ask here too, find me an example that has 5-10 firing points on the shooter with a variety of wep types that has convergence of said weps and does it. (ie works like your post for an alpha strike)

[Targetloc]

Ralgas, on 11 March 2013 - 11:28 PM, said:

Just called this out in another thread so i'll ask here too, find me an example that has 5-10 firing points on the shooter with a variety of wep types that has convergence of said weps and does it. (ie works like your post for an alpha strike)

How about any of a half-dozen WWII fighter sims, particularly if they include the P-38?

I suppose you're insisting on 5-10 firing points so you can discount the dozens of examples of games that allow you to dual wield two different weapons with entirely different projectile and accuracy mechanics while still nominally converging on reticle.

If your point is that it's difficult to implement programmatically... it's not.

If your point is that it would be too hard for players to figure out where their shots are going to go... not really. It will be within a few degrees of where the 'ideal' convergence would be. Most players are already intimately familiar with the concept of cones of fire from BF, CoD or WoT.


The much less trivial problem is trying to reconcile armor values and weapon stats that were based around assumptions like a large laser being noticeably more accurate than a medium laser at 210 meters or an Ultra AC20s second shot having a significantly lower chance of hitting the target. Or the AC20 vs 4 medium lasers...

[Noth]

Targetloc, on 12 March 2013 - 01:25 AM, said:

If your point is that it would be too hard for players to figure out where their shots are going to go... not really. It will be within a few degrees of where the 'ideal' convergence would be. Most players are already intimately familiar with the concept of cones of fire from BF, CoD or WoT.

BF and CoD only really have the shots fly not where you want them when firing full auto (hence why they fire in bursts) and you can pretty much place your shots wherever you want. Cone of fire doesn't come into play much at all for a good player. The only weapon that even remotely comes close to this in this game is machine guns and they spray damage everywhere. WoT is a horrid example of cone of fire as it relies almost purely on luck. You can be the best player have the best aim, line up the perfect shot and repeatedly miss or bounce just because of the rng. It actually removes player skill from the game.

Edited by Noth, 12 March 2013 - 01:52 AM.

[Schrottfrosch]

NO PLEASE GO AWAY!

I do not want randomizer on where my shots are going!

I remember a video of a tank destroyer in WoT (big gun - huge damage, SLOW reload) shooting at a target, that filled his reticule of probability with 98% at point blank range - guess where the shot went....

If you want to play pure luck games, why dont you go play poker online or something - or maybe go play your WoT or battlefield or whatever, but DO NOT try to dumb down MWO!

Edited by Schrottfrosch, 12 March 2013 - 03:14 AM.

[Ralgas]

Targetloc, on 12 March 2013 - 01:25 AM, said:

How about any of a half-dozen WWII fighter sims, particularly if they include the P-38?

I suppose you're insisting on 5-10 firing points so you can discount the dozens of examples of games that allow you to dual wield two different weapons with entirely different projectile and accuracy mechanics while still nominally converging on reticle.

given even a raven/commando carries 5 hardpoints, yes.
As for the ww2 sims, that where the various weapon types come into effect, what is a small deviation for a las could mean a 50% + miss for an srm/lbx.

and 2 weapon types doesn't cut what would be possible, given a atlas for example could throw up to 4 (ppc/ballistic, srm, dumbfire lrm and las).

I'm only pushing this point because i haven't seen it occur elsewhere, and certainly not in another mechwarrior title

[Fooooo]

I think you will find these "WW2" sims etc dont use a +1 to acc when not moving etc like you are asking for.


They use, generally, as close to real ballistics trajectorys as they can. Taking into account windage is generally only done for serious sniper games.

They try to use real things or at least as close as they can go, not a simple modifier to "represent" something physical......like wind effecting a bullet etc, they don't say, ok +5 for wind on firing because you are in this spot with high wind which is going to make you miss. No.

IL-2 for example does not use wind to effect bullets fired, it doesn't use wind for flying either afaik, its just way too much to calculate and would slow the game to a crawl on all but the most expensive super-computers etc.

Yes there is "spread" in the bullets fired from all of the planes in il2, only the nose cannons have less noticable spread, however aim is still paramount because the spread is not some silly +5 modifier etc.

A good pilot in il2 will wipe the floor with any player who cannot aim even if that player had all height in the world. He will dodge, make you waste your energy, come on your tail and blast you in 1 shot.

There is no +5 or -5 to aim because im pulling more than 2 g's etc, that would make il-2 a farce imo.

