118 replies to this topic

[DrSecretStache]

Roadbeer, on 18 April 2013 - 08:34 AM, said:

Coconut Monkey needs a buff.

Wat.

Coconut monkey prevents me from losing at all. It stares into the souls of the enemy pilots and makes them shake in fear. It must be nerfed, I say!
Also, nerf champagne glasses.
Actually, nerf self esteem in general. Cockpit items OP.

[Roadbeer]

Cockpit items are P2W. WTF PGI?

[Sug]

Willie Sauerland, on 18 April 2013 - 08:33 AM, said:

You forgot the LB-10X.

It is so OP right now and obviously requires

being whacked with the nerf bat...

I wish that was a haiku.

3rdworld, on 18 April 2013 - 08:36 AM, said:

Halo would like to talk to you.

Like every PC game since 1999.

better? Since we can actually aim with a mouse they had to do something....

Lukoi, on 18 April 2013 - 08:39 AM, said:

Mechs are more akin to Tanks and Aircraft in how they engage targets with weapon systems than the people represented in FPS like BF series, COD etc. So your joke falls flat.

1. They are more akin, but that's not how they're represented in MWO.

2. Not a joke.

Edited by Sug, 18 April 2013 - 08:48 AM.

[3rdworld]

Sug, on 18 April 2013 - 08:47 AM, said:

I wish that was a haiku.




Like every PC game since 1999.

better? Since we can actually aim with a mouse they had to do something....




1. They are more akin, but that's not how they're represented in MWO.

2. Not a joke.

[Little Nemo]

Syllogy, on 18 April 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

When I was in the military I used to reliably get Headshots on a man-sized target up to 300m away with an open sight.

When the target is the size of a 4 story building, why is hitting a panel the size of a buss hard to do at 800m?

Sorry, in the 13 years that I've been in, I've never walked down range to see where I hit the 300m. Seems fishy...

[TungstenWall]

Maybe if they they had the target reticules bounce around slightly (always showing where the weapons are aimed in real time) they could find a better common ground.
Think about the CoD sniper scopes, now rather than shacking the screen, just shake the reticule (but don't change the size/accuracy).

I could also see this making Aim bots just that much harder to code.

[Zerberus]

Skinny Pete, on 18 April 2013 - 08:51 AM, said:

Sorry, in the 13 years that I've been in, I've never walked down range to see where I hit the 300m. Seems fishy...

Neither have I. That`s what spotters are for.

[Viper69]

I dont want to nerf aiming for sure. I would however like to see a heat mechanic that makes movements labored and maybe a heat wave graphic in the cockpit. You know the blur or wave effect when you film above a heat source. I would definitely like some sort of heat mechanic.

[KingNobody]

Why don't we just make all 'mechs fire their weapons randomly in all directions at all times? That way there's no need to aim, just get within range and wait for a random hit.

[Zerberus]

Or Screw weapons altogether, put in the urbie, reimplement collisions, and just play urbie football


But it will still only take 20 minutes before the first dillholes post "passing needs to be nerfed " "Touchdowns score too many points", "assaults are OP on teh defensive line" "fieldgoals are cheating", "I tackled the quarterback, how is it OK that they scored a touchdown?" and other rageqq threads

Edited by Zerberus, 18 April 2013 - 09:05 AM.

[Sug]

3rdworld, on 18 April 2013 - 08:49 AM, said:

I don't get what you're trying to say. You do know that Halo was stolen from the PC by microsoft, release as an Xbox only game in 2001, then was ported (poorly) to the PC in 2003 right?

It wasn't made for the PC. Graphics were dated by the time it was ported and even if you put the in game mouse speed to the max it was significantly slower than any other pure PC game at the time. Consoles need slow accurate reticles. PC gamers need a cone of fire to mitigate the accuracy of mice.

Going through my old mags, there's a PCGamer where they took on the crew from the Xbox magazine in Halo. PC people used mice, Xbox people used controlers. Xboxers got completely *****. I think they might have gotten 1 kill in the match.

Also see shadow run
http://www.oxm.co.uk...e-of-imbalance/

[Kurayami]

Syllogy, on 18 April 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

When I was in the military I used to reliably get Headshots on a man-sized target up to 300m away with an open sight.

When the target is the size of a 4 story building, why is hitting a panel the size of a buss hard to do at 800m?

good. now imagine that you have assault rifle in each hand, sniper rifle strapped to the belt, some rpg and revolver ducttaped to crotch. you have laser pointers on all of them and can fire them via voice command.
you need to fire them all at once at moving target while running at max speed and jumping around. also location is mojave desert 1pm so it is kinda hot in here and someone constantly trying to blind you with laser pointer while trowing rocks at you.

[Sug]

Syllogy, on 18 April 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

When I was in the military I used to reliably get Headshots on a man-sized target up to 300m away with an open sight.

When the target is the size of a 4 story building, why is hitting a panel the size of a buss hard to do at 800m?

Don't understand the statement or the "likes" it's gotten.

What weapon were you using? What firing position? Stationary targets? I'm betting its wasn't with a pistol while running at full speed downhill at a moving target which would be the only impressive situation.

I'm not saying we need totally randomized hit locations just a bit of spread when moving. Pinpoint when slow/still, cone when running. Really not too much to ask.

[Willie Sauerland]

Kurayami, on 18 April 2013 - 09:21 AM, said:

revolver ducttaped to crotch.

