44 replies to this topic

[Frostiken]

The only thing I've seen in the videos that's bothered me to some degree has been the uber-stable reticule. In just about every Mechwarrior game I can remember, stomping around did have small effects on your reticule by causing it to jump around.

In fact, in-game, it appears that the only thing walking affects is the geometry of your cockpit bouncing around - everything else is perfectly stable, including your own POV, resulting in an unnatural, almost disorienting effect where the scenery around you is perfectly smooth and you're floating across terrain, but your cockpit is rocking back and forth.

Applying reticule bounce and sway depending on your movement speed is not only TT-compliant, but it's simply a tradeoff you have to make. In MWLL, I constantly have to slam on the brakes to make long-range shots, when in MWO, from all the videos I've seen, you can keep moving with no problem at all.

Please reevaluate this oversight :/

[Divine Retribution]

I like the idea of some shake coupled with rocking when hit. The shake prevents the overuse of 100% accurate weapons and makes high speed run-and-gun tactics more difficult. Any slight inaccuracy of ballistics becomes less of an issue when compared to energy weapons.

[Frostiken]

Well that's the funny thing - when you get hit in-game, your aim gets knocked all over the place. Weird that they went so overboard with that, but stomping around on uneven terrain produces no noticeable effects at all.

Edited by Frostiken, 09 June 2012 - 04:52 PM.

[Dragon Lady]

I'm also hoping from some reticule fading in and out due to the effects of heat buildup, to replicate the effects of heat in the Table Top games. The risk of shutdown should not be the only effect of overheating your 'Mech.

[RaptorSix]

I know gamers who have vomited due to the screen shaking excessively for long periods of time.

[Divine Retribution]

I imagine that stabilizers were developed to counter most shake during normal movement. The more difficult the terrain the more a reticle should shake. Also changing the weight distribution of a stock mech should affect the shake, as the stabilizer system would be designed for stock and specific variants.

[Pht]

Frostiken, on 09 June 2012 - 04:43 PM, said:

The only thing I've seen in the videos that's bothered me to some degree has been the uber-stable reticule. In just about every Mechwarrior game I can remember, stomping around did have small effects on your reticule by causing it to jump around.

In fact, in-game, it appears that the only thing walking affects is the geometry of your cockpit bouncing around - everything else is perfectly stable, including your own POV, resulting in an unnatural, almost disorienting effect where the scenery around you is perfectly smooth and you're floating across terrain, but your cockpit is rocking back and forth.

Which is exactly as it should be.

The reticule does not indicate where the weapons are actually physically pointed at. The reticule indicates to the 'mech's computer where the mech should aim it's weapons at; that is it's main (and pretty much ONLY) job. The reticule does not and should not dance around; that is exactly the opposite of the job of an "ideal aimpoint indicator," which is exactly what the reticule is.

The only thing the reticule should move in response to is manipulation of the cockpit joystick by the MechWarrior.

Edited by Pht, 09 June 2012 - 05:00 PM.

[Frostiken]

RaptorSix, on 09 June 2012 - 04:55 PM, said:

I know gamers who have vomited due to the screen shaking excessively for long periods of time.

And? Reticule shake shouldn't bother them, and if it does, well, I won't have game balance affected because some cheapass with broken vestibular centers in his brain can't spring for a carton of Dramamine. That's his personal problem, not mine.

Pht, on 09 June 2012 - 04:59 PM, said:

The reticule does not indicate where the weapons are actually physically pointed at. The reticule indicates to the 'mech's computer where the mech should aim it's weapons at; that is it's main (and pretty much ONLY) job. The reticule does not and should not dance around; that is exactly the opposite of the job of an "ideal aimpoint indicator," which is exactly what the reticule is.

Thanks for the lesson on semantics there, but it's pretty clear from the videos that there still isn't any deviation in aim from moving.

Edited by Frostiken, 09 June 2012 - 05:02 PM.

[Pht]

Frostiken, on 09 June 2012 - 04:59 PM, said:

Thanks for the lesson on semantics...

There's nothing wrong with semantics...

Quote

Semantics (from Greek: sēmantiká, neuter plural of sēmantikós)^[1][2] is the study of meaning. It focuses on the relation between signifiers, such as words, phrases, signs and symbols, and what they stand for, their denotata.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics

... and everything wrong with thinking that inquiring into the meanings of things is a waste of time.

Quote

...there, but it's pretty clear from the videos that there still isn't any deviation in aim from moving.

