704 replies to this topic

[Pht]

Homeless Bill, on 10 June 2013 - 01:03 PM, said:

It's not often I legitimately care about something, but if they don't fix this problem, I fear that this game will die.

Yes, you're right - the problem you point out is quite a serious problem, which removes a LOT of replay desirability from the game.

Not simulating the BattleMech's ability to bring each of it's individual weapons to bear, under any given condition, and instead allowing all direct-fire weapons of like velocity fired at any given time to hit the same armor panel has a necessary consequence:

It makes high-damage alphas (of literally any direct-fire flavor) into THE best tactic of the game; almost to the exclusion of any other sort of tactic. He who can reliably put out the most damage against a single armor panel in the shortest time will consistently win; so much so that this tactic will push out the viability of any tactic that doesn't kill a target as quickly as it does.

This is a math equation that finishes out to the result of people leaving, once they get tired of a one or two dimensional gameplay. MW4 had this problem quite severely. Were it not for a prebuilt fan-base that's backed by the fanbase for the novels and the other parts of the lore; and fans from mw1/2/3, I suspect MW4 may have died a far earlier death than it did.

Quote

Furthermore, if you've played an FPS with recoil, you'd immediately understand what's going on; it's intuitive and perfectly catered to the mass market. Even without that experience, it would take someone perhaps two minutes in the training ground or shooting at a wall to figure out precisely what's happening.

Simulating how well a 'Mech can bring it's weapons to bear under any given condition is indeed something that will give rise to intuitive gameplay. It takes no genius to figure out that overheating, running while shooting, shooting past medium rated range for any weapon, etc result in a lower hit percentage.

Quote

No one wants a random number generator to decide where they hit in a first person shooter,

---

but Battletech was balanced based on that very premise. A shooter needs responsive aim, but visceral, plodding 'mech combat needs something to limit pinpoint damage. My solution is essentially meant to be the bridge between the two requirements.

The MechWarrior genre is not an shooter nor an FPS genre. This misunderstanding stems from a confusion about how aiming happens in a BattleMech. The 'Mech's pilot controls a reticule on their hud by the means of a joystick and the pilot triggers the weapons.

The 'Mech does all the rest of the aiming chores. The 'Mech has to do the calculations to decide where to physically aim it's weapons in order to hit what it's pilot is indicating. The Mech has to physically bring those weapon to said alignment. The 'Mech has to compensate for all of the other conditions at the time of the shot that could throw the shot off. Yes, the 'Mech actually can and does aim each weapon individually; even torso mounted ones.

... and we know how well a 'Mech can do these things. We have it in a useful format; in numbers and the mechanics those numbers were built and balanced to work in. This is not my mere opinion; we know for a fact that the 'Mech actually does these parts of the aiming chores, and said numbers express this aiming ability. MWO currently doesn't simulate the 'Mech end of the aiming chores. It should.

---

The hit location table used determines what is hit in the TT. If you aim for front center of mass, your shots are put against the front of the target, with most shots clustering on the ct and side torsos. These tables describe a BattleMech's ultimate ability to get it's weapons fire clustered under the reticule; which is why there are multiple different tables representing different conditions; from chiseling a specific part off of an immobile 'Mech, to clustering your shots as tightly as a BattleMech can possibly get them vs a mobile target. There's really very little that's unpredictable about it, and you can control which table you're using (meaning human thinking and physical skill is rewarded).

Quote

THE SOLUTION
No skimming on this part. My solution is to implement a scale that represents the load on the targeting computer (TCL). Each weapon would, similar to heat, have an associated targeting computer stress value (TCS). When a weapon (or group) is fired, the stress value of all about-to-fire weapons are added to the load on the targeting computer. The targeting computer load automatically dissipates at a constant rate of 100 per second.

When the load is between 0 and 100, there are no ill effects. When it goes over 100, all missile locks and Artemis functionality are lost, convergence stops working (all weapons fire straight ahead), and you begin to take a small accuracy penalty (cone of fire) to any shots fired. Locking capability, Artemis, and convergence are not restored until the load on the targeting computer reaches 100 or below.

From 101 to 200, the accuracy penalty gets progressively worse (the cone of fire expands). Each weapon fires at its own accuracy offset, rather than all picking the same skew. The pilot can continue to drive the targeting computer load up to a maximum of 500 by continuing to fire, but the effects of a targeting computer overload reach their worst at 200.

To clarify, you can't get away with one free alpha strike; TCL values are added and penalties are applied before the shots are fired.

