140 replies to this topic

[Havoc2]

MWO = MechWarrior Online.


MWO != TableTop Online.

[TheRulesLawyer]

}{avoc, on 20 December 2011 - 12:32 PM, said:

MWO = MechWarrior Online.


MWO != TableTop Online.

Mechwarrior = RPG based on the TT and Novels
Mechwarrior != Non canon, poorly executed video games

Edited by TheRulesLawyer, 20 December 2011 - 12:41 PM.

[Raeven]

How about this as another factor to weapon convergence.

So, I agree with everyone that Alpha strikes hitting the same location is an issue. Yet, I want PPA and not a Cone of Fire system. My idea is to combine them a bit. Use the convergence model when firing TIC'd weapons. Use PPA when firing weapons individually.

Also, to give 'Mechs with weapons in the weaker armored arms, give arm mounted weapons a speed advantage to converge on target quicker than torso mounted weapons.

[Omigir]

Perhaps Gaus should be near pin point, lasers should be point systems and MG as wellas ACs all have CoF or reticle bloom?

and missles are just splash <__< damn you missles for being so simple!

[Pht]

UncleKulikov, on 13 November 2011 - 11:28 AM, said:

The returns are preventing alpha strikes from being a common, spammable tactic without any significant penalty, while still allowing a properly timed and aimed alpha strike to be effective.

Implementing just the heat penalties would stop alpha spamming without having to go with COF's necessary crazy-making complexity of concept.

Quote

Wait, what would be your alternative? I'd like to know if there are good alternatives out there. One of them might be better, but since I haven't heard a coherent one yet, I'm sticking with Cone of Fire. But what would you suggest instead?

http://mwomercs.com/...different-idea/

[Zyllos]

IceSerpent, on 19 December 2011 - 09:01 AM, said:

...This is good in theory, but given the size of a mech and weapon range you won't be able to make it useful and look realistic at the same time. First, it would give an extra incentive to put all weapons into CT (thus decreasing the base). Second, a mech is roughly 10m tall - let's say (just to keep it simple) that it's also 10m wide. So, I have medium lasers in the arms (10m base, 270m range), set them to converge at max range (270m), and aim for CT of the target (3-4m wide, I guess). At what distance would they miss CT and hit RT+LT instead?...

I am not sure if anyone really answered this question. It is actually pretty simple to calculate, given a few assumptions:

Assuming a BattleMech A is 10m wide firing 2 Medium Lasers set to converge at 270m. The target, BattleMech B, is also 10m wide. Assuming a completely balanced construction of the firing A and the target B, A's Medium Lasers are 5m from the center and B's LA, LT, CT, RT, and RA are all 2m wide, giving a total 10m target.

First, calculate the hypotenuse: using Pythagorean's Therom, from mech A, 5m^2 + 270m^2 = c^2 -> c = 270.05m -or- the distance from each Medium Laser to the 270m convergence point.

Second, find the angle needed for each Medium Laser: using trigonometric functions, from mech A, sine(Theta) = 270m / 270.05m -> Theta = 1.552 radians or 88.92 degrees.

Third, if the Medium Laser is to hit the LT/RT from the CT, they will need to deviate 1m: cosine(1.552 radians) = 1m / y -> y = 53.21m.

So the target will need to be 270m + 53.21m = 323.21m away from mech A and aiming dead center to hit both the LT/RT on mech B based on these assumptions.

Now, if you apply the same logic on longer ranged weaponry, the deviation becomes much finer. This would mean the target can be closer/further away from the convergence point and still basically be hitting the same area.

After reviewing most of the ideas and some thoughts, honestly, I feel each weapon type does need to follow their own firing scheme:

Ballistic weaponry (like ACs and Gauss Rifles) should fire at the same spot with a small amount of spread, converging just like lasers but fall due to gravity. The falling speed is dependent on the TT distances. An AC/20 shot would fall much faster than an AC/2 shot but both travel at the same speed. Convergence can include incline/decline to help with arcs due to gravity.