If you mean, deviation in the placement of the reticule on the hud because of anything other than the Mechwarrior moving the joystick...

that's the way it's supposed to be.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Divine Retribution, on 09 June 2012 - 04:50 PM, said:

I like the idea of some shake coupled with rocking when hit. The shake prevents the overuse of 100% accurate weapons and makes high speed run-and-gun tactics more difficult. Any slight inaccuracy of ballistics becomes less of an issue when compared to energy weapons.

theyve said there isnt 100% accuracy because of a whole number of things. weapon angle, torso turn speed, all kinds of stuff look in the
Q&As

[Strisk]

I agree with Pht, he put it into as good of words as I can come up with, the A/C fire in the video doesn't seem to be right on reticule every shot when I watch it, I think the result you see in the video is from someone with a lot of game time in that mech/variant who is able to control the shot positioning well enough on fairly easy targets to make the video look interesting.

A lot of what you said could make sense, but there is no way to know for sure without actually playing the game, which none of us have.

[Divine Retribution]

514yer, on 09 June 2012 - 05:13 PM, said:

theyve said there isnt 100% accuracy because of a whole number of things. weapon angle, torso turn speed, all kinds of stuff look in the
Q&As

I chose to pay attention to the in-game footage we've been provided more than the Q&As. Torso-mounted lasers shoot straight forward, with torso speed affecting whether the lasers will hit or not (separate torso & arm targeting). I don't recall a video where arm-mounted lasers hit anything other than the center of the reticle. Video of firing combo of torso and arm lasers showed torso lasers shooting straight forward, unable to track the target flanking the shooter. Arm lasers still tracked the reticle perfectly. Ammunition-based weapons are the only weapons not 100% accurate from the footage so far.

[Frostiken]

514yer, on 09 June 2012 - 05:13 PM, said:

theyve said there isnt 100% accuracy because of a whole number of things. weapon angle, torso turn speed, all kinds of stuff look in the
Q&As

I'd believe that, but I honestly have yet to see any lasers in any of the footage do much besides hit exactly where the reticule is pointed. And lasers are one of the most abusable weapons when it comes to accuracy.

Pht, on 09 June 2012 - 05:09 PM, said:

If you mean, deviation in the placement of the reticule on the hud because of anything other than the Mechwarrior moving the joystick...

No, I mean deviation in where the weaponfire is going. How are you not getting this? Every video with lasers (which are easiest to see deviation with) shows these mechs stomping all over the place and lasers are going exactly where the reticule says.

I think you need to see a doctor about whatever condition you have.

Edited by Frostiken, 09 June 2012 - 05:36 PM.

[GrizzlyViking]

Frostiken, on 09 June 2012 - 04:43 PM, said:

The only thing I've seen in the videos that's bothered me to some degree has been the uber-stable reticule. In just about every Mechwarrior game I can remember, stomping around did have small effects on your reticule by causing it to jump around.

In fact, in-game, it appears that the only thing walking affects is the geometry of your cockpit bouncing around - everything else is perfectly stable, including your own POV, resulting in an unnatural, almost disorienting effect where the scenery around you is perfectly smooth and you're floating across terrain, but your cockpit is rocking back and forth.

Applying reticule bounce and sway depending on your movement speed is not only TT-compliant, but it's simply a tradeoff you have to make. In MWLL, I constantly have to slam on the brakes to make long-range shots, when in MWO, from all the videos I've seen, you can keep moving with no problem at all.

Please reevaluate this oversight :/

Interesting observation. I remember in MW4 one of the tactics we used to use was to arm a Mech with several pulse lasers that could be fired individually and successively without overheating. The purpose of this was to have a continual fire that knocked the enemy off target. It could be highly effective depending on the map and the armament of the enemy.

[Randalf Yorgen]

Pht, on 09 June 2012 - 04:59 PM, said:

Which is exactly as it should be.

The reticule does not indicate where the weapons are actually physically pointed at. The reticule indicates to the 'mech's computer where the mech should aim it's weapons at; that is it's main (and pretty much ONLY) job. The reticule does not and should not dance around; that is exactly the opposite of the job of an "ideal aimpoint indicator," which is exactly what the reticule is.

The only thing the reticule should move in response to is manipulation of the cockpit joystick by the MechWarrior.

You sir are refering to a Targeting Computer which is a component that can be added to your mech, I think it weighs about 1.5 tons, and it could well do what you have said. However a Mech without a TC to track and lead the selected targets would have to compensate for the movement that the OP has asked about. The reticule will show you where your weapons are pointing and if the body of the mech is shifting and shaking then their should be some amount of bounce in the reticule as the weapons, that are attached to the body and arms and legs and shoulders of the mech will be moving along with it and the pilot will have to compensate for it.

