Jump to content

Battle Tech Novel Inspired Idea On Balancing Long Range Direct-Fire Weapons.


141 replies to this topic

Poll: Battle Tech Novel Inspired Idea On Balancing Long Range Direct-Fire Weapons. (178 member(s) have cast votes)

Is this change worth a try?

  1. Voted Worth it. (129 votes [72.47%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 72.47%

  2. Not worth it. (49 votes [27.53%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 27.53%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#121 Homeless Bill

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 1,968 posts
  • LocationA Box Near You

Posted 23 June 2013 - 06:55 PM

View PostEl Bandito, on 23 June 2013 - 06:37 PM, said:

Yes, it is risky. Which is why PGI needs to get that test server up ASAP. However, twitch shooting accurately over 500+ meters should have no place in MWO as long as big alphas exist.

No argument here. I'd love to see this sort of thing on the test server. And I'd go a step further and argue that accuracy and huge damage in a single click should be mutually exclusive.

If they don't figure out a way to fix it, I just can't imagine be around long after release. It's really killing a lot of the fun =/

#122 DocBach

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 4,828 posts
  • LocationSouthern Oregon

Posted 23 June 2013 - 07:04 PM

View PostHomeless Bill, on 23 June 2013 - 06:55 PM, said:

No argument here. I'd love to see this sort of thing on the test server. And I'd go a step further and argue that accuracy and huge damage in a single click should be mutually exclusive.



This is exactly my train of thought - want accuracy and precision? Fire a single weapon from a single location. Want to unleash brute force? Fire a group, but don't expect it to all land in one tight little hole.

#123 Ace Selin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,534 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 23 June 2013 - 08:33 PM

View PostAsmudius Heng, on 01 May 2013 - 04:17 PM, said:

Yes, i agree, some element of randomness is acceptable in a game like this as long as that randomness can be negated by skill, careul aiming and piloting etc. Waiting for a lock to gain greater convergeance is a fine idea to me. Different weapons might need different lock speed as well so brawling weapns can be snap shot more and snipers at long range need to be more careful.

It also means you can have modules to help with this giving players another thing to grind towards.

However it will never happen. PGI have flatly stated they do not like any randomness in thier game at all ever even though it would be a much better addition to the game because it is controlled and requires skill to negate. Either it is too hard for them to add in now, or they never even considered it which would be a damned shame.

It is part of the lore, the IP they are using, it is also key mechanic from the mathematical balance of the TT game that if removed breaks the system when they implement all the other parts.

Anyway - its a dead topic PGI will never do it much to thier discredit,
if they don't like randomness how is it that the Ultra AC5 has it included, they add it where they like. I don't mind your idea, as long as you allow for lead times for weapons like gauss / ppc


#124 ExtremeA79

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 351 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 23 June 2013 - 09:03 PM

View PostEl Bandito, on 01 May 2013 - 11:45 AM, said:

One thing I love as much as playing Mechwarrior games is reading classic Battle Tech novels. From them I got this idea to change the current stale meta of long range sniping. It is a long post so please bear with me and finish reading my post before you vote/comment.


First, read the following parts I specifically took from the BT novel "End Game".

"The khaki-painted BattleMech was scarred along its right side from earlier damage. Careful of the buildings behind the Cestus, Pierce worked to lock his targeting computer over the wounded flank.
The targeting crosshairs burned a deep golden hue, and he pulled into the trigger. Both of his rotary cannon spat out several hundred rounds, the slugs tipped with depleted uranium for 'Mech-stopping power."

"Pierce's targeting computer couldn't grab an angle on the Cestus's already-damaged side, and his crosshairs flashed the alternating gold and black of partial lock."

"The hard-hammering blows left Peter's ears ringing as he dragged his own crosshairs over the wispy gray cloud and searched for the Viking. The reticle changed from red to a flashing gold, and then burned steadily as his targeting system found a solid lock. Peter braced the Fafnir forward, leaning into the heavy recoil as each of his gauss rifles spat out a hypersonic mass."