This won't solve the one-dimensional gameplay problem. It will simply substitute a different problem - everyone will use sub-100 load direct fire pin-point alphas. So, instead of having 6 ppc stalkers, you'll have the reign of the 6 ppc stalker, firing 2 ppcs, than 2ppcs, than 2 ppcs, or 2 ppc fast heavies; or the 2ppc fast mediums, able to flit out and back from cover and pick apart targets far more safely than the relatively sluggish assaults; and if you squash down on those, people will start using large groups of sub 100 TCL load direct fire weapons, and the game will become a one-dimensional short ranged brawl-fest, where he with the highest DPS at 100 TCL load will win. If you patch to stop this, people will start making REALLY fast 'Mechs, and totally ignoring the TCL load; and instead they just rush up to complete point blank range, and blast away with obscenely high damage (and high TCL load) builds; knowing that their being virtually chest to chest with their targets will ensure that their shots will connect with their target. Something like a 'Mech toting SCADS of missile type weapons, for example, or any other weapons with an extremely high DPS.

It will spiral down into a patch/patch/patch cycle with a single latest/greatest for each patch as players figure out new ways to min-max and munch out the system; all the while driving out new and more casual players who don't have/haven't figured out the latest and greatest.

Quote

The problem we're trying to solve stems from convergence not being a thing in tabletop Battletech.

No, the problem is that the 'Mechs haven't been built to handle their weapons as they do in the lore. Instead, they've been built to function as large FPS avatars, instead of as armored combat units; with no thought to how the definitional setting has the 'Mechs behave in combat.

Quote

THE HOMELESS
I understand a lot of people will think this is overblown, too complicated, too new, too dangerous, too homeless, etc., but I've yet to see an adequate solution - simple or complex - to our current balance issues.

---

I've seen countless posts claiming the problem lies with heat or convergence or alpha strikes, but it really comes down to the combination of convergence and high damage.

The problem is that they started with the TT weapons damage and mech armor values systems. But they allowed for FAR more weapons to be hitting a single section of a target than those numbers were ever designed for. So they started tweaking numbers. First, they doubled the external and internal 'Mech armor values. Than they started tweaking the recycle times.

They didn't make a complete combat system concept and than work their numbers in said system. They tried to make a frankenstein's monster, mashing the weapons damage and Mech armor values into an FPS mechanic; which was doomed to fail from the start. Because they haven't gone at it as a complete system, they've so far been trapped in an ever downward circling spiral of weapons tweaks, resulting in the latest/greatest per patch problem. This is the basic nature of a frankenstein's monster approach to a combat system.

---

They should have either: scratch built their own entire custom combat system and numbers to work in it /OR/ used the tt combat system, in real time, excluding the pilot skill simulating gunnery mechanic/rolls.

I say: do the latter: http://mwomercs.com/...different-idea/ ; it will enhance gameplay depth; it will actually allow players to use all the skills they use now AND more; and it will make the 'Mechs really matter; it will stop the patch/patch/patch latest/greatest spiral; because it's a simple and yet systematic approach, and to top it off, the devs will have most of their work and balance testing already done for them.

Edited by Pht, 10 July 2013 - 10:32 PM.

[Pht]

Homeless Bill, on 10 July 2013 - 11:57 AM, said:

See, but it's a different kind of skill you're talking about. You're talking about simulation skills - managing levels, knowing percentages, and making decisions on a strategic scale. And that's not the game most people want to play.

No. I'm not talking about those sorts of skills. The skills I'm referring to:

Pht said:

Gunnery skill in a BTU BattleMech consists of several physical and mental skills.

Physically, the main skill is the use of a joystick to indicate and track the desired target that one wants their 'Mech to try and hit, and the ability to pull trigger(s) exactly when necessary without disturbing one's aim. The joystick controls a firing reticule which is displayed on the main HUD in the cockpit. BTU 'Mechs are, by design, not allowed to target or track anything with the reticule or choose to shoot any weapon! Minor physical skills consist of the use of mode switches and, for example, configuring Target Interlock Circuits on the fly.

The three most important Mental gunnery skills are:

Knowing how the internal heat levels in your 'Mech will affect it's ability to aim, knowing if your 'Mech can make the shot you're indicating to it, and if you think it can make the shot, how long to let your 'Mech's Targeting and Tracking (T&T) computers calculate lead (weapons convergence) in order to hit the target being indicated and tracked by you. The decision on when to shoot or not shoot and how long let your T&T work on "a fix" is affected by other factors, which a good MechWarrior will take into account.