Missile weaponry (like SRMS and LRMS) need to lock on and just naturally spread over the target. They need to lock on within their range but once fired, will attempt to follow the target until they hit. Normal missiles will only slowly correct themselves while Streak missiles will almost guarantee a hit due to huge in-flight corrections and increased speed.

Energy weaponry (lasers and PPCs) will always converge on their location and always fire at the same spot. Both Lasers and PPCs will basically travel instantaneously to their target. Lasers will fire beams that deal damage as they are hitting a target (DoT like) while PPCs will fire a single bolt. Lasers will deal significantly reduced damage outside the middle of the long range catageory. PPCs will deal significantly reduced damage not only outside the middle of long range but also within short range.

Heat will have huge negative impacts on a BattleMech. Heat will begin to slow down the mech. All movement, like torso turning/pitch and basic movement. Energy weaponry begin to deal significantly less damage across all ranges. Ballistic weaponry will scatter significantly more. Missile weaponry will malfunction on each missile, leading to jettison of each malfunctioned missile. Ammunition will have a small chance of exploding. High heat will cause cockpit to have a mirage effect. Critical heat will cause an automatic shutdown.

So, what I am stating here is that I believe a hybrid system with heat playing a major factor within the game is the best bet. I feel this would fix the boating/pin point accuracy issues because of heat while ballistics will require some degree of aiming and luck to land shots where you want them on a mech.

Edited by Zyllos, 23 December 2011 - 11:24 AM.

[Kyzar Kon]

IMO the UAC20 is going to need a CoF if it double shoots. I agree that I would rather see the small and medium lasers be more powerful as well.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

@Zylios AC's have ballistic trajectory calculated by the targeting computer, it's the more complex calculation of "lead" that needs human intervention when both mechs are moving. There is already a perfectly good basic system for dealing with the effects of heat, it just needs to be implemented and modified where necessary ie not working in 10 second slices but 0.1 or 0.01 sec slices (or less if feasible). Due to the high speeds and (relatively) short ranges involved Gauss rifles behave more like energy weapons. An AC20 does not drop more than an AC2, unless ballistics are totally different in BT. In general you can't apply RL ballistics to BT as it just doesn't work. After all the shots just fall to the ground at 1mm past their max range.

[Zyllos]

Sorry for an extremely late post (Christmas, who would have knew) but realisticly, yes, an AC20 should not drop anymore than an AC2 but how else do you create the short range? That right there almost makes ballistics different in BT.

Gauss Rifles still need travel time, just needs to be pretty quickly.

I use the maximum range as basically a way to create a cutoff point for normal fire. Short range ACs should drop faster, thus making them short range. Having the shell just disappear at max range is odd and I really can not think of another system to implement ACs and other ballistic weaponry. Energy weapons just disapating as they travel the long range section and reducing damage makes sense (defraction of the energy in the atmosphere) along with doing a beam instead of a "pulse" of energy. Missiles that do not fire while in short/long range is an extremely simple solution which does not seem to break any immersion.

I agree that heat already has a system in place and just needs to be implemented, the above ideas was the modifications needed as there is no way to apply +4 To Hit except by reducing the effectiveness of the weapon.

Edited by Zyllos, 27 December 2011 - 08:33 AM.

[guardiandashi]

Zyllos, on 27 December 2011 - 08:31 AM, said:

I agree that heat already has a system in place and just needs to be implemented, the above ideas was the modifications needed as there is no way to apply +4 To Hit except by reducing the effectiveness of the weapon.

it is ABSOLUTELY possible to apply a +4 penalty to accuracy at long range... by quite simply having the aimpoint being unreliable at that range. IE you have a scope with crosshairs on a modern rifle at ~100 meters of distance (or less) the bullet could be larger than the common deviation of the gun (IE pinpoint accuracy) at 500m the deviation of the bullet is 1/2 the diameter of the scopes sight picture, at 1000m the common deviation is larger than viewable area of the scope at that range for instance.