I do agree that weapons on the torso imo shoudl not converge. IE they should fire dead straight from their location. This would basically let people stagger fire to hit all the same location (adjusting aim for LT then RT etc), or alpha to spead it all. etc etc.

[FromHell2k]

Targetloc, on 11 March 2013 - 11:06 PM, said:

I've heard of few games that have variable spread for different weapons. Gunnery modifiers per weapon, with +2 to hit if you're running or +1 if you're walking.

I think they were called Counter-Strike... Battlefield... and Call of Something. But I guess they were never really popular because weapons aren't 100% accurate unless you stand still or crouch.

-11/10

CS, BF, CoKiddi.. One thing why it doesn't matter in MWO... You're not a human that has to handle the weight of a gun, you're a big stompy robot with infinite power.. So, no modifiers needed, only skill to hit a target.

[AndyHill]

Pinpoint alphas are the biggest balancing problem when translating a tabletop dice throwing game to real-time, but I think the OP's solution is not the correct one. Pinpoint might be ok if something is done about alphas and that's what I'd rather see. Instead of stuff like coolant flush that makes the problem worse.

Free tip to anyone concerned about game balancing: the clans are coming and with them they bring immense firepower and boating on a magnitude only dreamed of by A1 pilots so far.

[Karl Streiger]

FromHell2k, on 12 March 2013 - 04:01 AM, said:

-11/10

CS, BF, CoKiddi.. One thing why it doesn't matter in MWO... You're not a human that has to handle the weight of a gun, you're a big stompy robot with infinite power.. So, no modifiers needed, only skill to hit a target.

Affraid that your PPC Stalker becomes worhtless?
I support the TS

Skill? What do you think what aim your weapons towards a target? Your skill? Or is it targeting and tracking system.
Is it your skill? or dozen of systems that have to use 100% to allow the actual system.

Well at least the Atlas have this feature... fast fire on a target at ranges below 200m and you can be sure that your 3 weapons in 3 different locations may hit 3 different zones of the target. It is fair - i'm used to this "feature" - more fun than point and klick

[FromHell2k]

AndyHill, on 12 March 2013 - 04:27 AM, said:

Pinpoint alphas are the biggest balancing problem when translating a tabletop dice throwing game to real-time, but I think the OP's solution is not the correct one. Pinpoint might be ok if something is done about alphas and that's what I'd rather see. Instead of stuff like coolant flush that makes the problem worse.

Free tip to anyone concerned about game balancing: the clans are coming and with them they bring immense firepower and boating on a magnitude only dreamed of by A1 pilots so far.

IF they bring Clantech. Clantech shouldn't be available... Why would you use IS-Tech if there was Clantech? Clanmechs=Okay. Clantech=Nope, not at this point.

[Adridos]

Schrottfrosch, on 12 March 2013 - 03:13 AM, said:

If you want to play pure luck games, why dont you go play poker online or something - or maybe go play your WoT or battlefield or whatever, but DO NOT try to dumb down MWO!

He's not trying to dumb it down.

I mean, if all weapons fired from their respective places without that damn convergence, it wouldn't add a single bit of randomisation and would only rightfully screw over the CoD level of challenge builds like splatcat.

[FromHell2k]

Karl Streiger, on 12 March 2013 - 04:32 AM, said:

Affraid that your PPC Stalker becomes worhtless?
I support the TS

Skill? What do you think what aim your weapons towards a target? Your skill? Or is it targeting and tracking system.
Is it your skill? or dozen of systems that have to use 100% to allow the actual system.

Well at least the Atlas have this feature... fast fire on a target at ranges below 200m and you can be sure that your 3 weapons in 3 different locations may hit 3 different zones of the target. It is fair - i'm used to this "feature" - more fun than point and klick

Even if this would kill my lovely PPC-Boat, my Spider can kill 'whiners' . That's however isn't the point. There's still no real reason why weapons should get a random modifier that affects your aiming.

Edited by FromHell2k, 12 March 2013 - 04:38 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

FromHell2k, on 12 March 2013 - 04:37 AM, said:

Even if this would kill my lovely PPC-Boat, my Spider can kill 'whiners' . That's however isn't the point. There's still no real reason why weapons should get a random modifier that affects your aiming.

Random? No not really. Just fix the actual pinpoint system. For example the Stalker...you have a single energy weapon in the torso...upper side...and two energy weapons upper side in the arms.
Both two energyweapons may hit the same spot. But the torso weapon will hit a target at least 1m more to the side and lower.

