Jammerben87, on 26 April 2013 - 03:51 AM, said:
I dont wan't any randomness in my firing at all, reticle shake I could deal with, but no randomness.
That would absolutely ruin the game for me. It should be skill based and ONLY skill based. No RNG WoT random crap.
If you desire a purely skill based game without randomness then I recommend you play chess or something similar to chess; I'm not saying that to be an *** but games without some means of simulating randomness are completely inadequate when attempting to simulate something with as much randomness as dynamic, tactical level combat. The game MWO is based on, BattleTech uses a random number generation system (2d6) to simulate that randomness and much of the game balance inherent in and derived from BattleMech design is based on the random hit location system.
Specifically BattleMechs are designed (in the game sense, not in the in universe sense) to receive damage to a spread of locations determined at random using the probability curve of 2d6; this is why a 'Mech's center torso hit location is one of the most heavily armored hit locations and the head (which contains the cockpit and therefore is probably the most important part of the 'Mech) is the single most lightly armored hit location. This armor layout doesn't make much sense from a 'realistic' design point of view for a combat vehicle that can absorb ridiculous amounts of damage, but from a game design perspective it makes sense based on the 2d6 probability curve; the CT takes damage on a roll of 7 where as the head takes damage on a 12 so the CT is significantly more likely to receive damage than the head.
If you eliminate that spread mechanic and instead impose a system of pinpoint damage where all weapons fired as part of a weapons group (or from the same location or whatnot) reliably strike the same hit location then you are significantly altering the way the game plays and feels (in the sense of what a game based on BattleTech 'should' feel like) as well as completely destroying one of the main balancing elements of the game. Removal of that balancing element inevitably leads to the current 'meta game' of high damage alpha sniping since it is the most efficient means of destroying an opposing player's 'mech and winning the game. Granted, in my opinion there is at least one other significant factor (the current heat system) leading to the current designs for the high alpha pinpoint strikes, but even without that factor we'd still be seeing players finding ways to get the highest pinpoint damage possible in order to exploit the current system.
So what's to be done? MWO needs some means of re-instating (or otherwise simulating) the damage spread mechanic that BattleMechs are designed around; it doesn't necessarily need to be a RNG, but it has to be something since that mechanic is so core to the game. As I said in an earlier post, I like Renthrak's suggestion of a significantly slower convergence system for every weapon mounted on the 'Mech; after all the canon reasoning behind the random hit locations is the fact that the 'Mech's targeting and tracking (T&T) system is what's actually doing the aiming, not the 'Mechwarrior. The MechWarrior is essentially just telling his/her 'Mech which enemy 'Mech to shoot at and when, the T&T system then directs the various weapons to align and fire taking into account known factors such as the 'Mech's current speed, range to target and other such data the 'Mech's sensors can gather. If the 'MechWarrior tells the 'Mech to fire before the T&T system has been able to fully align all the weapons then you're going to get a damage spread. The system suggested by Renthrak sounds to me like an excellent means of simulating that process while still allowing a good degree of player induced accuracy based on situational factors like enemy movement (or lack thereof). Other suggestions may be equally viable at maintaining the balance and feel of the game, PGI just needs to find one they can implement and test it out.
Edited because I spelled Renthrak's name wrong, sorry!
Edited by danger uxo, 26 April 2013 - 06:58 AM.