74 replies to this topic

[P e n u m b r a]

Just no, this is not table top and you are not game designers, cone will just encourage brainless mech humping to minimize spread...

Edited by Le0yo, 25 April 2013 - 05:30 PM.

[Asmudius Heng]

Le0yo, on 25 April 2013 - 05:23 PM, said:

Just no, this is not table top and you are not game designers, cone will just encourage brainless mech humping to minimize spread...

Only if the mechanics and vlaues of the weapons encourage that.

If sniper weapons took ages to converge and still had a chance of not hitting dead on target BUT when they hit they hit like a freight train then people would be rewarded for their patience and good piloting.

Close range weapons would be a little more scattered and hugging close would help but you gotta make it there first, and then if we have collisions you canot just mech hump either.

The idea is that you can still fire without the converging lock but your shots might miss your intended panel a little more at the cost of you being able to fire more often.

Some weapons mechanics would also benefit from not needing to wait for the lock either. SRMs and LBX and mechine guns etc that rely on splashing anywhy would be great snapshot weapons while the bigger harder hitting once would require more patience to get the most benefit. Such additional differences in mechanics between weapons will help make the game more interesting as you consider if you want to be snap shotting or waiting for convergeance more.

It is not the idea that is bad, but if can be implemented well or badly.

But as many have stated - PGI will never do it and will have to live with the consequences of weapon stacking for better pinpoint accuracy and damage.

[Mister Blastman]

No cone of fire. Cone of fire is random and bad.

Instead, as I proposed back in July in Closed Beta...

a. No convergence at all
-or-
b. Arm weapons converge only. Torso weapons do not
-or-
c. Arm weapons have dynamic convergence while Torso weapons only have convergence at a fixed range.

Any of the above will dramatically help things.

[Psydotek]

Here's my idea that I posted in a thread about Heat Effects...

Quote

My suggestion for accuracy reduction was to have a reticle that expands the higher your heat level. This is NOT the same as an expanding firing cone. Weapons will still be pinpoint accurate and always fire at the center of your reticle regardless of heat level. However, when the reticle circle and tick marks are spread out across half your screen it makes aiming difficult since you won't be able to quickly discern where the center is.

Movement and jumping modifiers can also be factored into the reticle spread.

[TheForce]

this game is not MechWarrior. it looks like MechWarrior, but without some type of weapon spread for group fire it will never be balanced to what MechWarrior really is.

QQ

Edited by TheForce, 25 April 2013 - 07:13 PM.

[DjKonline]

I don't know how I would feel with cone vs pin point, but as a new idea ( or old haven't kept up with all ideas ) what about environmental variations ( rain snow temp humidity playing an effect on speed or range?

[SirLANsalot]

Accuracy. Its called Skill. Those who do it. Win. Those who don't. Whine.


Everyone supporting this stupid idea is literally trying to take Skill out of the game and add in a system that doesn't, and shouldn't, exist in a real time, super far future game.

Skill is what says you DO, or DO NOT hit. I am a pretty damn good shot myself, but even I still miss at long ranges, and close combat, I can pick your mech apart pretty easily with pinpoint shooting.

Call it what you will, but a lot of players are basically (in TT values) Elite Pilots with a +yes to hit.

Edited by SirLANsalot, 25 April 2013 - 09:12 PM.

[RainbowToh]

HRR Insanity, on 25 April 2013 - 05:18 PM, said:

The Devs know about this, they just don't care. I've been asking for this change for almost a year.

Given the community fury over 3rd person view, coolant flush and other controversial issue, Im sure the Devs are worried about changing such a vital core gameplay issue in fear of 'polarising the player base once more.' I was thinking they can make a test build internally, have their internal testers play it and make videos of it and show us the results of the change. Then the community can decide whether they want it or not and have a general patch.

Mister Blastman, on 25 April 2013 - 06:18 PM, said:

No cone of fire. Cone of fire is random and bad.

Instead, as I proposed back in July in Closed Beta...

a. No convergence at all
-or-
b. Arm weapons converge only. Torso weapons do not
-or-
c. Arm weapons have dynamic convergence while Torso weapons only have convergence at a fixed range.

Any of the above will dramatically help things.

That might work too. And you can only change your torso convergence in the mech lab.

[RainbowToh]

Renthrak, on 25 April 2013 - 03:36 PM, said:

Maybe, but PGI seems to be against different systems for arms vs. torso aiming.

I can imagine the coding must be a pain. hahaha

[RainbowToh]

Psydotek, on 25 April 2013 - 07:08 PM, said:

Here's my idea that I posted in a thread about Heat Effects...



Movement and jumping modifiers can also be factored into the reticle spread.

