203 replies to this topic

[Caleb Brightmore]

Neverfar, on 28 May 2013 - 12:07 AM, said:

Better spoken and more mature than before, by far. Bravo.

Unfortunately for all you wrote the basic problem remains: dogmatic adherence. RNG mechanics absolutely can not be anywhere, because you say so. It doesn't matter if every modern shooter franchise has them to some extent and for good reason: for all the bluster you make of it, hitting something with mouse-directed crosshair is really not all that hard. The fact that you dogmatically insist that pinpoint torso-arm-linked convergence is also an absolute necessity for your "skill" to show also speaks volumes.

So, games that suggest that you need to stop and take aim first to really get the shot exactly where you want it? Dogmatically terrible. Games that inhibit accuracy because you shot on the run? Dogmatically terrible?

Unreal Tournament 1 was over a decade ago, and apparently that's as far as you want your game dynamics to go. Because everything after was "RNG" and henceforth terrible.

That's not even including the fact that you're using the skill™ card to justify not one but four to six sniper rifles bolted together all somehow pinpoint striking the same spot unerringly. In earlier versions of this game torso weapons didn't even have firing arcs and simply fired forward, at the direction the torso was facing. Zero convergence. They would hit in a shot pattern identical to the hardpoint location of the weapons, projected forward. Wouldn't that be "skill" enough for you?

Apparently not. The game is carrying you more than you want to admit and you want to keep that hand-holding.

Negative K

If you want to introduce all of those things they can be acomplished by using ballistics and flight path.

Rounds do not go straight to a target if I had one complaint about this game that would be it.

The ERPPC should not fly straight into any target nor should a shell from distance.


But to randomly place a shot regardless of how perfectly aimed it is does not counter anything it only adds more room for luck and arguements such as.

"I was right in front of him and my weapon system malfunctioned" wtf?

Adding RNG will turn this into MechWarrior DnD and I am wholy against that.

Besides can you imagine the nerf hell in ballistics that don't go straight door to door?
Or randomly hit. omg

No

I didnt say anything random is horrible as critting is random and seems to work.

Don't blanket my statements they are specific.

And as far as everything being RNG I don't want to play a game like all of the rest because then it is same w***e different dress.

This is becomming like Halo deathmatch as it is and I randomly crash in matches and launching I don't need any more randomness than the chaos of combat in my game.

That is my opinion at least.

Edited by Caleb Brightmore, 28 May 2013 - 12:22 AM.

[Caleb Brightmore]

Neverfar, on 28 May 2013 - 12:07 AM, said:

Better spoken and more mature than before, by far. Bravo.

Unfortunately for all you wrote the basic problem remains: dogmatic adherence. RNG mechanics absolutely can not be anywhere, because you say so. It doesn't matter if every modern shooter franchise has them to some extent and for good reason: for all the bluster you make of it, hitting something with mouse-directed crosshair is really not all that hard. The fact that you dogmatically insist that pinpoint torso-arm-linked convergence is also an absolute necessity for your "skill" to show also speaks volumes.

So, games that suggest that you need to stop and take aim first to really get the shot exactly where you want it? Dogmatically terrible. Games that inhibit accuracy because you shot on the run? Dogmatically terrible?

Unreal Tournament 1 was over a decade ago, and apparently that's as far as you want your game dynamics to go. Because everything after was "RNG" and henceforth terrible.

That's not even including the fact that you're using the skill™ card to justify not one but four to six sniper rifles bolted together all somehow pinpoint striking the same spot unerringly. In earlier versions of this game torso weapons didn't even have firing arcs and simply fired forward, at the direction the torso was facing. Zero convergence. They would hit in a shot pattern identical to the hardpoint location of the weapons, projected forward. Wouldn't that be "skill" enough for you?

Apparently not. The game is carrying you more than you want to admit and you want to keep that hand-holding.

Excuse me but can you read what I wrote again?