"Tancred knew the Nightstar and the kind of hurt it was capable of dishing out among other 'Mechs. He swallowed dryly, facing his old ride, then toggled in his large laser with his rotary autocannons. His crosshairs burned a deep gold as the Templar's targeting computer grabbed a hard lock, and Tancred drilled a good measure of scarlet energy and hot metal into the Nightstar's chest."


Basically the parts I selected all talk about novel's characters trying to lock on to the enemy with direct fire weapons such as Rotary AC, Gauss Rifle, and Lasers. That's right, to make an accurate shot they need to wait for a solid lock using direct fire weapons. (not even guaranteed then).

Why not use the novel's idea of targeting in MWO to address pin-point shooting with direct fire weapons (non-missile) from 1000 meters away? With some tweaks?

Suppose every mechs' targeting computer--being Inner Sphere junk--can only give you 100% accurate shots with ballistics and lasers/PPCs within 400 meters (actual distance is subject to change--it can be 500 or 600 depending on balance). To shoot accurately over 400 meters you will need to lock on to the enemy and hold your targeting reticule for 0.5-2 seconds (also subject to change) depending on how far the enemy is. Further away the enemy is, longer you will have to keep you cross hair over the enemy before it achieves hard lock.
Once a hard-lock is achieved, the cursor will change color and/or give you a warning sound (or have some different animation), and the direct fire weapon will hit the exact spot when fired.

You can still immediately fire (ie, without hard lock) any direct fire weapons if you choose to, but it will only hit targets accurately up to 400 meters. More than 400 meters and without a hard lock, the shot will not go straight forward, instead it will shoot at slight angle (the path of the shot is random within certain limit). How wide the shot will go will depend on the distance. For example, if the enemy is standing at 600 meters, your shot without hard lock will most likely still hit the enemy but might not hit the section you targeted. If the enemy is over 1000 meters your shot will probably completely miss him even if he is standing still, without hard lock.

Unlike Missiles, direct fire hard-lock will end immediately if the enemy move out of your reticule zone. There is no target decay time.

In regards to leading shots: Without a hard lock, the shot will not be 100% accurate. With hard lock, you can accurately lead the target.


To repeat for clarification--In order to accurately shoot a target over 400 meters (did I mention that it is subject to change?)...

1. You must have a lock onto the enemy. Your allies can spot for you to achieve such lock if the enemy is further away from your max targeting range.

2. After you lock onto the enemy you must keep the cross hair on the target for 0.5-2 seconds (subject to change) depending on the distance. Longer the distance, longer the lock time.

Reminder: You can still shoot your guns without hard lock but over 400 meters its accuracy will not be guaranteed and it gets worse as the bullet/laser/PPC travels further.


I believe with these changes, snipers and poptarts will now have to expose themselves longer for retaliatory fire and lights/mediums will have much better survival rate crossing the field.

With such drastic change comes pros and cons. I do not yet know the all specifics about them since I just wrote this thread but IMO:

Biggest con--Introducing RNG, or luck in this game. Your shots might still hit the moving enemy at long distances even without lock depending on the random path of the shot. Or you might completely miss a target that is traveling around 600 meters without hard lock. Lore wise, it is correct though.

Biggest pro--Making the game feel more Battle Tech, less common FPS.


Discuss away, ask questions and vote. Thanks.


This is basically convergence slowed down. I like the idea because it is canon.
The flickering crosshair means that they have converged enough for a good shot.

#125 Riptor

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 1,043 posts

Posted 24 June 2013 - 03:16 AM

View PostTaemien, on 08 May 2013 - 11:07 PM, said:

As people said before, Blender BattleTech does this...

And to be honest. That would be HORRENDOUS for an online game. Its a fine distraction for about 15 minutes. But that is it. It gets very annoying when 75% of your shots just go wide because the system says so. There's no skill involved, just who would get a lock first.

It would also make every mech going over 120kph invulnerable.



There would be more skill involved overcoming this mechanic than the current point and click shooting wich involves no skill whatsoever. Currently its basicly who sees whom first.