Hmm this might actually work without changing the core gameplay much. I like this. Essentially this is asking for player/pilot skill to compensate for the targeting computer (crosshairs) when it overheats or moving.

One thing i can imagine working against this is that it is fairly easy for players to imagine a fixed crosshair on their screens. Secondly while affecting accuracy, this still doesnt address the pinpoint accuracy of boating. While you might hit another part of the mech other than the portion you are aiming at, the pinpoint high alpha is still there.

[Brilig]

I also think convergence is the main issue affecting weapon balance. I don't like cone of fire myself. It would hurt brawlers while just adding a little more time between shots for snipers. I also like aiming to be entirely controlled by the pilot.

I tried to flesh out an idea about changing crosshairs to fix convergence while keeping things skill based here.

http://mwomercs.com/...08#entry2284908

Wasn't popular but it might give someone else some good ideas.

[RainbowToh]

How exactly does the current system of convergence speed works? I remember the devs talking about it during closed beta when this issue was hot. At that time we were seeing ML n SL boating haha. I was thinking about slowing that (convergence speed) down and then it would become like from the books, where it is described the targeting computer takes a second or so to compute range and lead for a target mech

[Renthrak]

RainbowToh, on 25 April 2013 - 11:55 PM, said:

How exactly does the current system of convergence speed works?

From what I can tell, it looks like convergence speed is currently instant, and has been for the last few weeks. It's pretty harsh with State Rewind. Hopefully it's just temporary while they make sure HSR works right, but I worry that it will be permanent.

I really can't think of an easier solution than simply tweaking the convergence speed slower. Change one variable and see what happens.

[Destoroyah]

I think a partial cone of fire system should be implemented. Mainly so getting pinpoint or close to pinpoint shoots takes skill and proper positioning. I think BT somewhat supports the concept in that while a mech is moving, jumping, or making major position adjustments the mech is joustling around a good bit because the mechs hardly got perfect stabilizers which attributed to having to roll a dice to see where you would hit if you hit.

I think a similar concept needs to be adapted where the faster your moving and the more drastic your movements the larger your Cone of Fire will be whereas standing still and making slow aim adjustments will have very little effect on the Cone of fire and allow your convergence to really kick in so you can get those good shots. I'm not saying we should have huge CoF circles only smaller ones that would help add more spread especially at range.

Their should be two types of convergence in my opinion a fixed somewhat convergence for torso weapons and arms without lower arm actuators, then precision convergence for arms with lower arm actuators.
The fixed convergence would be able to reach a maximum size of a little over the current plus symbol used for torso aiming, but because these weapons are more fixed they can't become absolute pinpoint so they will never fall below a certain lvl maybe like 1/3 or something.
Percision convergence can reach a larger CoF size of +50% - +100% the current torso aiming reticule symbol but can reach pinpoint accuracy if they take the time to aim, or close to pinpoint if they avoid huge adjustments and maintain a decent cruise speed but it takes longer to adjust.
I think the weapons mounted on the mech are stabilized enough that firing shouldn't adjust CoF, though taking hits should make a impact especially with big weapons. Lasers, mgs, and flamers would make no impact as they aren't hitting you with anything of real mass. Whereas a AC20 would probably reset back to full convergence whereas a AC2 would only feather you, but constant AC2 rounds could keep you convergence up at a certain lvl.
The big problem I see with a Cone of Fire system is how to keep it restrained enough so like a HNK 4P doesn't look like it's fire each of it's lasers all over the place. The simplist solution I can think of is having the lasers be like connected in a 6 point star type thing that expands and contracts as convergence changes. For Arms maybe make two small circle CoFs that grow and converge on one another, where a precision convergence could get complete overlap but a fixed convergence would olny be able to achieve a side by side.

[Karl Streiger]

I found that this idea sounds really reasonable.
http://mwomercs.com/...85#entry2280485
No cone, but a more or less moving crosshair based on your current movement.

Alternative I'm still sure that a "fixed" convergence system could work too.
Look take those WW2 simulations...take a Spitfire or a Hurrican..all there Machineguns will hit left and right were you aiming at, when you got to close....
however i got used to that...and instead of reducing the convergence to lower as 300m i increased it....i was still able to kill the pilot of a Ju88 or He111....only differnce to flying a Me109 was that i have to aim at another spot....really easy....and what was most interesting you could even hit 2 spots at the same time

[danger uxo]

SirLANsalot, on 25 April 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

Also, Gyro's, allows a bouncing/shaking mech to have a stable firing platform.

Incorrect; the gyro (in conjunction with the neurohelmet) is used solely to balance the mech. Per the TechManual, pg. 34:

Quote

A BattleMech’s gyroscope is the device that keeps a BattleMech upright while running over rough terrain, jumping or struggling against battle damage. ’Mech actuators are too slow and clumsy
for the swift, precise applications of force needed to keep a ’Mech upright, and so that force comes from the gyroscope housed in the heart of every ’Mech’s torso.