Look at my definition of skill.

Now read what you wrote.

Notice a difference?

That's because there is a HUGE one.

[Demuder]

Caleb Brightmore, on 27 May 2013 - 06:26 PM, said:

Excuse me I use an SDR-5D AND A DRG-5N© mostly and none of them are boats.

I am not demanding a thing I am saying suck it up buttercup this isn't COD and if you cannot aim life is hard.

If you want to boat life can be easy unless they are smarter then it's hard.

In the end I took responsibility for losing to the poptarts when I did, something that NONE of you have done so far you just argue convergence vs rng vs whatever.

I am not saying the mechanic is perfect but I don't trust RNG as far as I can throw it.

Where does it say that in my post?

Nobody said that it is extremely difficult to avoid and kill poptarts or cheesy 6 PPC builds. In fact, whenever I see half my team take "strategic positions" 500m behind the front line hoping to snipe the socks off someone, I know we are doomed and more often than not, we are. In fact, it is extremely fun to have a poptart trying to hit and moving last second to avoid their powa-shot.

My main gripe with the whole pinpoint situation is that it actually makes silly builds like that viable, which destroys at least half the gameplay. I mean if you want to simply snipe, a giant robot trying to hide behind a rock is definitely the worst way to do it. And the only reason it works, is because of the - completely unrealistic imho - instant convergence of all weapons, regardless of placement, distance and all other factors mentioned. And again, the only reason that annoys me, is not the fact that I rarely die to it, but because it gives no incentive to players - in fact prevents them - of digging into the mechanics and gameplay of the game, which are much richer than your run of the mill shooter.

I know mentioning the table top rules is a dangerous matter, however, they have been put in place for a reason. I don't think we need those rules in MWO, since real time works in a totally different way and what's more, we have the code that can do some things a million times better than any game master can, ie, have all torso mounted weapons calculated and shoot at exactly where they point with no convergence.

Caleb Brightmore, on 27 May 2013 - 11:51 PM, said:

But dice rolling on what are not always easy shots isn't cool with me if I am standing there or not fast enough then I deserve to get shot not "lucky" because the dice said random misfire his buddy 5 meters over just got critted by that random AC/20 round because the target was moving and the round went awry or whatever.

Noone is really advocating dice rolling. However if you think dice rolling is broken because it would hamper anyone's carefully taken shots - and it would actually - then at the same time, pinpoint, magical, instant convergence of all weapons is also broken, since it is actually boosting the same person's unskilled shots.

The tabletop - from what I can infer, because I never actually played - uses dice rolls to determine the point the target is hit, not if the target is hit (that is another dice roll). In effect, it's the only convergence that could be built in the tabletop game. Here, we don't need a dice roll to determine if the shot actually connects. However, we need a way to randomize the placement of the shoot on the target, because of all the reasons mentioned above.

In fact, it doesn't even have to be random, just removing convergence from torso hardpoints would help a great deal with this.

Edited by dimstog, 28 May 2013 - 12:53 AM.

[YueFei]

The core issue is what kind of gameplay do we want here? Everything else is a side track.

Imagine this game let us one-shot enemy mechs. The game would still require skill and thinking, aim and reflexes, but it just wouldn't be Mechwarrior ™. Yes, the more skilled player would tend to win such one-hit-kill contests, but that isn't the kind of skill this game is supposed to be about. There are many different kinds of skills, not just the skill to see an enemy first and shoot him first before he can shoot you.

Chess is a slow paced game, but no one would argue that it doesn't take skill. It's just a different kind of skill.

This game is supposed to be a blend of action and strategy. You can't have much strategizing if mechs die too quickly. There's a very good reason that they doubled the armor values early on. Imagine we were still using the old armor values!

I would say that lasers are the baseline against which all other weapons' performance should be measured. As in, against a dumb or lazy mech pilot who stays still, the damage can all be focused into a single spot. But an alert and smart pilot will be able to twist and turn to spread the damage.