These factors consist of:
Choosing what weapons should be fired based on their rated battlefield ranges in relation to the distance to the target;

Knowing how the varying environmental and terrain types your 'Mech or a target is in will affect your 'Mech's ability to make the shot;

Choosing when to shoot based upon the target's behavior, for example, waiting until the target is relatively "still" enough in relation to your 'Mech's firing arc so that your 'Mech has an easier time making the shot;

Choosing what sort of movement you will be engaging in while asking your 'Mech to make a shot, for example, standing still while shooting, or running and shooting;

Choosing what types of weapons to fire based on their differing performance parameters i.e. ACs vs Gauss weapons, or pulse lasers vs normal lasers;

Choosing what types of ammo to use for ammo using weapons i.e., when to use LBX Cluster rounds vs LBX AC rounds;

Choosing firing modes for some weapons, for example, attempting to fire normal AC's in rapid fire mode, or rate of fire for Rotary ACs;

Knowing when engaging in an advanced firing mode is worth the tradeoff it requires (for instance, bracing an arm requires you to be immobile; Called Shots are harder to connect with, etc);

Knowing how the damage your 'Mech has taken will affect it's ability to make a shot (weapons can be degraded by taking damage, weapons in damaged arms might not align properly).

In case it's not already obvious, the 'Mech handles the calculation of how far to "lead" a target in order to hit the target that the MechWarrior is indicating with the reticule on his HUD. It is impossible for the MechWarrior to do these calculations anywhere near as fast or as precisely as the 'Mech's computer does them, and especially for multiple weapons types at once. YES, a 'Mech CAN align/converge all of its weapons, torso mounted or otherwise.

Quote

Most people want a Battletech-skinned FPS.

You've read the mind of "most people?"

If you haven't, you can't know this.

Quote

Random isn't necessarily evil, but it's definitely something I don't want affecting my shooting if at all possible.

If you mean the same thing I do when you say random ... does this than mean that you don't want any mech weapons handling simulation in a game about ... piloting a mech in combat?

If so, why are you playing any sort of mech/mecha game?

Quote

I won't stick around if my shots have a random chance to hit, whether or not I'm in control of how good or bad that chance is.

So, if ANY hit percentage modifiers are introduced, you'll leave?

They modified hit percentage for people while jumping.

Why are you still here?

Edited by Pht, 10 July 2013 - 10:18 PM.

[ShivaPT]

I give this thread my stamp of approval.

I feel like I MUST find something wrong with the system (or try), to validate/invalidate it, and thus contribute.

2 ideias: 1) Gradual (but still fast) loss of convergence, and 2) minimum range for convergence.

I dont like the complete loss of convergence at 100. I Have read your rebuttal, but still.... a JagerBoom (or a mauler!), in desperation, alphastriking something incoming will suddenly... miss hilariously. Really. Imagine a JagerBoom (or a mauler, or a any-mech-with-over100tcs-alfa) getting pummeled by a lance. He turns on one, desperate to take someone with him. He finds a little hunchback. Oh that little one will have some pain, at least.
At 200m he aims for centermass, in the midst of incoming fire... and fires.
And promplty the TC shuts down, looses convergence, sending the left autocannon shell firing over the hunchback's left shoulder, and the right autocannon firing over the huncback's right shoulder.
Everyone on the opposing team faints from laughing, jagermech wins.

Convergence loss should (as it is being paired by an innate cone of fire) drop as TCS rises from 100 to 150-ish. The idea would be that an alfastriking, 6ppc / ac40 mech should hit half their targets at say 200m.
Also... minimum range for convergence. Meaning... no ac40s hitting the center torso of a jenner at 5 meters. Thats just ludicrous.
All weapons (and torso should be a fraction of arms) should have a maxium swivel angle on their mounts. Basically, the left and right torso mounted ppc on an awesome should only be able to converge over 200m away. The arm mounted weapons would be like 100m. This would spread damage a lot on close range fighting (but not solve absolutely nothing at range though).

[scJazz]

28 Pages into this thread it gets moved to Features? Instead of Gameplay Balance where it belongs? With what appears no notice at all? WTF?

[EchoMike]

They moved this thread to feature suggestions? Hmmmm the thread getting too popular?

Edited by EchoMike, 11 July 2013 - 08:27 AM.

[Barantor]

scJazz, on 11 July 2013 - 06:44 AM, said:

28 Pages into this thread it gets moved to Features? Instead of Gameplay Balance where it belongs? With what appears no notice at all? WTF?