The jokes for this statement alone are enough

to get me banned in at least three different forums...

However, the visual in my head is just effin' hilarious.

Sug, on 18 April 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:

Don't understand the statement or the "likes" it's gotten.

What weapon were you using? What firing position? Stationary targets? I'm betting its wasn't with a pistol while running at full speed downhill at a moving target which would be the only impressive situation.

I'm not saying we need totally randomized hit locations just a bit of spread when moving. Pinpoint when slow/still, cone when running. Really not too much to ask.

Was he actually shooting the 300 meters,

or was he using paper targets which simulated

the silhouette of a person at 300 meters but only

did his head shot from 25 meters?

Of course, this is of absolutely zero relevance because

shooting while being shot at always makes shooting

much more difficult as any veteran who has been in combat

can attest -such as myself, for example...

Edited by Willie Sauerland, 18 April 2013 - 09:33 AM.

[3rdworld]

Sug, on 18 April 2013 - 09:13 AM, said:

I don't get what you're trying to say. You do know that Halo was stolen from the PC by microsoft, release as an Xbox only game in 2001, then was ported (poorly) to the PC in 2003 right?

It wasn't made for the PC. Graphics were dated by the time it was ported and even if you put the in game mouse speed to the max it was significantly slower than any other pure PC game at the time. Consoles need slow accurate reticles. PC gamers need a cone of fire to mitigate the accuracy of mice.

Going through my old mags, there's a PCGamer where they took on the crew from the Xbox magazine in Halo. PC people used mice, Xbox people used controlers. Xboxers got completely *****. I think they might have gotten 1 kill in the match.

Also see shadow run
http://www.oxm.co.uk...e-of-imbalance/

What you are doing is called moving the goal post.

You claim "every" shooter since 99 has had cone of fire. I say Halo didn't.

You then say that you meant PC games. Halo was on PC.

Now it must be a shooter that is your interpretation of which games were PC games and which were just bad ports?

In zoom CoD weapons don't have cone fire either. But I am guessing that is just a bad port as well.

[Ansel]

Adding a RNG system into the convergence of weapons in this game isn't what is needed.

Changing the way armor receives damage is what is needed, putting in the need for a player to actualy cluster shots to breach armor instead of just shooting anywhere on an entire section to do so.

[Sug]

Like almost every shooting type game developed for the PC in recent memory!!!!!!!!!

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Syllogy, on 18 April 2013 - 08:08 AM, said:

Please, illustrate a build that will 1-shot a Cataphract that is facing you without a headshot.

Just because it seems like you were replying to me...who said anything about 1 shots?

The game as it stands is....shoot center torso while jumping jetting, land, jump shoot again.

Or it's shoot center torso, and twist so your center torso is not an available target, twist back, shoot, rinse repeat.

That is the game.

Good players do not waste shots on arms or legs (unless you are a light potentially). If they realize you have an XL they may go for your right/left torso.

But basically the game is getting to where have destructible parts besides the center torso is mostly irrellevant.

[Fut]

Syllogy, on 18 April 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

When I was in the military I used to reliably get Headshots on a man-sized target up to 300m away with an open sight.

Were you running around while taking those shots, or were you standing still/laying prone/using a bench to brace your weapon?

plexi, on 18 April 2013 - 08:27 AM, said:

The problem has to do with violating the spirit of combat in the Battletech universe more than anything else in my opinion. All aiming is handled via the Battlemech's fire control computer in universe, which results in inaccuracies when the pilot fires weapons before achieving a positive lock. But in-game, it is far too easy to concentrate fire onto a single component at most ranges, and most mechs seem to die within only a 30 second window of being engaged. Even with double armor (now practically bypassed) engagement times are tiny compared to what they should be to allow for a gradual degradation of the Battlemech (In which positioning, critical slots, and heat management can actually play a more important role)

Read some of the battles from the novels and you'll see the massive difference. Right now MWO's game play feels like just about any other shooter, but with a mechlab. It doesn't feel like Battletech, and pin-point aiming/convergence at all times is one of the issues. I'm not saying to remove it entirely, but alternatives should be looked into, otherwise we're just replicating the exact same mistakes of previous Mechwarrior games.

Quoted for truth!
Wish I could "like" this one twice.

Ansel, on 18 April 2013 - 09:36 AM, said:

Changing the way armor receives damage is what is needed, putting in the need for a player to actualy cluster shots to breach armor instead of just shooting anywhere on an entire section to do so.

Are you suggesting that each part of the Mech be broken up into multiple sections?
Or something else?

Edited by Fut, 18 April 2013 - 09:48 AM.

[Zyllos]

Endgame124, on 18 April 2013 - 08:08 AM, said:

Aiming / convergence should be pretty to fix just by looking to classic TT battletech for inspiration. If you're parked (0 speed), allow convergence as it is now. Walking half speed, put in a small convergence penalty (10% less convergence?), if you're running full speed, put in a larger convergence penalty (40% less?). If your jumping add a huge convergence penalty (75%) AND a small cone of fire.

This is the only way I think you can balance weapon convergence anymore.

I am a huge proponent of wanting to have weapons have fixed torso convergence, but reviewing a ton of situations and various builds, I doubt that even having that would fix the issues we are having now.

Just...this entire aiming system and mechanics right now is just a cluster f***...

I just don't know anymore...