Do that, and massive alpha strikes don't become overwhelmingly more effective than a mixture of weapons, each with different travel speed, because the weapons are gonna fire off sequentially anyway.

If we're not gonna make it possible to spread the damage, then why are we still using the damage/armor model from TT?

[Caleb Brightmore]

dimstog, on 28 May 2013 - 12:49 AM, said:

Nobody said that it is extremely difficult to avoid and kill poptarts or cheesy 6 PPC builds. In fact, whenever I see half my team take "strategic positions" 500m behind the front line hoping to snipe the socks off someone, I know we are doomed and more often than not, we are. In fact, it is extremely fun to have a poptart trying to hit and moving last second to avoid their powa-shot.

My main gripe with the whole pinpoint situation is that it actually makes silly builds like that viable, which destroys at least half the gameplay. I mean if you want to simply snipe, a giant robot trying to hide behind a rock is definitely the worst way to do it. And the only reason it works, is because of the - completely unrealistic imho - instant convergence of all weapons, regardless of placement, distance and all other factors mentioned. And again, the only reason that annoys me, is not the fact that I rarely die to it, but because it gives no incentive to players - in fact prevents them - of digging into the mechanics and gameplay of the game, which are much richer than your run of the mill shooter.

I know mentioning the table top rules is a dangerous matter, however, they have been put in place for a reason. I don't think we need those rules in MWO, since real time works in a totally different way and what's more, we have the code that can do some things a million times better than any game master can, ie, have all torso mounted weapons calculated and shoot at exactly where they point with no convergence.



Noone is really advocating dice rolling. However if you think dice rolling is broken because it would hamper anyone's carefully taken shots - and it would actually - then at the same time, pinpoint, magical, instant convergence of all weapons is also broken, since it is actually boosting the same person's unskilled shots.

The tabletop - from what I can infer, because I never actually played - uses dice rolls to determine the point the target is hit, not if the target is hit (that is another dice roll). In effect, it's the only convergence that could be built in the tabletop game. Here, we don't need a dice roll to determine if the shot actually connects. However, we need a way to randomize the placement of the shoot on the target, because of all the reasons mentioned above.

In fact, it doesn't even have to be random, just removing convergence from torso hardpoints would help a great deal with this.

Yes I will agree laser hardpoints on the body for example are not on a swivel so you should be forced to aim both reticles on the target and have a clear LOS.

Which will mean standing way out in the open more than normal for some.

But wouldn't just getting rid of armlock solve a lot of that?

It was a lot harder learning to aim without armlock than with it so much so I hate arm lock it is nothing more than a handicap at the cost of side to side aiming arc.

It is the worst imo and should not exist but again it does not fit my style so I don't really use it at all even when trying to land a distant shot.

[Caleb Brightmore]

dimstog, on 28 May 2013 - 12:49 AM, said:

Nobody said that it is extremely difficult to avoid and kill poptarts or cheesy 6 PPC builds. In fact, whenever I see half my team take "strategic positions" 500m behind the front line hoping to snipe the socks off someone, I know we are doomed and more often than not, we are. In fact, it is extremely fun to have a poptart trying to hit and moving last second to avoid their powa-shot.

My main gripe with the whole pinpoint situation is that it actually makes silly builds like that viable, which destroys at least half the gameplay. I mean if you want to simply snipe, a giant robot trying to hide behind a rock is definitely the worst way to do it. And the only reason it works, is because of the - completely unrealistic imho - instant convergence of all weapons, regardless of placement, distance and all other factors mentioned. And again, the only reason that annoys me, is not the fact that I rarely die to it, but because it gives no incentive to players - in fact prevents them - of digging into the mechanics and gameplay of the game, which are much richer than your run of the mill shooter.

