198 replies to this topic

[Chrithu]

I am pretty sure that the "Every modern FPS uses cone of fire" is NOT true in the way that people using it think. What is true is that yes: some modern FPSs and even older FPSs use cone of fire mechanic when firing rifles in full auto and burst mode to simulate the effect of recoil aswell as when firing the rifle while running. What is NOT true: For a single shot fired when using sights and holding breath there is a cone of fire that determines by random where that shot goes. If that was true no one would play those shooters because there is absolutely NO skill involved in determining wether you hit or not, you'd just point in the targets direction and hope the bullet hits.

I don't see any necessity for introducing cones of fire and with it dice rolls into the game. All that is needed is introducing recoil for ACs, Gauss and PPC, a longer time for weapons to converge on the target, and some crosshair bouncing while walking.

Edited by Jason Parker, 15 August 2013 - 03:24 AM.

[Ralgas]

MrZakalwe, on 15 August 2013 - 02:45 AM, said:

I actually don't think they are that far off the mark at the moment.

Super high pinpoint alphas are gone and they have said they have a solution for the Gauss/PPC issue then if it works that will be sorted to.

Improve the LB X and the AC 10, get SRMs and SSRMs up to scratch, stop punishing multiple large lasers so hard, make pulse lasers worth it and they are more or less there.

Till they get hitreg sorted we really don't know for sure, which is possibly why they've been so reluctant to move on wep balance to date. With launch date set and the fix not readily in sight though there will probably be some temp fixes over the next patch or 3 i'd wager

[MrZakalwe]

Ralgas, on 15 August 2013 - 03:33 AM, said:

Till they get hitreg sorted we really don't know for sure, which is possibly why they've been so reluctant to move on wep balance to date. With launch date set and the fix not readily in sight though there will probably be some temp fixes over the next patch or 3 i'd wager

I'm wondering if I have some super version because aside from everything used against Spiders and SRMs in general my hits tend to register fine.

PPCs and ACs do, certainly.

[Ralgas]

MrZakalwe, on 15 August 2013 - 04:09 AM, said:

I'm wondering if I have some super version because aside from everything used against Spiders and SRMs in general my hits tend to register fine.

PPCs and ACs do, certainly.

I usually have fairly well the same experience, but you do see it happen.

I'm more concerned about what we don't see, moreso hit scan ticks, individual missiles, ect that would either throw our current balance out the window or put more weapons than not on the level of ppc's and see very fast mech disintegration

[KAT Ayanami]

If you put a cone of fire, and the bullet does not go where I point. I will stop playing the game.

This is not Counter Strike or any other game like that where there is a cone that grows as you shoot.

We shoot once every couple of seconds on many weapons. If I shoot an AC20 (to go to the extreme) and the bullet misses because of the cone, Im out.

That does not happen with real weapons. It should not happen here.

[MrZakalwe]

Ralgas, on 15 August 2013 - 04:18 AM, said:

I usually have fairly well the same experience, but you do see it happen.

I'm more concerned about what we don't see, moreso hit scan ticks, individual missiles, ect that would either throw our current balance out the window or put more weapons than not on the level of ppc's and see very fast mech disintegration

Good point. The weapons not really heavily used are the ones we can't check :/

[Joseph Mallan]

KAT Ayanami, on 15 August 2013 - 04:46 AM, said:

If you put a cone of fire, and the bullet does not go where I point. I will stop playing the game.

This is not Counter Strike or any other game like that where there is a cone that grows as you shoot.

We shoot once every couple of seconds on many weapons. If I shoot an AC20 (to go to the extreme) and the bullet misses because of the cone, Im out.

That does not happen with real weapons. It should not happen here.

I would have to say it depends on the weapon in question.

Quote

An on board fire control computer coupled with laser rangefinder computes angle and velocity of the shell to ensure an accurate hit on the target. The tank is accurate targeting to 8,000 meters with an error of less than 35 meters. Turret stabilization system allows for firing while moving over even rough terrain.

35 meters... That is a pretty big Cone of Fire

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 15 August 2013 - 05:18 AM.

[3rdworld]

Jason Parker, on 15 August 2013 - 03:23 AM, said:

I don't see any necessity for introducing cones of fire and with it dice rolls into the game. All that is needed is introducing recoil for ACs, Gauss and PPC, a longer time for weapons to converge on the target, and some crosshair bouncing while walking.

With the CD of most weapons being measured in seconds, adding recoil would only push the game more towards alpha striking.