SirLANsalot, on 25 April 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

Oh and SKILL is something that dictates wheather you hit or not, knowing how to lead targets ect.

SirLANsalot, on 25 April 2013 - 09:08 PM, said:

Accuracy. Its called Skill. Those who do it. Win. Those who don't. Whine.


Everyone supporting this stupid idea is literally trying to take Skill out of the game and add in a system that doesn't, and shouldn't, exist in a real time, super far future game.

Skill is what says you DO, or DO NOT hit. I am a pretty damn good shot myself, but even I still miss at long ranges, and close combat, I can pick your mech apart pretty easily with pinpoint shooting.

Call it what you will, but a lot of players are basically (in TT values) Elite Pilots with a +yes to hit.

Also incorrect; the MechWarrior does not directly control the aiming of a 'Mech's weapons, the MechWarrior simple instructs the 'Mech what target to engage and when. Again from the TechManual, pg. 42:

Quote

But BattleMech computers do handle an incredible amount of lower-level decision-making. The T&T (targeting and tracking) system, for instance, sorts, processes and interprets sensor data for the MechWarrior, who only has to look at his screens or HUD to get a concise picture of the battlefield. When targeting, a MechWarrior merely uses a control stick to aim a crosshair on a display that shows the enemy. It is up to the BattleMech to actually aim the weapons with all the calculations that entails.

These are canon examples of how a 'Mech is supposed to function, but the are driven by game balance considerations. BattleMechs are not designed (from a balance/game perspective) to take pinpoint damage to a single location in the way PGI has implemented. Even with doubled armor an Atlas cannot (nor was it made to) withstand multiple strikes to the same hit location with the 40+ damage alphas that are currently prevalent in the game and maintain the level of combat effectiveness/resilience it is meant to have as a premier assault 'Mech. There needs to be a system of damage spread to maintain the balance that is at the foundation of BattleMech design. Personally I think Renthrak's suggestion has the most "BattleTech" feel to it so far; additionally I feel that the current heat system requires a significant re-vamp to allow for graduated heat effect penalties to movement and targeting as your 'Mech accumulates waste heat, but that's for a different discussion.

Edited to add SirLANsalot's second post.

Edited by danger uxo, 26 April 2013 - 12:40 AM.

[RainbowToh]

Karl Streiger, on 26 April 2013 - 12:24 AM, said:

I found that this idea sounds really reasonable.
http://mwomercs.com/...85#entry2280485
No cone, but a more or less moving crosshair based on your current movement.

Alternative I'm still sure that a "fixed" convergence system could work too.
Look take those WW2 simulations...take a Spitfire or a Hurrican..all there Machineguns will hit left and right were you aiming at, when you got to close....
however i got used to that...and instead of reducing the convergence to lower as 300m i increased it....i was still able to kill the pilot of a Ju88 or He111....only differnce to flying a Me109 was that i have to aim at another spot....really easy....and what was most interesting you could even hit 2 spots at the same time

LOL are you playing War Thunder?

[Karl Streiger]

RainbowToh, on 26 April 2013 - 12:53 AM, said:

LOL are you playing War Thunder?

Nope
IL2
and IL2 Cliffs of Dover

[RainbowToh]

Karl Streiger, on 26 April 2013 - 01:05 AM, said:

Nope
IL2
and IL2 Cliffs of Dover

I see. War Thunder is fun btw!

@danger uxo

Unfortunately previous MW titles have this 'pinpoint' shooting too as well, to a certain extent. LOL it has been sometime since I last played MW2,3,4.

[B1SCUIT]

I dont really get why some people are so vehemently against a cone of fire system in mwo.well,i guess i do.they just dont want to lose thier silly alphastrike warrior online leet status i suppose.
I mean look at it this way,virtually every popular,succesful,"esport" fps/shooter game ever has a cone of fire mechanic.you run...cone spreads.you jump....cone spreads.this is not only accepted,but expected.are you saying those games take no skill because they have a cone of fire that has to be adjusted for? I would argue that they actually take more skill than mwo's simple point and click situation.you have to decide when and how to take a shot.should i risk crouching/slowing down to get a better shot on that guy or keep my speed but risk missing?

That doesnt exist in mwo.it's just boat the biggest alpha you can,hide behind a rock,then lolskill poptard your way to victory.

Some kind of cone of fire system is even supported by the lore the game is supposedly based on.
Sadly at the moment it feels less like mechwarrior/battletech and more like some generic robot mod pasted over top of a cheap low quality fps game.

Edited by B1SCUIT, 26 April 2013 - 02:25 AM.