I know mentioning the table top rules is a dangerous matter, however, they have been put in place for a reason. I don't think we need those rules in MWO, since real time works in a totally different way and what's more, we have the code that can do some things a million times better than any game master can, ie, have all torso mounted weapons calculated and shoot at exactly where they point with no convergence.



Noone is really advocating dice rolling. However if you think dice rolling is broken because it would hamper anyone's carefully taken shots - and it would actually - then at the same time, pinpoint, magical, instant convergence of all weapons is also broken, since it is actually boosting the same person's unskilled shots.

The tabletop - from what I can infer, because I never actually played - uses dice rolls to determine the point the target is hit, not if the target is hit (that is another dice roll). In effect, it's the only convergence that could be built in the tabletop game. Here, we don't need a dice roll to determine if the shot actually connects. However, we need a way to randomize the placement of the shoot on the target, because of all the reasons mentioned above.

In fact, it doesn't even have to be random, just removing convergence from torso hardpoints would help a great deal with this.

While I am thinking on this lets say for example they create convergence the way you suggested by limiting it to where the hardpoint in pointed with limited movement up or down for body weapons.

most Gauss can crit from a distance,

Most Gauss is arm mounted so even double would not suffer from a convergence check as the target is distant only if the target were too close for the rounds to converge would it effect Gauss.

So what stops people from doing the same thing that they did last time 2x Gauss became the primary sniper weapon?

I just don't see how adding something like that won't open up another can of worms with whatever.

As it is things seem to be kinda working as intended but it's a struggle to keep up with the daily changes and FOTM builds.

In the end I just try an adapt since nothing in this game is in stone.

I may wake up and Gauss will be nerfed.

i dont know I don't use it.

It was fun for about 3 games then I felt like I was in halo again and I hated that game.

But in that game the snipers were mostly using hacks so it was impossible to avoid being hit.

This isnt the same but deathmatch is deathmatch imo the platform matters not still a bit boring at times.

[Ralgas]

YueFei, on 28 May 2013 - 12:50 AM, said:

The core issue is what kind of gameplay do we want here? Everything else is a side track.

Imagine this game let us one-shot enemy mechs. The game would still require skill and thinking, aim and reflexes, but it just wouldn't be Mechwarrior ™. Yes, the more skilled player would tend to win such one-hit-kill contests, but that isn't the kind of skill this game is supposed to be about. There are many different kinds of skills, not just the skill to see an enemy first and shoot him first before he can shoot you.

Chess is a slow paced game, but no one would argue that it doesn't take skill. It's just a different kind of skill.

This game is supposed to be a blend of action and strategy. You can't have much strategizing if mechs die too quickly. There's a very good reason that they doubled the armor values early on. Imagine we were still using the old armor values!

I would say that lasers are the baseline against which all other weapons' performance should be measured. As in, against a dumb or lazy mech pilot who stays still, the damage can all be focused into a single spot. But an alert and smart pilot will be able to twist and turn to spread the damage.

Do that, and massive alpha strikes don't become overwhelmingly more effective than a mixture of weapons, each with different travel speed, because the weapons are gonna fire off sequentially anyway.

If we're not gonna make it possible to spread the damage, then why are we still using the damage/armor model from TT?

I'm going to chime back in here in that even though i am one of the "i hate rng " crowd it doesn't mean what we have now is perfect. If you add cone fire/mech sway you run into the following issues (which is the basis for my objection)

On spread
a) lights get their lagshield back, although now you cant compensate because random.

b )random defeats a) but then becomes inconsequential when shooting anything larger than a hunchie due to the spread being less than a torso panel

On wep balance
c) either lasers or ballistics/ppcs become op compared to the other depending on the system (cone fire prefers lasers as you can compensate in the duration and direct fire prefer mech sway)

d) lock on weps (ssrm/lrm) defeat it altogether (a1/jm6-s/stalkerfest?)

e) fixing torso weps still creates situations on chassis that would ignore it (see hn-732, stalkers, jaggers as examples)

What we need imo is the return/lengthening of convergence locks as there were supposed to have been (does anyone read the pilot trees? pinpoint?) although it needs to extend from too being far inwards as crossing in front of mech's for nada dam is quite infuriating

Edited by Ralgas, 28 May 2013 - 01:25 AM.