Cross hair bouncing hurts lights most, which further pushes the game towards heavier snipers. Convergence time is illogical and unneeded, and further pushes the game towards assault snipers.

edit: And convergence is technical nightmare when using a HSR system.

Edited by 3rdworld, 15 August 2013 - 05:23 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

3rdworld, on 15 August 2013 - 05:20 AM, said:

With the CD of most weapons being measured in seconds, adding recoil would only push the game more towards alpha striking.

Cross hair bouncing hurts lights most, which further pushes the game towards heavier snipers. Convergence time is illogical and unneeded, and further pushes the game towards assault snipers.

edit: And convergence is technical nightmare when using a HSR system.

Recoil would only really affect Ballistic weapons.

[3rdworld]

Joseph Mallan, on 15 August 2013 - 05:25 AM, said:

Recoil would only really affect Ballistic weapons.

Recoil has no effect on the first shot. So it would do nothing other than rewards alpha strikes.

[Joseph Mallan]

Well in that case, recoil has no affect on a patient player/shooter.

[3rdworld]

Joseph Mallan, on 15 August 2013 - 05:28 AM, said:

Well in that case, recoil has no affect on a patient player/shooter.

I am not sure patients is really the word. Unless you are going to have mechs recovering from a gauss shot for more than 4 seconds, it wont change anything other than making chain fire and small ballistics worse.

[Joseph Mallan]

3rdworld, on 15 August 2013 - 05:30 AM, said:

I am not sure patients is really the word. Unless you are going to have mechs recovering from a gauss shot for more than 4 seconds, it wont change anything other than making chain fire and small ballistics worse.

It already takes 4 seconds to reload. More than enough time for a Mech to Buck and settle back down.

[MrZakalwe]

Joseph Mallan, on 15 August 2013 - 05:41 AM, said:

It already takes 4 seconds to reload. More than enough time for a Mech to Buck and settle back down.

That's his point- he's agreeing with you

[Fooooo]

Pht, on 14 August 2013 - 04:46 PM, said:

MW 1 to MWO have all had pinpoint "perfect under the reticule" weapons damage for all direct-fire weapons of like velocity fired at the same time.

And this has always been wrong... and given the simplicity of implementing the combat mechanic that simulates the 'mechs part in the aiming equation ... probably possible since at least MW2. Maybe even in MW1, because it was single-player only. It's just simple math and conditonal data that most multi-player games have been collecting for a long time.

It's only a problem when developers make the mistake of thinking that both of the combat mechanics simulate murphy's law ("randomness") and pilot gunnery skill, and they get stuck inside of the box of "have to do it the FPS way."

Just a small note, MW2 actually had a random dmg spread mechanic in there for 1 of the settings.

I think it only came into effect on hard difficulty, but if you aimed at the legs (which was the easiest way to kill every mech very fast) it would put dmg to the arms, once the arms were gone, it moved to LT and RT etc.

Occasionaly you would get a lucky "roll" and actually do dmg to where you are aiming etc but thats 1 of they ways they made the game "harder" without just increasing the AI's armor.

(I remember hearing one of the devs of MW2 mention this in an interview as well as my first hand experiences of it.)


That said,

The OP has it wrong, as most have said.....

removing convergance does not mean CoF.
Adding convergance (like it was in CB) does not mean CoF.

I'm all for either having every weapon hardpoint fire directly straight, and then having recticles to show where each is aiming. (to a degree)
OR
Having the sections split on aiming. IE.

Left arm, Left Torso, CT, Right Torso, Right arm. all have their own recticles. Torso ones move just like now....linked to torso movement, and the arms ones move just like now.....with the mouse.

The best thing about both of these ways/ideas is that you cant just alpha and get every weapon to hit the same spot. Unless they are really close that is. (and bigger than a light) You have to fire your right arm, then move your left arm over and fire that, then fire your CT and LT and RT maybe in an alpha etc........

Simple and easy for anyone to understand (unlike invisible heat penaltys etc) as its staring you right in the face when you shoot and ofc the recticles........ oh and there is no issues with "the server will have to much load" etc like PGI said with having convergance....as it doesnt have to compute a thing.

Edited by Fooooo, 15 August 2013 - 07:39 AM.

[Pht]

Joseph Mallan, on 14 August 2013 - 06:20 PM, said:

I'm sorry? This is a FPS, You are walking around in the seat of a giant robot, (1st person perspective) Shooting other giant robots(shooter style game).