[Team Leader]

I also think its weird that the reticle and computers are so stable, but the windows and things move around with each step. It doesnt seem right. And Pht, even if the computer only read input from the pilot, the mech walking would provide enough jostling to move the pilot, and therefore their hands on the joystick, enough to make it jerk around slightly with each step. So even with the most advanced computers, user imput would move the reticle as the vehicle moved.

[Randalf Yorgen]

GrizzlyViking, on 09 June 2012 - 05:37 PM, said:

Interesting observation. I remember in MW4 one of the tactics we used to use was to arm a Mech with several pulse lasers that could be fired individually and successively without overheating. The purpose of this was to have a continual fire that knocked the enemy off target. It could be highly effective depending on the map and the armament of the enemy.

several LRM 5's linked in chain fire could achieve the same result, you are just dependant on ammo but you get a lot more range to play with. If your sole jobe is to keep the target bouncing then I might suggest looking into the AC/2. you can set up outside of LRM range and keep popping the target until the cows come home.

[Pht]

Frostiken, on 09 June 2012 - 05:32 PM, said:

No, I mean deviation in where the weaponfire is going. How are you not getting this?

Most likely because I didn't read the entire thread and you didn't indicate what you're saying here in the post I replied to.

Quote

Every video with lasers (which are easiest to see deviation with) shows these mechs stomping all over the place and lasers are going exactly where the reticule says.

I already knew this.

It seems they apparently haven't done a proper simulation of the ability of the 'mech to handle and aim each of it's weapons.

Shame, really.

Randalf Yorgen, on 09 June 2012 - 05:40 PM, said:

You sir are refering to a Targeting Computer which is a component that can be added to your mech,

No, I am not. Every battlemech already has a built-in targeting computer; the extra hardware you're making reference to is a piece of hardware that is far more advanced than what is built into 'mechs normally.

http://www.sarna.net...Tracking_system

Quote

However a Mech without a TC to track and lead the selected targets would have to compensate for the movement that the OP has asked about.

'Mechs don't track targets with their weapons systems. They're specifically built and programmed so that they can't. It's the job of the 'mechwarrior to track an aim point with the reticule, and it is done this way because 'mechs are simply too destructive to be allowed to track targets and/or handle deciding when to shoot and what to track.

Quote

The reticule will show you where your weapons are pointing...

It can not do this.

The reticule is an indicator to the 'mech where it should aim it's weapons at, it is NOT an indicator of where the 'mechs weapons are physically pointed.

The only indication of how well a 'mech has it's weapons lined up to hit what you're indicating is the colored ring around the reticule; red indicates bad alignment, through several colors to gold, which indicates best alignment.

Team Leader, on 09 June 2012 - 05:41 PM, said:

I also think its weird that the reticle and computers are so stable, but the windows and things move around with each step.

That simulates the movement of the MechWarrior's body/head in the cockpit in relation to the hud and his surroundings.

Quote

And Pht, even if the computer only read input from the pilot, the mech walking would provide enough jostling to move the pilot, and therefore their hands on the joystick, enough to make it jerk around slightly with each step.

The tension in the joysticks is most likely adjustable in order to compensate for this, and that's just if they use springs and such, as we do, instead of using more capable computerized 'stick stabilization setups that automatically compensate for the 'mechs movements.

Edited by Pht, 09 June 2012 - 06:09 PM.

[Teralitha]

Frostiken, on 09 June 2012 - 05:32 PM, said:

I'd believe that, but I honestly have yet to see any lasers in any of the footage do much besides hit exactly where the reticule is pointed. And lasers are one of the most abusable weapons when it comes to accuracy.


No, I mean deviation in where the weaponfire is going. How are you not getting this? Every video with lasers (which are easiest to see deviation with) shows these mechs stomping all over the place and lasers are going exactly where the reticule says.

I think you need to see a doctor about whatever condition you have.

Actually, I watched the videos closely too, and there are occasions where lasers sporadiaclly fire off in a random direction due to unusual movements by the firing mechs. Such as, firing while jumping, strafing on rough terrain, getting knocked around by enemy fire while trying to fire back and quickly rotating torso while firing. Only time lasers had a degree of accuracy was when the firing mech, and the mech being fired upon, slowed down their movements.

I kinda like the way its working.

Edited by Teralitha, 09 June 2012 - 07:00 PM.

[Shiinore]

ITT:

Expressing disapproval about something in a game that is unreleased and unaccessible to anyone not in the beta.