[Caleb Brightmore]

Neverfar, on 28 May 2013 - 01:11 AM, said:

Good. You finally answered that convergence question.

Some people who throw the word "skill" around a lot seem thoroughly convinced that their "skill" would be unfairly straightjacketed if the game didn't auto-lock their arms and torsos for them.

The very reason that arm lock could be disabled to begin with (and shouldn't even be in the game), was that supposedly it lead to more interesting gameplay where you might be able to hit something beyond the turn rate and torso twist of a Mech. I do that sometimes to good effect.

My primary beef is with people that simply must have arm-lock and expect perfect pinpoint convergence with it.

A lot of other problems I have with bloat-boaters involve the simple metagame issue of "this best weapon, get more of best weapon". I'd prefer a metagame where "this is best weapon UNLESS you try to stack it, in which case two of this is better except in the case where this third weapon counters that more". We don't have that yet.

My tertiary beef is with people that throw pointless personal attacks out and pretend they have a crystal ball that reads my personal life, finances, romantic options and probably orientation, all based on my opinions on a video game.

So long as you don't do that and behave, that is good.

Allow me to clarify.

I am all for "weapon convergence" being used correctly but shot convergence as to exactly where on the armor plate it hits being RNG'd I dont agree with.

And if you read my posts in almost every "skill" match I speak of I am in a SDR-5D moving at 145.9 and LANDING shots albeit I miss tons as well on lights all the time anything bigger and I dont even need to slow down to hit mostly.

Yet I have missed an Atlas at point blank range in panic mode it happens

I am NOT talking about using the heaviest armor you can and boating tank like weapons but I have no issue if you choose to do so as well.

Edited by Caleb Brightmore, 28 May 2013 - 01:23 AM.

[Voidcrafter]

jay35, on 26 May 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

~stuff~

It's quite annoying that the hit detection is currently broken on ballistics until the other half of ballistic HSR is brought online, so nearly half of on-target AC and PPC shots are failing to register. But that's also a good example for everyone of how obnoxious it would be if some sort of RNG was introduced to determine whether your shots hit what you aimed at. Please keep that in mind the next time you are tempted to start a thread that is in effect a request to remove player skill from the game.

I don't agree with you on this point.
I don't think that ballistics are THAT broken - yes, now and then ocassionally a shot (seems to)fail to register.
But I'm more than certain, that the reason for people thinking that this is broken is their own fault for not playing well enough with the named weapons.
I've been tearing appart sidetorsos/arms/leggs/heads with trajectory weapons since I started playing this game and can't say that I'm having any trouble with aiming and hitting wherever I wanted.
Today I've destroyed the left sidetorso(the only cored part) on a AC40 Jager with AC5s, yesterday did the same with an spider I'm not even thinking when I'm shooting - it's just comming natural to me and I don't feel that there's any problems with that.
Yes - there is the PPC-seems-to-hit-but-it-does-not issue, but for me that happens once on 20+ shots and still I'm having the feeling that the hit actually registers, but there just aint a crosshair blink.

So I jump to the conclusion that your deffinition of "properly aiming" is quite different than mine is.
And I got a vallid argument for it too(at least valid for myself) - sice I've spectated lots of people since I started this game I can say with ease that very, very few of them can play with ballistic weapons properly.
Yes - you can hit a target with 4/5/6 PPC volley, yes it will be devastating, in most of the cases would either kill the target or make it useless/wary until the end of the game.
So what?
Big deal.
Try hitting the damaged side torso of fast moving BJ/Jager/Cata-pult/phract/smaller target, while 300-900m away - not just hit the target itself.
And that, my friend, in my opinion is working just fine.
That's one of the main reasons I still love the game, even if it's a poptart/PPC-boating hell right now - cause when I do all I mentioned in the previous sentance, I really feel satisfied.
Cause this thing, in my opinion again, requires the most skill in the game.
And a bit countrary to the most believing in the oposite - the SRMs were actually quite a skill weapons, especially when you're using them in a fast-paced close combat against fast target - cause then, when you actually manage (again...) to hit the desired location instead of the target itself - you really felt good and satisfied.

