378 replies to this topic

[SmoothCriminal]

why has it taken 17 pages to say no? people camp enough in this game...

[cyberFluke]

SmoothCriminal, on 16 April 2013 - 01:37 AM, said:

why has it taken 17 pages to say no? people camp enough in this game...

Perhaps because this is a discussion of different ways we can add more skill to aiming, not a poll to try and prove a point to no-one in particular?

[MustrumRidcully]

3rdworld, on 15 April 2013 - 03:07 PM, said:

I find your false sense of superiority disturbing.

Is it so hard to accept your idea is bad?

Stopping to shoot well does 1 thing.

Buff alpha boating assaults. while kneecapping all mechs that rely on movement to survive....more or less everything not called stalker or atlas.

And you talk soooo much trash then get offended when people troll you.

I think this is the biggest issue probably - it doesn't really do anything about alpha strikes if you can negate accuracy problems by slowing down. It just encourages it even more.

I think it would still be better if there was only arm convergence, arm weapons fire in the direton the arms converge on, torso weapons fire the direction the torso is facing, and if your weapons are 6m apart, you have to deal with that yourself. The current convergence system suggests that an AC/20 installed in your torso can still move to change its angle.

You can still boat and alpha strike - if you have a mech like HBK 4P, it might be dream because all your lasers are in a tight group, and they probably can all hit the same location in one alpha. But it's also that glaring weakness, because enemies know exactly how to neuter you.
Currently, the 4P already has this disadvantage, but it gains no benefit from mounting all guns in one spot, because convergence doesn't care where your weapons are mounted.

[Belorion]

The static reticule is where the AC-20 hits. Its the arms that move to where the torso reticule is pointing.

It wouldn't make any sense for the weapons to not converge or be unable to be aimed.

[Lostdragon]

Saying that a vet will never benefit from luck against a less skilled player is patently false. Picture this: A match comes down to a 1v1 at the end. On one side is a veteran player who has already scored 3 kills but he is beat up. His CT armor is gone and his internals are red. One more shot to the CT will finish him. He rolls around a ridge at full speed and sees his last opponent. This guy has been at the wrong place at the wrong time the whole match because he doesn't know the map. He has barely done or taken any damage so if he can just make one shot to the CT he wins for his team.

The noob is running full speed so his weapons have a cone of fire but he and the vet both line up their shots and fire. The noob's shot hits the vet in the LT due to weapon spread. The vet has fired an alpha strike that mostly hit his enemy's CT, but a PPC hit the cockpit.

The vet knows he got lucky. He passes the noob at full speed then quickly stops and turns. He waits for the noob to turn then fires a precision shot into the cockpit and wins.

In this scenario the vet got lucky twice on the initial pass, when his opponent missed and when he hit the cockpit. He then used his knowledge of the aiming system to put himself in the best possible position and used his aiming skill to get the kill.

I also like the other two ideas proposed on the last couple of pages, but I think a cone of fire system would probably be the easiest and most likely thing to be implemented. Will a vet sometimes lose to chance when he otherwise might have won? Yes, but that exists in the game already. Weapons like SRMs and the LBX-10 already have a random spread component and it is possible to be killed by a very lucky shot. It is also possible to cook off your ammo if you overheat. There is an element of luck in anything, the key to mastering any game is to understand what systems rely on luck and know how to put the odds in your favor.

Edited by Lostdragon, 16 April 2013 - 05:44 AM.

[Malora Sidewinder]

Alright guys we've established that blooming crosshairs is a terrible idea.

NEXT

[Alois Hammer]

cyberFluke, on 15 April 2013 - 02:30 PM, said:

. Gabe's Greater Internet [REDACTED] Theory is in full swing.

...as anyone reading your own posts cannot fail to see.

[Vapor Trail]

Malora Sidewinder, on 16 April 2013 - 06:08 AM, said:

Alright guys we've established that blooming crosshairs is a terrible idea.

NEXT

I disagree.

I think we've established that there's some argument about the merits of the idea. Seems to be obvious since the "Introducing randomness removes skill" camp and the "Overcoming randomness is skill" camp haven't agreed.

Previous!

[Lostdragon]

Vapor Trail, on 16 April 2013 - 10:17 AM, said:

I disagree.

I think we've established that there's some argument about the merits of the idea. Seems to be obvious since the "Introducing randomness removes skill" camp and the "Overcoming randomness is skill" camp haven't agreed.

Previous!

