459 replies to this topic

[Johnny Reb]

One Medic Army, on 13 June 2013 - 11:56 PM, said:

Huh, I guess there is a game that actually does that.
No wonder it's slowly dying based on what a cursory web search turned up.

Like this one?

[One Medic Army]

Johnny Reb, on 14 June 2013 - 12:00 AM, said:

Like this one?

If you're insinuating that this game is dying/will die due to perfect accuracy, then I guess I'll have to agree with you.
Though I hope that the recent connection related issues are due to the servers being stressed.

[Siegwald]

Johnny Reb, on 13 June 2013 - 11:55 PM, said:

Heh. what is a "modest" cone and what does that intell!

er.. entell!

A "modest" cone as I envision it would be small, at least in comparison to WoT, where your "2 standard deviations aka 95% cone" is for many weapons larger than a tank when shooting at distances over 300 meters.

I would like a cone that spans 3 horizontal sections (like RT - CT - LT wide) of a medium-sized mech at max optimum distance (270 meters for a medium laser) and has a gaussian distribution.
That would give you roughly a 2/3 chance at hitting the desired zone at this distance. This would pass for a mech that is not faster moving than cruising speed and below 50% heat.

Standing still and being at baseline heat (< 10%) should increase accuracy to nearly perfect (1/2 or 1/3 of the above mentioned cone size), while running with > 90% heat would increase the size to 2 or 3 times the above mentioned size.


Something like this is what I have in mind...

[Theodor Kling]

Siegwald, on 13 June 2013 - 11:46 PM, said:

But I also seriously believe that this is on the agenda anyway. The mechanic is in and is being tested with MGs right now. I think that once the netcode and hit detection issues are solved, we will see cone of fire mechanics for many if not all weapons being introduced.
Cheers, Siegwald

Curious: How can you test something with a weapon next to noone uses?

PEEFsmash, on 13 June 2013 - 11:49 PM, said:

U know that little teensie tiny game Quake Live, aka the best, highest skill-cap shooter in the world?

Shooter being the word here. Where you yourself are mobile as hell compared to a mech.

[Accursed Richards]

The OP sounds like an excellent idea. For why it's needed, look how torso twisting has become a staple tactic because it does the radical thing of letting you take some hits on the side torsos, and the gap between instant-fire weapons (alpha and then immediately twist) vs DPs weapons, where you have to keep looking at the target and exposing your CT. It's completely undeniable that it's far too easy to drill out the CT on many mechs, often without any other locations even losing armour.

A shrinking cone of fire requires more skill in the form of risk management--snap off a shot and risk it hitting the wrong location, or take time to aim and risk exposing yourself. Make it based on a percentage of max speed rather than absolute speed, and lights are fine.

[Siegwald]

Theodor Kling, on 14 June 2013 - 12:22 AM, said:

Curious: How can you test something with a weapon next to noone uses?

Maybe it's just the (crappy) elo bracket I'm playing in but I see a lot of MG builds the past 2 weeks...

[Theodor Kling]

Siegwald, on 14 June 2013 - 12:26 AM, said:

Maybe it's just the (crappy) elo bracket I'm playing in but I see a lot of MG builds the past 2 weeks...

Yeah the almighty elo.. makes it hard to tell anything for certain. I see next to no MGs whatsoever, nor that many SRMs if I don't use them myself. And only a handfull of LB-X 10s once in a while.

[Alistair Winter]

I would prefer a more realistic approach. After all, this is supposed to be a simulator game, kind of. Just bear with me here:

On a modern tank, if you're shooting at a moving target, you need to keep your aim on target for 1-2 seconds, while using a laser to measure the distance, so that the targeting system can calculate its trajectory. When you pull the trigger, the cannon fires at the spot your target will be when the projectile has travelled that distance.

I've seen people on this forum suggest, based on novels, that mechs actually have more advanced targeting systems, so you need to get a lock before firing your weapons. Kind of like fighter jets.

As I'm a big fan of simulator games, I'd like to see the two ideas combined.

Cone of fire? No, I think it would diminish the feeling of being in a huge and heavy walking weapons platform. The feeling of playing a big stompy deathmachine is one of the key aspects of Mechwarrior.