That's why I've argued few times with some people on the very same topic - "OMG SRMS ARE NOOBISH WEAPON WHATS SO HARD ABOUT IT TROLOLOL".
Well... if a person haven't get that point before saying that... is there actually a reason to try to convince him otherwise at all?
So may I ask you, again -
Did you actually ment that you can't hit properly the place you're aiming with your ballistic weapons on your mech?
And about the tabletop...
I'm not even sure I wanna start that one...
Sadly, just cause of the franchize's universe, this game would never be capable of escaping the mention of the tabletop stuff...
And it'll always be a very delicate subject, no?

[cyberFluke]

Caleb Brightmore, on 28 May 2013 - 01:22 AM, said:

Allow me to clarify.

I am all for "weapon convergence" being used correctly but shot convergence as to exactly where on the armor plate it hits being RNG'd I dont agree with.

And if you read my posts in almost every "skill" match I speak of I am in a SDR-5D moving at 145.9 and LANDING shots albeit I miss tons as well on lights all the time anything bigger and I dont even need to slow down to hit mostly.

Yet I have missed an Atlas at point blank range in panic mode it happens

I am NOT talking about using the heaviest armor you can and boating tank like weapons but I have no issue if you choose to do so as well.

There is still nothing worthy of being called "Skill" here. My second favourite ride is my Spider w/ECM, JJ and an ERPPC. I regularly pull 600 damage a round with it. I killed an atlas while flying though the air backwards at 132 KPH yesterday. It wasn't hard, at all. that's my point, THIS GAME IS TOO EASY TO AIM. It's like saying riding a bike with stabiliser wheels on takes skill. You're just flat out wrong.

[cyberFluke]

Neverfar, on 28 May 2013 - 01:37 AM, said:

That was my point originally before he started his little flamewar. What he's doing isn't that impressive and what he's defending shouldn't be nearly as sacred as he makes it.

Preaching to the choir dude

The game needs to force more thought into taking *any* shot, let alone a long range snipe. As it stands it's simply too easy, either that, or I'm very, very skilled, which I highly doubt.

[Demuder]

Caleb Brightmore, on 28 May 2013 - 01:32 AM, said:

What about firing at an SDR from my SDR with an ERPPC at 145.9 and landing hits when he is moving across me in a battle at the same speed?

Is that skill? RNG would ruin that.

I don't mean to rain on your parade here, but since you have mentioned this several times, no, it's not skill. Why ? Because you are doing 145.9 kph in 30 tons of metal, weaving around, on LEGs, on uneven terrain most of the time and you have less shaking than a Ferrari on a asphalt straight road.

I know, I know, 3025 technology and stuff, granted it is in the realm of possible, but still, you are almost not shaking (predictable bobbing is not shaking) and what's more, you are doing that in relative invulnerability from any other danger in the field - balistic will only hit you with extreme luck, lasers might hit you for a fraction of their duration, SRMs will not catch you, SSRMs will probably miss too. Personally, I think the ability to mount an ERPPC on a Spider is ridiculous, however, that is completely my personal taste and has nothing to do with balance.

Taking all of this into account, no, it doesn't require skill. I am not saying you are not skilled, but no, it doesn't require exceptional skill to do that. Just like running at 135kph around a lonely assault (thus granting you invulnerability) and peppering him with hits to down him in say... 4 min? That doesn't take skill either. And I am willing to bet 1mil C-Bills that for every shot you land on that enemy SDR, you miss 9 others. Meaning, you are in the realm of RNG anyway from a statistical point of view at least.

