20 replies to this topic

[Nova2]

I have possible plans for next year once I get my PC room finished, to make my own custom cockpit control system dedicated for MWO. I have been playing MechWarrior games since MW2, and in the later years with the USB joysticks (during MW3 and MW4) I thought it would be cool to butcher up a joystick and re-arrange the buttons to make a customized cockpit style control panel for the game. In the past several years I have been collecting buttons and switches, and even stumbled across MCUs (like the Arduino) which can be programmed to function like a joystick when hooked up to the PC.
While I have been busy with allot of other projects and not playing much of MWO lately, in fact the last time I played MWO had just went open beta. But when I loaded it up today the cockpit controls seem to fall a bit short of the previous MW games, with very few things to configure or use. In allot of the older games there were all these controls for radar modes, sensors and electronics, cycling through enemy and friendly targets, flushing coolant, cycling nav points, weapon cycling and grouping, firing modes, and ect, that were worthy and needy of a nice custom control panel. Not to mention make a nice looking cockpit control panel. The majority of the existing controls to MWO can easily fit on my X-42 joystick.

I am curious to know, is there going to be more of these functions and controls put into the game or is this it?
Even if this is it, I might still be going ahead with the project just to say I finally did it. But it would be nice to know if I should be holding off on design concepts for the control panel for a finalized version of the cockpit controls to MWO.

[VIPER2207]

Nova2, on 26 November 2013 - 05:05 AM, said:

I am curious to know, is there going to be more of these functions and controls put into the game....

sadly, i think that's it for MWO, i don't except more functions.
Especialy sinde PGI stated that the core-fans are no longer their target group, they want to reach new players and make the game less complex (which is why 3PV was introduced, (official) reason was, that new players could see their legs and torso, to get a better feeling for the movement).
Introducing new and/or complex control options would contradict this.

but maybe i'm wrong at this point... idk

[Macbrea]

Some of those controls do exist. Go to your options and see what you can set. Simpits do exist as some people have built them. You can find a whole category here at the forums about them. Just look down in the technical section.

[Redshift2k5]

We don't have multiple radar modes, friendly targetting, etc. so there will be fewer functions than other titles like MWLL.

Coolant flushing we do have but requires buying a consumable module for every match you use one.

[sneeking]

you used to be able to place amo and associate it with a weapon so it would consume first and if a weapon was destroyed you could eject the amo so as not to carry around an explosion risk needlessly.

mech2 gbl had more complexity and more freedom but with that comes exploits and imbalanced play, given the multi player focus here I think they are on the right path trying to keep competition tight by limiting those options.

[Solkar]

The consumables (have to rebuy them each match you actually use them in) include UAVs, Air Strikes, Artillery Strikes, and Coolant Flushes so far, and each of those has a different control. There may not be different radar modes, however there are 2 different zoom modes, if you have the advanced zoom module installed. Also most people forget that there are actually 7 weapons groups (the 6 you see, plus an alpha strike). I expect that there will be at least a couple new expendables down the line, which will also get custom controls, but that is a guess.

About the only thing that has less detailed control than other MW games is targetting. You can not target friendlies (so no next or previous friendly) and for enemies there is only a 'target next' that gives preference to enemies under or closer to your rectical, however if you are already targetting the mech under your rectical it will cycle to a different mech, which can be annoying. If you are designing a special set-up though I would keep a spot for a "previous target" control button, in the hopes the option is added

[Mycrus]

we are lucky that they re-added back "fire current weapon group" so yeah... i won't hold my breath...

btw, i'm not holding my breath for a separate map monitor or any cool ish like that...

[Nova2]

Wow, I completely missed the SimPits section. Thanks for the quick responses!
I was afraid that this was going to be a WYSIWYG thing.

I have looked through the game already for the control configurations. And I know I did mention some of the things that were already in the game, in one way or another, but some was only in part like they were incomplete. When I looked through the controls in the game it left me even more puzzled, as if there was a lot more to come, especially when seeing stuff like Toggle ECM Mode, Weapon Door Toggle, Cockpit Light, adding both Night Vision and Thermal Vision, and the UAVs and Strikes.
Wait a minute, UAVs, Air Strikes, Artilery Strikes…? Oh, I got the wrong game again! This is Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Online, I was looking for MechWarrior Online.
I remember hearing about stuff like that for the new “MW5” game that got shut down when Harmony Gold got all huffy when they seen the Warhammer in the trailer, but I did not realize that MWO was a direct continuation of that game.