[Slashmckill]

Asmudius Heng, on 13 June 2013 - 10:22 PM, said:

There will always be best build(s)

The more of them around the more variety - nothing will be perfectly balanced but as long as at the pointy end of the competitive spectrum there is still enough variety of roles and play styles we will be ok - as you state we are not. Though i was talkig about a system of trade offs on nearly all choices which creates depth. I you cannot get everything without suffering in another department you build in weaknesses to mechs not just strengths

When i say "best build" i just mean the one the majority uses, but yeah there can be multiple best builds if the balancing is right. (and clearly it would not)

Well a system of tradeoffs was generally what i was thinking of anyway, mainly since this is about mechs, special abilities wouldn't work, so everything would have be a system of checks and balances where one would have to decide what few skills he could accel at. (i doubt pgi would even consider it at this point though)

hell even just a deep and interesting e-warfare in this game would make it more mmo like, but we can never have nice things for some reason.

Also i love the amount of people that don't even read the thread, then post that they don't like it merely because the term "Cone of Fire" was used. Its not taking away aiming, it's taking away convergence under specific conditions, conditions you can control. (Point and click ppc fest is pretty dull and definitely not hard)

Edited by Slashmckill, 14 June 2013 - 06:38 PM.

[marabou]

Aiming is op, nerf it!

[Fiona Marshe]

If a cone of fire is added, is should be approx 15m across at 1000m range. Just enough for damage to spread around a 'mech if you're not at brawling range.

[Jam the Bam]

No.

No RNG crap, that's the reason I left WoT, I do not want any part of my play experience to be in the hands of the gods of dice.

[Rippthrough]

All that will happen in a cone-of-fire setup is exactly the same as does happen in the CS and COD games you mention using it - the guy that wins will be the camper sat at base and never moving with a sniper build.

I would simply take away the convergence full stop. Got weapons on left and right torsos? Well you have to hit the L/R torso of what you're shooting at, or fire them seperately and twist between them.

Either that or the old suggestion of making all weapons a fix convergence at their optimal range only.

Edited by Rippthrough, 14 June 2013 - 01:54 AM.

[Accursed Richards]

marabou, on 14 June 2013 - 01:17 AM, said:

Aiming is op, nerf it!

I agree, in that it's currently much too easy to land hit after hit on the CT and nowhere else.

[El Bandito]

Jammerben87, on 14 June 2013 - 01:27 AM, said:

No. No RNG crap, that's the reason I left WoT, I do not want any part of my play experience to be in the hands of the gods of dice.

1. You can control RNG in MWO--if you are skillful enough.

2. RNGs can have positive effects in the game. Random targeting mechanism had saved MWO from poptart hell. It can also save us from the deluge of Snipers.

It should feel both challenging and rewarding if you can hit a moving target 500+ meters away with all your weapons. Right now, it is laughingly easy.

Edited by El Bandito, 14 June 2013 - 02:22 AM.

[Valore]

Cone of fire means you just have to make sacrifices if you want that perfect shot.

A sniper who's had time to centre himself, steady his aim, and do some breathing is more accurate than one who's been forced to run an obstacle course, and take his shot while on the move, while people fire back at hime.

A mech that's flailing its torso wildly from side to side to avoid incoming fire or running full speed should not have the same accuracy as one that's stood still.

Again, as I've said earlier in this thread: MWO uses TT numbers, while not using TT rules. That's given us the problems this game has.

To quote my friend:

Quote

Just look at the difference between an AC/20 and a medium laser: 4 times the damage for 14 times the weight and 10 times the size. That's how useful extra damage to a single location is [in TT].

Unless a complete overhaul of the numbers is done, its not going to work. It has nothing to do with RNG. People will just have to develop a 'skill' that tells them logically their flailing about and peekaboo shots aren't going to be as accurate as someone who's had the time to focus and take aim or let his computer calculate as it is.

Edited by Valore, 14 June 2013 - 02:25 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

One that is speed expanded (according to you running or walking) Absolutely.

[klez]

this is a terrible idea

Edited by klez, 14 June 2013 - 02:56 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

klez, on 14 June 2013 - 02:55 AM, said:

this is a terrible idea

No. It's not.

[Tahribator]

This would essentially kill MWO for me. Taking skill away from aiming and making it random completely kills the enjoyment you get from the game by "getting good at it".

I hate PPC boats with passion as well, but there are other solutions to boating and pinpoint damage rather than taking out the competitive side from MWO. Paul has already a framework in place for heat penalties and it will only get better from there.