[Zyllos]

That is assuming ballistic weaponry, which I mentioned would be effected by heat through greater deviation, like you mentioned. But with directed energy weaponry, it does not make sense to have it deviate but instead lose its damage capabilities.

Basically, heat will effect each type of weapon differently because of the difference between types of weapons.

Ballistic - deviation
Energy - damage
Missile - firing

Edited by Zyllos, 27 December 2011 - 10:54 AM.

[Zyllos]

To continue on this, +To Hit modifiers should only be applied from a heat perspective as per above. Movement and other factors should not effect the weaponry.

[guardiandashi]

just because it is a "laser/energy weapon" does not AUTOMATICALLY mean it is perfectly accurate all the time to infinite range.

if the small lasers primary accurate range is only 10-30m its moderately accurate range is 31-60m and its margionally accurate range is 61-90 meters then this means that the weapon is likely to either have horrible range/coherance for the beam extreme tracking issues, or pitiful aiming charactoristics the point is that the weapon does basically the same damage from 1m to 90m it just has a real painful time hitting targets @ 90m

personally I suspect in part this could be represented as very poor sighting and fire control on the weapon mount ie the equivalant of using a come a long manual "winch" type device to adjust the elevation of an artillery piece rather than a more modern and precise adjustment method

and movement absolutely affect weapon targeting after all this is mechwarrior a game of simulated armored combat based on the future of the 1980's, where a civil war cannon has better range and targeting then most weapons in battletech

[Zyllos]

Ok, I think we are thinking and refering to different aspects.

On the TT, everything and anything that has the +To Hit modifier effects the overall accuracy of a weapon. But this can not directly be represented in a MW game as some +To Hit modifiers are defined and represended differently.

Take movement for example, on the TT, you and your target's movement effects the +To Hit. In MW, that is represented in the aspect of your control of aiming at a moving target.

Another angle is heat. In the TT, once again this is just an added +To Hit modifier. MW games in the past have not represented heat very well at all but should still be represented. This is done by effecting weaponry but weaponry has different aspects.

About the energy weapons not meaning perfectly accurate all the time to infinite range, technically, they are. A laser mounted into a hunk of steel will never scatter, even while moving. It will always land in the same location. Just the effectiveness changes as the condition of the weapon and environment changes (heat and distance to target, respectively).

Also, following the TT directly into MW presents issues like lasers disappearing at max range (and ballistics) or weapons with minimum range doing odd things like not being able to fire (an exception to this rule is Missiles as they need to lock-on).

Edited by Zyllos, 27 December 2011 - 12:36 PM.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

@Zylios "Sorry for an extremely late post (Christmas, who would have knew) but realisticly, yes, an AC20 should not drop anymore than an AC2 but how else do you create the short range? That right there almost makes ballistics different in BT" - this has been a sore point for many of us since the beginning. The AC20 actually weighs considerably more that the Civil War (American) Parrot or Whitworth rifled cannon which were accurate at about 3 miles from memory. All direct fire ballistic weapons have increased range/penetration/shell size with increased calibre. People will blather on vehemently about how energy weapons are always totally accurate and go apopletic if you suggest that damage should reduce over range due to fairly reasonable physics based arguement. Yet these same people are willing to accept that a 200mm cannon shell drops to the ground after less than 800m.

Quote

About the energy weapons not meaning perfectly accurate all the time to infinite range, technically, they are. A laser mounted into a hunk of steel will never scatter, even while moving. It will always land in the same location. Just the effectiveness changes as the condition of the weapon and environment changes (heat and distance to target, respectively).

Actually thermal shear caused by atmospheric temperature differentials (especially those caused by air overheated by the passage of energy weapons) will cause degradation of aim.
The trouble is applying RL logic/physics to BT causes all sorts of problems. This is a direct cause of the problems people perceive in porting the TT to PC, although many of these problems (and complaints) existed on the TT.
End of rant (for the moment)

[Zyllos]

Yes, I am trying, at least in my head if I was a dev, to create simple ideas for the issues of direct translation from TT to MW while trying to maintain the balance, realism, and game mechanics.