All that aside, I don't understand why "skill" has to come in the discussion every single time. We are debating a broken mechanic here, pinpoint dmg of all weapons against curtailing that pinpoint dmg. Skilled players will do better either way, skill is a non-issue here.

The only thing that requires actual skill in this game is being able to coordinate with your team mates. There is no poptarting build, 6 PPC alpha build, group of steroid lights, etc etc that can stand up to a well coordinated lance of mixed tonnage and builds. That's where the skill lies. And torso twist. And aiming for the right component. And waiting to get intel from the scout so you can plan your approach. And having a build that can engage at least at two ranges of the three. And reserving a spot in your build for AMS.

And all that skill simply goes to waste when there's 4 poptarts on the other team and 4 6xPPC stalkers on yours.

[Demuder]

Ralgas, on 28 May 2013 - 02:16 AM, said:

While it's the best implementation i've heard so far it still a huge ball and chain on lights, having to crawl to be able to aim effectively makes them sitting ducks.

Edit: meaning swooping in firing on the run and vanishing again is their stable

Which leads to the awkward result, that in almost every scoreboard the top dmg positions are kept by lights and the occasional correctly outfitted Atlas or Highlander. I am all for invulnerability in high speed, but there must be a trade off, don't you agree ? Otherwise, why bother designing a 100 ton mech and giving them heavy armor and weapons ?

Edited by dimstog, 28 May 2013 - 02:32 AM.

[Ralgas]

Might be different at the top, but not in my experience unless it's a premade or exceptional wolf pack.

Edit: As more seismic sensors get out there and/or until it gets altered that kind of play isn't going to net the kind of results it previously has in any event.

Edited by Ralgas, 28 May 2013 - 03:08 AM.

[Demuder]

Ralgas, on 28 May 2013 - 02:43 AM, said:

Might be different at the top, but not in my experience unless it's a premade or exceptional wolf pack.

Edit: As more seismic sensors get out there and/or until it gets altered that kind of play isn't going to net the kind of results it previously has in any event.

I won't argue, maybe I am completely wrong about it. It just feels "wrong" to me to have a light be able to put out as much damage as an assault - in any way. But again, I think this is mostly personal taste, not a balance thing.

[Joseph Mallan]

jay35, on 26 May 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

Just a quick reminder that if you have issues with players always being able to hit what they properly aim at, which is normal in a first-person simulator/shooter like MWO, you might be better served by MechWarrior:Tactics, where the gameplay is much closer to tabletop, including pRNG (pseudo random number generation, i.e., representation of dice rolls) for whether your weapons fire hits its intended target. That removes player skill from the equation and leaves it up to "chance", which might be more to your liking.

However, to come here and demand this game be changed to inhibit player skill as the primary factor in whether someone hits their target, is to undermine the very nature of this game. The devs have themselves stated in the past that they want player skill to be the primary factor, and requesting the introduction of things like "weapons don't always hit where you aim" would be the beginning of wrecking this game, and turn off not only the core playerbase but also most of the potential audience that would come from other FPS games. Right now the biggest fanbase is here for one of two reasons: fans of previous MW games, which did not have any sort of randomized nonsense in whether you hit your target, or competitive players, which also demands player skill be the primary determinant of success and that begins with the game designating a hit on what you correctly targeted.

It's quite annoying that the hit detection is currently broken on ballistics until the other half of ballistic HSR is brought online, so nearly half of on-target AC and PPC shots are failing to register. But that's also a good example for everyone of how obnoxious it would be if some sort of RNG was introduced to determine whether your shots hit what you aimed at. Please keep that in mind the next time you are tempted to start a thread that is in effect a request to remove player skill from the game.