I suspect he was referring to the idea in most FPS/shooter games that there is virtually NO simulation of anything but direct control over ALL of the aiming equation.

MW, by definition, requires that the 'mech have a part in the overall aiming equation.

The only way I could think of to properly call an MW game a "shooter" is to call it an armored-combat shooter... but even than I suspect that would make most people expect that the 'mech didn't really matter much in the aiming equation.

[3rdworld]

Fooooo, on 15 August 2013 - 07:35 AM, said:

Just a small note, MW2 actually had a random dmg spread mechanic in there for 1 of the settings.

I think it only came into effect on hard difficulty, but if you aimed at the legs (which was the easiest way to kill every mech very fast) it would put dmg to the arms, once the arms were gone, it moved to LT and RT etc.

Occasionaly you would get a lucky "roll" and actually do dmg to where you are aiming etc but thats 1 of they ways they made the game "harder" without just increasing the AI's armor.

(I remember hearing one of the devs of MW2 mention this in an interview as well as my first hand experiences of it.)


That said,

The OP has it wrong, as most have said.....

removing convergance does not mean CoF.
Adding convergance (like it was in CB) does not mean CoF.

I'm all for either having every weapon hardpoint fire directly straight, and then having recticles to show where each is aiming. (to a degree)
OR
Having the sections split on aiming. IE.

Left arm, Left Torso, CT, Right Torso, Right arm. all have their own recticles. Torso ones move just like now....linked to torso movement, and the arms ones move just like now.....with the mouse.

The best thing about both of these ways/ideas is that you cant just alpha and get every weapon to hit the same spot. Unless they are really close that is. (and bigger than a light) You have to fire your right arm, then move your left arm over and fire that, then fire your CT and LT and RT maybe in an alpha etc........

Simple and easy for anyone to understand (unlike invisible heat penaltys etc) as its staring you right in the face when you shoot and ofc the recticles........ oh and there is no issues with "the server will have to much load" etc like PGI said with having convergance....as it doesnt have to compute a thing.

Or I just stack all my weapons onto 1 or 2 locations, or on arms. So all you are actually doing is lowering mech choice.

[Pht]

MrZakalwe, on 15 August 2013 - 12:21 AM, said:

My God I read the whole post you linked to and you basically want to play Mechwarrior Tactics from cockpit view and only control one mech.

NO. I don't.

I clearly stated - first person, real time, skill and human choice as THE controlling factors.

Quote

You want dice rolls to determine everything more or less.

NO. They don't.

If this is all you got from that post, than you did less reading of content and more reading of your own ideas into the post.

You have clearly missed the FACT that what hit-percentages are used ("rolls") are ENTIRELY based upon human skill with the reticule and human choices...

AND

... that you can drive your hit percentages up to 100%.

Stop letting your prejudices do your thinking and reading for you.

[Pht]

KAT Ayanami, on 15 August 2013 - 04:46 AM, said:

If you put a cone of fire, and the bullet does not go where I point. I will stop playing the game.

Missiles and cluster LBX rounds don't "go where you point."

Why are you still playing?

Quote

This is not Counter Strike or any other game like that where there is a cone that grows as you shoot.

We shoot once every couple of seconds on many weapons. If I shoot an AC20 (to go to the extreme) and the bullet misses because of the cone, Im out.

That does not happen with real weapons. It should not happen here.

To make it obvious from the get-go - I DO NOT LIKE NOR ADVOCATE a cone of fire. There...

that said, the battlemech part of the aiming equation SHOULD be in the game.

Outside of that ... NO "real" weapon goes exactly where you point it, and especially not every single time.

[One Medic Army]

KAT Ayanami, on 15 August 2013 - 04:46 AM, said:

If you put a cone of fire, and the bullet does not go where I point. I will stop playing the game.

This is not Counter Strike or any other game like that where there is a cone that grows as you shoot.

We shoot once every couple of seconds on many weapons. If I shoot an AC20 (to go to the extreme) and the bullet misses because of the cone, Im out.

That does not happen with real weapons. It should not happen here.

Actually, with real weapons it completely does.
My .308 bolt action rifle, which is really really ****ing accurate, still has a "CoF" of about 1/8th inch at 50yards. That's not counting things like gusting wind or factory ammunition (I hand-load which removes some of the randomness).
My friend with his PTR-91 (civilian G3 effectively) has a much larger randomness factor, same for his AR-15.