It absolutely does not make sense, realisticly, for the AC20 to be a short range weapon. But, to maintain game mechanics and balance, the weapon itself needs to be short. The same goes for energy weapons, it's realistic to have them lose no aim over their effective distance, but game mechanics and balance dictates we should apply heat penalities, distance issues, and beams to fix the past issues with lasers compared to ballistic weaponry.

I am extremely interested in how the devs will handle the convergence and characteristics of various types of weapons in the game. Hoping the devs see the idea of having a hybrid system for weapons.

[Seth]

The Devs touch on this subject in the Three Moves podcast.

[Zyllos]

So I heard. I will have to see when I get home.

[WerewolfX]

Late comer to the thread but, while at work and oddly thinking of this thread I came up with some concepts that have a BT flavor while making it unique.
You have your standard cross hair typical MW4 arrangement inside of it is 4 little dots your piloting a catapult. Underneath that cross hair is four little dots arrayed in the med laser pattern now as you move and such these bounce around a bit left and right like one of those office things with the metal balls. But, never outside the cross hair. Alternatively he higher your pilot or mech level preferably mech level the smaller the cross hair. This reticule would change based on armament and mech. Say an atlas had it's own arrangement based on weapons placement. Now then it would all be COF in this post so bear with me.
Anytime you put those cross hairs on target and the longer you held them there less bounce there would be or a tighter spread to it. An example I give is an Atlas firing to cover his lance in the streets. A catapult blunders out in front of him and he puts his cross hair onto the Mech the wobbling of the dot in the cross hair would begin to be less noticeable and his shots start hitting more reliably rather than spraying over the LL RA LT in that manner. The whole cross hair thing is that you have this big mech giving off EM radiation emissions and thermal imaging. It's like blindfolding someone and putting them in front of a Q-beam and telling them to open there eyes with it on and asking them to find the source of the light. Therefore when you have the cross hairs over your target and are actively tracking them your fire should be more accurate. Though that's with radar active mech both looking at each other you Mech compensates quicker and "Locks" for lack of a better word onto the target at a reasonable speed 1 to 2 secs say and you can fire at will anytime. Jumping will make you rattle and shake like crazy but, if you can keep your mech on target this will happen in the air as well.

But, WW COF is bad M'Kay?

Really? I don't much care for it either but, you dumb the game down to a WOT type deal (Which works for it and the tech at the time and makes for shooting in that game a accurate experience for a risk/reward system.) and you have a carbon copy. Carbon Copies only last for so long gain a small but, dedicated fan base and the game eventually dies as another casualty in gaming history. Mechwarrior has a pedigree and a rabid fan base that through intelligence and the biggest thickheadedness yet to be encountered in anyone I have yet met (This is a good thing) Can beat any fan boy down and have them weeping in the corner with tears. Now then




Missiles would have their own reticule. Something similar to the Chromehounds rocket reticule would work. then as you held that reticule onto the mech it would shrink in size accordingly with a full lock giving a tone and the reticule being smaller (covers the whole mech and nothing else at max range.) This I think is self explanatory.

Anyway in closing while you still have COF it can be adjusted based on mech experience and it will allow other areas than legs and CT of MW4 to get hit. Ergo increasing survivability without adjusting toughness and such.

Edited by WerewolfX, 31 December 2011 - 07:29 AM.

[Roninator2]

ok, first of all I hate forums. I don't have the time to read 7 pages of comments. Do the game developers even read this SH*T. Well I also hate forums because there is no order. Everyone can make a new topic and there can be 10,000,000,000 posts, without anything accomplished.
That said I have an issue with the weapons on the mech firing off the screen. legs straight, torso turned 140 degrees and your arms are turned 180 degrees. so you fire off the screen. I don't like that at all. It does not make sense to me one little bit. unless you give me two mice as one person suggested. which would be horrible to control everything else on the mech. I would have to have two joysticks and foot pedals to play the game. cringe at the thought, yes it would be awesome but I might as well make a battlemech cockpit and play from there.