Nice summary. To me, it is like playing blackjack vs. playing darts. Anybody can sit down at the table and play blackjack and you might win or lose. There is a strong element of luck in the game but the more you play the more you learn how to make smart bets when the odds are in your favor.

Darts, on the other hand, is less cerebral and all about a physical skill. To me, the best and most memorable games are the ones that combine that cerebral skill of knowing how to play the odds and the physical skill of precise aim or movement. Right now MWO has a lot of the later and not much of the former. In my experience a game needs both in order to achieve longevity and maintain qn active playerbase.

[cyberFluke]

With the BHSR that went in in the patch, this is even more necessary. I almost *have* to try and miss, and I'm not *that* good....

[Hellcat420]

Yokaiko, on 14 April 2013 - 03:18 AM, said:

You want planetside 2?

would be better than the cod:mechwarrior edition that we currently have.

[Tekadept]

Yeh I kinda feel god like, having a 300 ping and had learnt to compensate quite well but was still very effective.. Now being able to hit what I'm aiming at, once I overcome my muscle memory that insists I lead It will be very hard to miss.

[Shismar]

cyberFluke, on 14 April 2013 - 02:21 AM, said:

I want an honest, sensible discussion about this and how it could help move MW:O on from where it is, to where it should be. Please?

I don't think the word 'skill' means what you think it means ...

[Imagine Dragons]

Personally, I have no idea how we are defining "skill"

Are we talking about twitch reflexes? Or Mech Knowledge? Hand-Eye coordination?

A person's ability with handling high mouse DPI? A person's tactical knowledge?

Edited by XenomorphZZ, 16 April 2013 - 07:30 PM.

[cyberFluke]

XenomorphZZ, on 16 April 2013 - 07:29 PM, said:

Personally, I have no idea how we are defining "skill"

Are we talking about twitch reflexes? Or Mech Knowledge? Hand-Eye coordination?

A person's ability with handling high mouse DPI? A person's tactical knowledge?

As far I can discern from the rabid calls of "scrub", we're talking twitch reflexes, any requirement further to that is apparently "low skill".

[Davers]

People should really just give up on RNG. Not saying it is bad or anything, but PGI is not going to stop and redesign the entire core game play 5 months from launch.

[cyberFluke]

Davers, on 16 April 2013 - 10:50 PM, said:

People should really just give up on RNG. Not saying it is bad or anything, but PGI is not going to stop and redesign the entire core game play 5 months from launch.

It's already in the engine they're using. They disabled/didn't use already existing engine code to get what we have to my knowledge.

[TOGSolid]

cyberFluke, on 16 April 2013 - 11:05 PM, said:

It's already in the engine they're using. They disabled/didn't use already existing engine code to get what we have to my knowledge.

The other option is to use a system that's already in MWO: Just flat out make convergence take longer. It's the same basic idea that we've got only with a hell of a lot less work. If someone wants to pinpoint snipe by standing out and taking a carefully aimed shot, then more power to them, they earned it. They were aware of the situation, knew they were safe from LRMs and countersnipers, and took careful aim. People should not be rewarded for running around the corner and popping someone down range instantly though.

Quote

.bigger crosshair ? no - we are in a precision instrument of speed and weaponry...i am sure we can have an accurate targeting system regardless of the situation..be that you are running or jumping or sliding. it is not a fps where you play a human.

Actually no. Inner Sphere mechs don't get targeting computers for another 12 years so your argument doesn't really work.
http://www.sarna.net...geting_Computer

Edited by TOGSolid, 17 April 2013 - 12:10 AM.

[cyberFluke]

TOGSolid, on 17 April 2013 - 12:09 AM, said:

The other option is to use a system that's already in MWO: Just flat out make convergence take longer. It's the same basic idea that we've got only with a hell of a lot less work. If someone wants to pinpoint snipe by standing out and taking a carefully aimed shot, then more power to them, they earned it. They were aware of the situation, knew they were safe from LRMs and countersnipers, and took careful aim. People should not be rewarded for running around the corner and popping someone down range instantly though.

I'm down with that, but I'd be talking orders of magnitude longer than they take at the minute.

[TOGSolid]

cyberFluke, on 17 April 2013 - 12:23 AM, said:

I'm down with that, but I'd be talking orders of magnitude longer than they take at the minute.

Making the convergence timer variable based on distance would work well. The longer the shot, the longer it takes for your weapons to converge with a minimum timer to keep short range pinpoint boats honest.

Edited by TOGSolid, 17 April 2013 - 12:30 AM.