I wondered this too. Went looking for it in gameplay balance and didn't see it on the first 3 pages and knew something was up.

Hopefully it means it got looked at by someone that can actually give it the thumbs up or down.

[Aurenn]

Seriously, this is a great idea. Look at every other FPS out there, the one mechanic they all have in common with their weapons is Spread. CoD, BF, BLR, Every FPS always has some sort of Spread mechanic, MWO? The only Spread in it is with the LBX or missiles.

Sure this is going to be work, sure it's going to probably be a pain in the *** to code, this coming from a coder, but this will be well worth it in the long run and keep the game going for years to come.

Please, PGI, take notice to this and implement it into the game in some way, shape or form.

[zorak ramone]

This thread should NOT be in feature suggestion.

The system that Bill is suggesting addresses the very core of the balance problems in MWO right now, and should be in gameplay balance.

Mods, you know that moving this thread out of Gameplay Balance will reduce its visibility.

[Homeless Bill]

What the actual ****.

It's a suggestion, sure, but so are most of the other threads in Game Balance. This is a thread about game balance and doesn't belong here. This isn't a feature; it's a comprehensive balance proposal. Stuffing this in with threads about bobbleheads, ejecting, and screen shake is a total waste.

Edit: Moderators contacted. Say a quick prayer.

Edited by Homeless Bill, 11 July 2013 - 11:56 AM.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Homeless Bill, on 11 July 2013 - 11:50 AM, said:

What the actual ****.

It's a suggestion, sure, but so are most of the other threads in Game Balance. This is a thread about game balance and doesn't belong here. This isn't a feature; it's a comprehensive balance proposal. Stuffing this in with threads about bobbleheads, ejecting, and screen shake is a total waste.

Edit: Moderators contacted. Say a quick prayer.

You've been removed from view so as not to attract much more attention.

[Stomp]

Bumping for visibility nonetheless.

[DocBach]

Why is a game balance discussion in the suggestions forum?

[Draxist]

while exactly like this may not be the best solution, some form of convergence is severely needed to challenge pilots to pick shots wisely, instead of using high alphas, because heat penalties alone won't do it

where do I vote to say "yes"?

[Jragonsoul]

I have pointed this out to more of my fellow lance/house mates and the VAST majority LOVE the idea. So 4 more likes from my side of things. Why was this topic moved again?

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Homeless Bill, on 10 July 2013 - 05:39 PM, said:

O rly? Do I have to wait for the podcast or are you going to spill the beans?

NGNG PodCast #80 ... the discussion starts at about 17:30 and goes on for more than a half hour.

It seems that most of the people brought into the discussion "get it" for the most part (even Phil).

[Homeless Bill]

Kageru Ikazuchi, on 11 July 2013 - 02:48 PM, said:

NGNG PodCast #80 ... the discussion starts at about 17:30 and goes on for more than a half hour.

It seems that most of the people brought into the discussion "get it" for the most part (even Phil).

****. Yes.

21:35 - they're thinking about having me on.

I would just like to take a moment to thank everyone for their support. A lot of people are spreading the word, and without you guys, this concept wouldn't be getting any attention.

And thank you Zomboid (or something like that) for bringing it up. I love you.

[EchoMike]

Homeless Bill, on 11 July 2013 - 03:53 PM, said:

****. Yes.

21:35 - they're thinking about having me on.

I would just like to take a moment to thank everyone for their support. A lot of people are spreading the word, and without you guys, this concept wouldn't be getting any attention.

And thank you Zomboid (or something like that) for bringing it up. I love you.

No. Thank You, Bill.

[Homeless Bill]

300 likes. **** yeah. For the special occasion:


Also, I'll stop being lazy and actually respond to stuff when I have a less busy day. Pht, in particular, deserves a well though-out response.

[Stomp]

Oh snap I never liked it.

301 likes and awaaaaaay!

[Immitem]

It sounds like this idea is going places (minus the bogus thread location change). One thing that popped into my head recently (and sorry for pestering you with more questions) and that is should the weapons value be different for different mechs? As I understand it (not much) the Awesome is designed to alpha 3 PPC, a strength offset by its armour and large profile where as the Masakari should only fire 2 at a time without bloom to offset its Clan Tech.

Something I saw in another thread that could prevent the Awesome from being the FOTM is having the initial projectile do 5 damage and the rest coming from a tail that follows behind it that does gradual damage like a laser.

What do you think?

P.S. I liked how PPC in Mechwarrior 3 screwed with your HUD.

Edited by Immitem, 11 July 2013 - 06:18 PM.