So when you want to hit the same target location fire the arm lasers first, correct the aim and trigger the torso weapon. That is exactly how i do it with the Atlas when fighting targets below 200m. Fire left arm...correct aim, fire right arm, correct aim fire gauss.....above 200 or 300m i just fire them at the same time...from time to time both ppcs hit on target location and the gauss another but well that is just acceptable.

[FromHell2k]

Karl Streiger, on 12 March 2013 - 04:48 AM, said:

Random? No not really. Just fix the actual pinpoint system. For example the Stalker...you have a single energy weapon in the torso...upper side...and two energy weapons upper side in the arms.
Both two energyweapons may hit the same spot. But the torso weapon will hit a target at least 1m more to the side and lower.

So when you want to hit the same target location fire the arm lasers first, correct the aim and trigger the torso weapon. That is exactly how i do it with the Atlas when fighting targets below 200m. Fire left arm...correct aim, fire right arm, correct aim fire gauss.....above 200 or 300m i just fire them at the same time...from time to time both ppcs hit on target location and the gauss another but well that is just acceptable.

I don't know which Atlas you're actually piloting, but my Atlai hit their targets where I want them to hit..

Edited by FromHell2k, 12 March 2013 - 04:56 AM.

[Zyllos]

More evidence that weapon convergence is an issue.

As long as we continue to have the same weapon convergence as MechWarrior goes of old (seperating arms from torsos does not do enough to split weapon convergence), we are going to have the same old flaws being repeated.

Assault mechs will only ever have torso sections be knocked out because weapons do not spread their damage. This is why the Raven feels so strong in taking hits compared to Assaults because that weapon fire is easily spread across a fast moving, small target while Assault mechs are just giant CT or LT/RT walking around.

[Karl Streiger]

Zyllos, on 12 March 2013 - 05:28 AM, said:

Assault mechs will only ever have torso sections be knocked out because weapons do not spread their damage. This is why the Raven feels so strong in taking hits compared to Assaults because that weapon fire is easily spread across a fast moving, small target while Assault mechs are just giant CT or LT/RT walking around.

I allready startet to lower armor at arms and legs of my atlas because nearly everybody goes for the side torso.

[Cyke]

The whole convergence issue is interesting.
If we realistically cause torso-mounted weapon hardpoints to fire on their actual bore axis, that means that beams from two torso energy hardpoints that are, say, 5 meters apart (broad-chested hypothetical 'Mech) would always travel in parallel, 5 meters apart, right?

Just pointing out (this is also discussed on another thread in Game Balance), if torso-mounted weapons were really boresighted to fire forward from the axis of their actual mounting, this would mean that even the walking and running of a 'Mech with cause them to move/tilt up and down slightly, in rhythm with a 'Mech's gait.

This is by no means "random". The weapon axis will be fixed relative to the torso, and instability due the 'Mech's walking/running gait is rhythmic, so it can be compensated for (for those who like to bandy about the word "skill").
The "skill" crowd should be made aware that the game currently automatically aims torso guns toward a convergence point for you, and also automatically compensates for a 'Mech's walking movement, so the "skill" players should support this, I guess? It'll certainly be very confusing at first, and will take a lot of getting used to, but nobody (and I mean nobody) can claim that it'll be "random", or "removes player skill" as a factor!

As an added bonus, the TT crowd should be happy that walking/running will make it harder to land pinpoint shots because of the cyclic rhythmic movement of the torso hardpoints when a 'Mech runs.


I'm just not sure if it'll alienate new players to the game, though. This is always the number one consideration, I would think.

Edited by Cyke, 12 March 2013 - 06:00 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Targetloc, on 12 March 2013 - 01:25 AM, said:

The much less trivial problem is trying to reconcile armor values and weapon stats that were based around assumptions like a large laser being noticeably more accurate than a medium laser at 210 meters or an Ultra AC20s second shot having a significantly lower chance of hitting the target. Or the AC20 vs 4 medium lasers...

Or that the armour distrubtion was based on the random hit location table, and doesn't necessarily make sense when people can manually aim for a hit location (without any dedicated equipment and insane skill bonuses)

[AndyHill]

FromHell2k, on 12 March 2013 - 04:34 AM, said:

IF they bring Clantech. Clantech shouldn't be available... Why would you use IS-Tech if there was Clantech? Clanmechs=Okay. Clantech=Nope, not at this point.

MWO already has issues with boating with fairly few boatable designs around. The clans' weapons, heat sinks etc. are just better and in clan language "omni" means "boat", so any issues we have now due to the main design approaches will be many times worse with the clans in play.