I came here to play a mech game not a ******* High noon simulator with robots.

Edited by Riptor, 24 June 2013 - 03:16 AM.


#126 El Bandito

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 26,736 posts
  • LocationStill doing ungodly amount of damage, but with more accuracy.

Posted 24 June 2013 - 07:03 AM

Some people were concerned that using this system will be hard to lead a shot. Giving a hard lock 1 second fade time can fix that easily.

#127 ExtremeA79

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 351 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 24 June 2013 - 11:49 AM

View PostRiptor, on 24 June 2013 - 03:16 AM, said:



There would be more skill involved overcoming this mechanic than the current point and click shooting wich involves no skill whatsoever. Currently its basicly who sees whom first.

I came here to play a mech game not a ******* High noon simulator with robots.


This is a simulator...

#128 El Bandito

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 26,736 posts
  • LocationStill doing ungodly amount of damage, but with more accuracy.

Posted 24 June 2013 - 12:21 PM

View PostDarren Tyler, on 24 June 2013 - 11:49 AM, said:

This is a simulator...


Feels more common FPS than simulator though...

#129 Riptor

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 1,043 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 04:52 AM

View PostDarren Tyler, on 24 June 2013 - 11:49 AM, said:


This is a simulator...



You dont really know what a simulator is dont you?

Hint: MWO is not one. I had more complex simulators on my 468 PC back in the 90s

#130 DocBach

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 4,828 posts
  • LocationSouthern Oregon

Posted 25 June 2013 - 07:29 AM

http://mwomercs.com/...active-reticle/

very much inspired by this thread

#131 Ph30nix

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,444 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 08:35 AM

there really is no basis in reality for punshing LONG range convergance. The farther away something is the easier it is to converge on a point since it requires far less adjustment then weapons at closer ranges.

Also implementing any major convergance nerfs/changes would ROYALLY screw over brawlers. Unless they choose to "ignore" brawl weapons when it comes to any convergance changes which just boils down (again) to

nerf Long range/Snipers
Buff Brawlers

#132 El Bandito

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 26,736 posts
  • LocationStill doing ungodly amount of damage, but with more accuracy.

Posted 25 June 2013 - 08:39 AM

View PostPh30nix, on 25 June 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:

there really is no basis in reality for punshing LONG range convergance. The farther away something is the easier it is to converge on a point since it requires far less adjustment then weapons at closer ranges. Also implementing any major convergance nerfs/changes would ROYALLY screw over brawlers. Unless they choose to "ignore" brawl weapons when it comes to any convergance changes which just boils down (again) to nerf Long range/Snipers Buff Brawlers


I am only trying to remake the current super easy long range big alphas into something more closer to real BattleTech combat.

Current PPC boating snipe meta is a major turn-off for newcomers and veterans alike. It needs to be tuned.

Edited by El Bandito, 25 June 2013 - 08:40 AM.


#133 Ragnar Darkmane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 459 posts
  • LocationLuthien

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:27 AM

Partial locks are something I miss in this game whenever I read a BT novel. Bumped for support.

Edited by Ragnar Darkmane, 25 June 2013 - 09:27 AM.


#134 Pht

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,299 posts

Posted 29 June 2013 - 05:19 PM

View PostPh30nix, on 25 June 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:

there really is no basis in reality for punshing LONG range convergance.


MW isn't about "reality" - it's about "what it would be like to pilot a battlemech from the battletech universe/setting in combat in that setting" - which would make for a very fun game.

Quote

The farther away something is the easier it is to converge on a point since it requires far less adjustment then weapons at closer ranges.


You're leaving out the problem of having to be able to predict where to align the weapons being far harder at long rangs and the problems of getting the weapons tweaked at exactly the proper *small amount* - which may very well be smaller than the 'mech can handle.

Quote

Also implementing any major convergance nerfs/changes would ROYALLY screw over brawlers.


No, not really: http://mwomercs.com/...different-idea/

... it's possible to have the 'mechs behave like BTU mechs without screwing over brawlers ... or snipers.