From a person who used to shoot stuff/people for a living... this game has little to do with, "proper aiming"! Sorry, its a game, if you want to experience a real targeting feel and good aiming results, go hunting or joint the Infantry.

[Fooooo]

Just to cyberFlukes reply a few posts up.......


What what what ?

Slowing down to gain more accuracy (via a cone of fire getting smaller) = skill ?

Thats just knowing a game mechanic. There is no skill in it bar knowing that you must slow down to get that 100% perfect shot.

Add to that it turns the game into a camp fest, with people standing still to gain 100% accuracy instead of moving around because they would miss almost all their shots........

Being able to move your physical HAND on the mouse / joystick, to get the aimer to hit the exact spot is more of a skill then that.....

I can bet there is tons and tons of players who cant hit a spider at 1000m with a ERPPC no matter how hard they tried. Yet there is a few who could almost do that 100% of the time. Are you saying there is no skill gap there ?

Adding some random change of weapon direction (cone of fire) means that even if I DID happen to find that perfect spot and clicked the mouse at the exact right time, it could STILL MISS. Meaning my perfect aim meant jack all............hence less skill because of some RNG mechanic.........

[Karl Streiger]

Fooooo, on 28 May 2013 - 04:30 AM, said:

Thats just knowing a game mechanic. There is no skill in it bar knowing that you must slow down to get that 100% perfect shot.
....
I can bet there is tons and tons of players who cant hit a spider at 1000m with a ERPPC no matter how hard they tried. Yet there is a few who could almost do that 100% of the time. Are you saying there is no skill gap there ?

Is there a difference... to hit that mythical spider at 1000m is the same... just knowing the game mechanics and the rest is training...

However...I believe to have RnG means that there have to be a value that measures the "accuracy" of a weapon.

For example 0.015 for a AC 20 - resulting in a "missing" of 0.015m at 1000m range. (means that weapon hit the spot - even when AC 20 is not able to deal any damage at this range...curious)

Without these value... no RnG could be implemented - not without tearing the source code into pieces.

Miss...when ever some body is argueing against RnG they use the argument that they could miss a thing.
As far as i can remember WoT with heavy RnG...the chance to miss a target was highly dependend on the shot you take.

Aiming for the command turret means that there was a high chance to miss completely...aiming for other spots means that you may miss the spot, but hit the target any how...
I really would like to see this behaviour in MWO...to have the choice between a 100% hit and a 35% chance to kill a target.

[Zyllos]

And this is why I advocated for either having no individual weapon convergence (everything fires straight ahead) with torso weapons firing around the torso crosshair based as if the crosshair is aiming straight from the cockpit and arm weapons fire just to the left and right of the arm crosshairs.

But this doesn't even fix all the problems. The Stalker comes to mind. You could load 4 PPCs in the arms and have them land basically in the same spot where you aim.

How do you fix that problem without RNG?

The whole problem right now is that you can make builds that only need to aim for a split second and all the damage is applied to where you aimed. This completely nullifies any other builds that has to aim multiple times and in multiple ways due to travel time. They will inheriently spread their damage due to having to wait, change distance, and contend with where the target will be before firing a different weapon system.

[Accursed Richards]

Fooooo, on 28 May 2013 - 04:30 AM, said:

What what what ?

Slowing down to gain more accuracy (via a cone of fire getting smaller) = skill ?

Thats just knowing a game mechanic. There is no skill in it bar knowing that you must slow down to get that 100% perfect shot.

Add to that it turns the game into a camp fest, with people standing still to gain 100% accuracy instead of moving around because they would miss almost all their shots........

Think it through. If you're standing still, you're also easier to hit. Knowing when to slow down for accuracy, when to be evasive, or when to spray fire on the move sounds pretty tactical to me. And shots don't have to miss on the move--just scatter a little so they don't hollow out the CT quite so reliably.

It's also quite easy to balance this for light mechs, by having the scatter based on your percentage of maximum speed, rather than current KPH.