@sneeking
Allot of the functionalities I was referring to was even found in MW4, which as you know left allot of the hard-core fans unhappy with Microsoft for dumbing it down and radically changing it from MW3 and MW2. And MW4 was considered by Microsoft (just like MWO by its designers and publishers) a fresh reboot that was tamed down for the new players.
The biggest exploit that MW2 had that took away from the game (other than bugs/glitches, or making a mech in GBL and placing the configuration in your NetMech dir) was the Jump-Jets. And even in MW4 where all you could go was up, the pop-tarting got old fast.
But like I stated before, they had all these other little details and I figured the rest was still to come.

[sneeking]

last one I played mech3 , im an old mech2 gbl expansion guy.

I came to have a look at mwo after difficulty finding ways to get mech2 running in windows7 ×64, so far as I can tell even in dosbox the old disket versions won't run on my hardware and the windows patch for the pentium edition is useless also.

im cool with the fact that this is not the same game, its online skirmish not a full blown sim. id still like to get mech2 with gbl but may have to scab up some retro hardware to do it ( a 486dx would suffice ) as a bonus I could run my comanche diskettes and maximum overkill expansions I have those tucked away for a rainy day also lol.

[Victor Morson]

Don't forget / for "Open Bay Doors." This is a huge deal on several 'mechs, like the Centurion & Catapult.

Also Q for displaying all detected targets and B for the minimap are important.

EDIT: Put Heat Override somewhere that you can easily hold it down, too. It doesn't last long.

Edited by Victor Morson, 27 November 2013 - 02:02 AM.

[sneeking]

what exactly is the significance of bay doors ? I own 3 centurion varieties and have never used it.

[Victor Morson]

sneeking, on 27 November 2013 - 02:49 AM, said:

what exactly is the significance of bay doors ? I own 3 centurion varieties and have never used it.

When they are shut, missiles are delayed about three quarters of a second before firing, when you press the button; however in this state, you are given a % bonus armor (I believe 10% but don't quote me on that.)

In general, it's a non-issue for LRMs but it will literally make or break an SRM Cent.

The only UI for it is the tiny light in the cockpit that goes Yellow to Green, and is almost impossible to make out in some lighting.

Edited by Victor Morson, 27 November 2013 - 04:43 AM.

[Yom]

I'd put a button on the joystick that locks the arms to the torso. In some strait on situations, it's best to focus the damage as much as possible.

[sneeking]

ok, would be other way around though wouldn't it ? closed standard armour value open 10% penalty left torso hit box.

rather than a bonus I mean.

I notice the sharp shooters go for my right torso after my magazine most though.

[SpiralFace]

Keep in mind that as a game that gets constant updates that can be quite extensive sometimes (Including an upcoming gutting of the current UI.)

Its not out of the question that extra functionality can be included at a later date.

But as it has been mentioned, this game needs to be at the very least approachable for new players.

Currently there are systems in the game that cater to the new players, and those that cater to the advanced players.There's nothing stating that they are no longer adding new advanced features, but the features themselves have to be approachable enough that new players can digest them in "chuncks.

You can't just throw something in there to make the game more complicated at the detriment of the new players.

[Denolven]

sneeking, on 27 November 2013 - 05:07 AM, said:

ok, would be other way around though wouldn't it ? closed standard armour value open 10% penalty left torso hit box.

Yes, it should be that way. But as far as I remember, this was tested by someone, and he found out that you actually get a bonus with closed doors instead of a penalty with open doors.

Edited by Denolven, 27 November 2013 - 05:57 AM.

[Denolven]

VIPER2207, on 26 November 2013 - 05:13 AM, said:

Especialy sinde PGI stated that the core-fans are no longer their target group, they want to reach new players and make the game less complex (which is why 3PV was introduced, (official) reason was, that new players could see their legs and torso, to get a better feeling for the movement).

Actually, they try to make the game as complex as it deserves (in regard to old school MW), but less complicated than veterans are used to. Make sure you get the difference between complex and complicated. Right now, the game is still a nightmare for newbies. Even the damn cadet bonus is is made in a way that totally punches them in the face.