#135 El Bandito

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 26,736 posts
  • LocationStill doing ungodly amount of damage, but with more accuracy.

Posted 29 June 2013 - 05:43 PM

View PostPh30nix, on 25 June 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:

there really is no basis in reality for punshing LONG range convergance. The farther away something is the easier it is to converge on a point since it requires far less adjustment then weapons at closer ranges. Also implementing any major convergance nerfs/changes would ROYALLY screw over brawlers. Unless they choose to "ignore" brawl weapons when it comes to any convergance changes which just boils down (again) to nerf Long range/Snipers Buff Brawlers


Didn't you read my thread? I specifically stated that no lock on time is necessary under 400 meters, which is more than enough distance for brawlers.

#136 pulupulu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 183 posts

Posted 29 June 2013 - 05:52 PM

Just curious, what's the track record of pgi implementing a "system" from player/fan suggestion?

Personally, I like the idea, but I would prefer if weapon convergence is the main effect of lock on. No lock on, no pin point convergence. Long or close range. No rng needed.

Edited by pulupulu, 29 June 2013 - 05:53 PM.


#137 Ph30nix

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,444 posts

Posted 29 June 2013 - 05:54 PM

View PostEl Bandito, on 29 June 2013 - 05:43 PM, said:


Didn't you read my thread? I specifically stated that no lock on time is necessary under 400 meters, which is more than enough distance for brawlers.

sorry missed that part.

but how would you have it actually work though? how would anyone be able to snipe PERIOD? hitting a moving target would be virtually impossible if every time your cross hairs moved off them your alignment screwed up. Even if it punished you for fractions of a second it would be a MASSIVE nerf to anyone attempting sniping.

the game would turn into Brawlers and LRM's only. Oh and you would STILL see the massive PPC boats.... they would just make sure to be within 400 meters which wont bother them at all.

Best fixes

Make maps with plenty of cover between "brawl zones", and GET A DAMN MATCH MAKER WITH TONNAGE RESTRICTIONS!!!!

Edited by Ph30nix, 29 June 2013 - 05:58 PM.


#138 El Bandito

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 26,736 posts
  • LocationStill doing ungodly amount of damage, but with more accuracy.

Posted 29 June 2013 - 06:25 PM

View PostPh30nix, on 29 June 2013 - 05:54 PM, said:

sorry missed that part. but how would you have it actually work though? how would anyone be able to snipe PERIOD? hitting a moving target would be virtually impossible if every time your cross hairs moved off them your alignment screwed up. Even if it punished you for fractions of a second it would be a MASSIVE nerf to anyone attempting sniping. the game would turn into Brawlers and LRM's only. Oh and you would STILL see the massive PPC boats.... they would just make sure to be within 400 meters which wont bother them at all. Best fixes Make maps with plenty of cover between "brawl zones", and GET A DAMN MATCH MAKER WITH TONNAGE RESTRICTIONS!!!!


If the PPC boats wants to use them at 400 meters for instant accuracy then that is a PLUS. It means the idea has succeeded in nerfing long range alphas. Besides, it will allow brawlers to counter snipers easier since reaching a PPC boat 400 meters away is much better prospect than trying to reach PPC boats 750+ meters away. Moreover, PGI can make the accuracy restrictions to either 300 or 500 meters depending on the feedback.

Aside from sniping Lights, Snipers will have little problem hitting other moving targets. Just wait 0.5-2 seconds depending on the distance from 400+ meters. Mechs are not men, they move pretty slow compared to CoD or CS. Such mechanic will also make peek-a-boo shooting less spammy--which is also a PLUS.

Edited by El Bandito, 29 June 2013 - 06:48 PM.


#139 GroxGlitch

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • 88 posts
  • LocationSome random backwater dirtball in the Inner Sphere

Posted 29 June 2013 - 06:45 PM

Total support. I'd love to see this in.

#140 pulupulu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 183 posts

Posted 05 July 2013 - 12:45 PM

deserve a bump (tired of reading bad ppc balance ideas)





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users