With good design, you can make very complex things whithout being too complicated. That's why smartphones are so successfull today. They key is to adapt the technical stuff to humans, not the other way around. And yes, 3rd person view is one of those steps. If your product is not accessible, nobody will use it. If nobody uses it, the whole thing fails.
I understand that you want the game how you like it - everyone does. But if your way means the death of the game, then sorry, no, you can't have it your way.

For more insight on this, I recommend this 5 minute video:

[VIPER2207]

Denolven, on 27 November 2013 - 06:12 AM, said:

Make sure you get the difference between complex and complicated.

well, sorry for that. i agree, "complicated" was the word i should have used. English is not my native language, so i mess up with some words sometimes. Bad luck when it happens in such a context.
nevertheless, the rest of my post is my opinion, when you change the two words.

[Nova2]

When it comes to complexity of a multiplayer game we have to remember (we: the players and the developers) that the players make up for half the game’s content, and the majority of the community. When it comes to the new players in general it is up to the skilled players and veterans to step in to help coach and teach the new players on how to play and give them positive encouragement to keep playing the game.

I can remember several years back I had picked up a brand new strategy game off the store shelf, it was strictly a multiplayer game (no single player campaign), I played some of the tutorials and got the gist of the game. When I played my first multiplayer game I made a newbie mistake and the next thing I knew I had a hailstorm of prophanety and insults thrown at me by my teammates. After that I remember being asked to leave allot of the servers as I was an "unskilled player" that "didn't provide a challenge" to them. I only played about 2-3 games online before giving up entirely on the game. I did not really give up on the game itself but the community, and became discouraged from playing the game by the community.

So as a skilled player in a game you have to remember not to be so hard on the new guys and give them a chance. And if your looking for a skilled opponent you have to remember you will have to go out of your way with teaching/coaching a new player a little to become better skilled, along with encouraging them to stick around to build up their skills on the game.

The new players should also be understanding in the fact that a new game brings new things to learn. And that veteran players are not going to hand them over the golden guide on a silver platter all at once, but will give them bits and pieces of information to become a better player and understand the game.

If the developers have made it, it is not easily found. But I do think MWO is lacking a nicely detailed manual that explains on how things work in the game. Like the weapons bay doors for example, I figured they were just for looks at first, and if they did anything at all they covered a hard-point with a few extra points of armor. They do have about a half hour of videos with some tips and brief explanations of stuff. A mass amount of this information is a no-brainer for the old MW players. A nicely detailed manual explaining weapons equipment systems and subsystems of a mech, more specifically the ones choose to include into the game and details on how their functionalities work in the game.

A rant for the deves:

Spoiler

I would have normally of held this rant back, but if you are going to ask $240 for a “Clan Mech Pack” the rant is on.

On the training video for “BattleMech Weapon Systems” they were giving a basic description of the weapons and while I was wondering why they are not getting into the details or advantages as to why you would use this weapon over that one I thought I heard “PPCs, also known as man made lighting…”, I backed the video up thinking I was zoning out and heard something wrong, sure enough that is what they said “man made lightning”.

OK, I am going to pretend I am one of these new guys to MW and BattleTech, I am completely ignorant of all that is BattleTech. I hear this and think “PPCs... man made lightning… Cool they have giant vandergraphs in this game… I wonder how many sheep they have to skin to make one of these weapons-grade vandegraph generators?”

Did you even do any R&D on BattleTech before you jumped into making MWO, or did you just make things up from staring at the cover-art?

A PPC (Partial Projector Canon) or partial accelerator or commonly referred to in other scifi areas as a “proton cannon” emit a beam of protons, lightning bolts are made up of electrons and generally caused from static electrical buildups … http://www.sarna.net...rojector_Cannon There is no cannon or uncannon BattleTech source that they have referred to a PPC as being a “lightning bolt”.

When a lot of us older MechWarrior gamers sat back and said we will work with you and cut you some slack to dumb down the game for the new players, I think there was a bit of misunderstanding on your side on what we meant by “dumbing down”. We meant simplified controls, not adding all the functionalities of the subsystems and components to make it easier for a new player to grasp. You know like not adding in the option to disable the inhibitor field to the PPCs to allow a shot at a target that is 90 meters or closer. Not reach up each others arses and pull out functionalities and descriptions of weapons and systems.

I understand you have new players and old players to cater too, and while I donot like the fact that you seem to be heavily leaning towards catering the new players and almost leaving the old players out in the cold I will still give the developers a chance to wow me with a fun and entertaining experience. But you are still dealing with BattleTech franchise, no matter how simple or hard you make the game to learn you need to pay attention to details and follow through with your promises if you want the support from us older players. It is us older players that gave the initial contribution to let you get the ball rolling with your new MWO game, they are the ones you can always turn to to keep the ball rolling, not the new comers as they have no clue as to what MechWarrior or BattleTech is about and are often unwilling to take the chance on something new. I am not saying the old players at the “BattleTech Gods” and you must obey the gods and make their every wish your command, but you do need to show them some respect.

If you go the extra mile by paying attention to detail and add in the little features (I am not talking about mile-long MW5 wish lists that turn the game into a complex monstrosity to the new players) but the basic details and features that can be enjoyed by both the old players and new players for years to come, the employees of Piranha Games will enjoy prosperous years to come.

I have said it before in the past, and I think it would be a good recap for the devs of Piranha Games and anyone else interested in trying to make a MechWarrior game:

If you want to make a MechWarrior game, then make a MechWarrior game. And to make MechWarrior you’re going to have to take what has already laid down in front of you and expand to it with the capabilities of madern day PCs and related technologies. And if you have to make some minor changes in consideration for the new players that is fine. But do not change it so much that the product you made no longer relates to the MechWarriors of the past, if you want to do that go make “RoboWarrior” instead, as all your going to do is erk-off the existing fans by making RoboWarrior and titling it “MechWarrior” to cash in on them.

The MW fans are not going to come in with an open mind like new comers to the franchise, they are going to uphold you to the standards of the old MW games and BattleTech. And this will lead to heated debates as well as some very harsh criticism if you donot stay on the path of the MechWarrior (hey look I made a funny). But if you make a RoboWarrior game and title it so, you are the kings in your own kingdom of standards, and everyone will come to your product with an open mind.

sneeking, on 27 November 2013 - 01:59 AM, said:

last one I played mech3 , im an old mech2 gbl expansion guy.

I came to have a look at mwo after difficulty finding ways to get mech2 running in windows7 ×64, so far as I can tell even in dosbox the old disket versions won't run on my hardware and the windows patch for the pentium edition is useless also.

im cool with the fact that this is not the same game, its online skirmish not a full blown sim. id still like to get mech2 with gbl but may have to scab up some retro hardware to do it ( a 486dx would suffice ) as a bonus I could run my comanche diskettes and maximum overkill expansions I have those tucked away for a rainy day also lol.

I am running Windows 7 x64, and I have no problem with getting the DOS versions of MW2:31CC, NetMech, MW2:GBL, MW2:Mercs, or Merc-Net to run in DosBox. You should even be able to get the ’95 versions run under a Win 9x VM with some finesse, or Windows XP x86 with the patch. The 3DFX versions can be done with a Glide wrapper, but that is going to take some finesse as well. Try checking out: http://www.mech2.org...c.php?f=7&t=806
Sounds like you did not do something right in DosBOX, you can try again with “Solution 6: DosBox” or try “Solution 1: MechVM”. If you follow their guides you can even play NetMech and Merc-Net against other people over the internet. If you still have problems getting it to work, ask on the mech2.org forums, there is usually someone around to help.
When I installed my games I made an ISO copy of my discs to run off of in DosBOX, it seems to work better that way. I went straight DosBox rather than MechVM as I play allot of other old dos games too.
Since you are a MW2 fan I would still recommend taking a look at MechVM as it has some cool tools to extract sounds and models and what not out of the game files.

[Koniving]

Denolven, on 27 November 2013 - 06:12 AM, said:

For more insight on this, I recommend this 5 minute video:

The foo strategy in MWO, unfortunately, is single shot pinpoint instant-damage ballistic weapons (ACs, Gauss rifles, PPCs).

And unfortunately, it generally trumps everything else, even the higher skill weapons.