41 replies to this topic

[Joel47]

Remember, though, that the reason for the WoT spotting system is to make everything server-side. If the location of the enemy is relayed to the client, a hacked client could display enemy tanks in, say, neon pink, making it easier for the player to spot them. If everything in MWO is going to be drawn by the client all the time, leaving it to the player to spot the enemy, things will only be fair as long as the client remains un-hacked. (So, what, a day? Two, tops?)

I'm not saying spotting couldn't be a bit better implemented in WoT, but I like having things server-side -- I can then trust that we're all on a level playing-field.

(And now that firing pretty thoroughly de-cloaks a tank, if you're getting shot from invisible tanks in WoT now, it's because there's a spotter nearby who isn't shooting.)

[Thomas Hogarth]

No, by cloaking tanks, we mean fires at less than 50 meters from a bush, yet clearly visible in said bush, then inside of five or so seconds cloaks again. It viciously breaks immersion.

Like I said, I'm all for the concept. Just need to increase visibility ranges by a large amount.

[Gaius Cavadus]

Yeah, we're not talking about spotting on the radar/map. It's... a lot to explain. Just check the game out and you'll understand how stupid it is.

[Black Sunder]

Cavadus, on 11 November 2011 - 03:30 PM, said:

Yeah, we're not talking about spotting on the radar/map. It's... a lot to explain. Just check the game out and you'll understand how stupid it is.

Exactly.

[Stiffish Asp]

Going through the post I cant help but wonder if some of you even know what the battlemech uses to detect enemy mechs. Magscan checks for a concentrated metallic background, useless in a city map. Then there's Vislight (night vision). Third, there's the heat sensors. just going through the TRO's, the novels, and the other source/game rule books these appear to be the only three ways to detect by electronic means FROM the cockpit. The Mk1 eyeball being the "yeah yeah, 4th detection" option. The only other is by orbital relays through either satalite or space capable craft.

I understand the frustration with the WoT system, but ffs people; RUSSIAN PROGRAMMING. 'Nuff said. Yes the stealth/detection is "im about to put my fist through the screen" annoying and the match making really REALLY needs an overhaul, and the maps need more room to maneuver in. but, do you know of a better tank combat game out currently? suck it up.

Now, that being said, i'd like to multi-kilometer maps with people arranged by lances like squads in the battlefield game series. I'd also like to see a mech commander style C3 overview, like they did in bf2 where you had one guy dropping in care packages and stuff, this way you have a individual playing some RTS, but the actual pieces he's moving around are controlled by real players who get their orders from said MC. this outta cut down any voip problems people have shouting "contact! omgwtf he warping" over the drop lead trying to establish some control.

just my thoughts, back to dropping arty on poor suckers in WoT - because i can

[GreyGriffin]

Three words.

Beagle. Active. Probe.

[Woodstock]

The principle of the WoT system is sound.

Have 'rays' come from the spotting tank that go out in all directions if they hit certain points on another tank then you can see it.

Now where it seems to fail is that there are too few 'rays', too few spotting locations on the tank and the refresh rate is not very high. The result is tanks that vanish in the open and don't appear until they have left cover and shot you.

Not sure how much lag it would cause but to make the whole 'tank' mech a spot box and to increase the number of 'rays' so the entire field is saturated ... then make cover block line of sight better. So people get spotted when they leave cover but while they are in the trees then it prevents them being spotted.

The mechanics of this NEED to be right though otherwise light mechs will be useless and their whole role thing will fail right along with them.

[Thomas Hogarth]

Stiffish_Asp, on 11 November 2011 - 06:10 PM, said:

Going through the post I cant help but wonder if some of you even know what the battlemech uses to detect enemy mechs. Magscan checks for a concentrated metallic background, useless in a city map. Then there's Vislight (night vision). Third, there's the heat sensors. just going through the TRO's, the novels, and the other source/game rule books these appear to be the only three ways to detect by electronic means FROM the cockpit. The Mk1 eyeball being the "yeah yeah, 4th detection" option. The only other is by orbital relays through either satalite or space capable craft.

I understand the frustration with the WoT system, but ffs people; RUSSIAN PROGRAMMING. 'Nuff said. Yes the stealth/detection is "im about to put my fist through the screen" annoying and the match making really REALLY needs an overhaul, and the maps need more room to maneuver in. but, do you know of a better tank combat game out currently? suck it up.

Now, that being said, i'd like to multi-kilometer maps with people arranged by lances like squads in the battlefield game series. I'd also like to see a mech commander style C3 overview, like they did in bf2 where you had one guy dropping in care packages and stuff, this way you have a individual playing some RTS, but the actual pieces he's moving around are controlled by real players who get their orders from said MC. this outta cut down any voip problems people have shouting "contact! omgwtf he warping" over the drop lead trying to establish some control.

just my thoughts, back to dropping arty on poor suckers in WoT - because i can

Explain the LOS penalty for night fighting, then.

[Kato]

Aaron DeChavilier, on 11 November 2011 - 02:37 PM, said:

oh and don't forget, in WW2 tanks fired hypersonic rounds...cause in WoT you never hear
shots from enemy units at range you only hear when its close or hits you

Which is actually quite correct. Typical tank guns in WW2 fired at Mach 2 to Mach 3 muzzle velocity.

[Alizabeth Aijou]

Aaron DeChavilier, on 11 November 2011 - 02:37 PM, said:

oh and don't forget, in WW2 tanks fired hypersonic rounds...cause in WoT you never hear
shots from enemy units at range you only hear when its close or hits you

Supersonic /= hypersonic.
An F-34 cannon (T-34 tank) has a muzzle velocity of around 650 to 970 m/s, depending on which shell is used.
Or Mach 2-3. Hypersonic is Mach 5+.

Pretty much the only real weapons with which you might hear the gun before the bullet hits, is the Val, Vintorez and Vihkr.
Well, you might if those three didn't have suppressors.

[Stickjock]

Been playing WoT for a while now... seems like I read somewhere that when they started testing the game, LOS had problems of some sort... so they intro'd the current "visibility" system...

Agree that it's a bit "wonky" to say the least... hopefully a functional LOS system will be in place for MWO...

[minobu tetsuharu]

Stiffish_Asp, on 11 November 2011 - 06:10 PM, said:

Going through the post I cant help but wonder if some of you even know what the battlemech uses to detect enemy mechs. Magscan checks for a concentrated metallic background, useless in a city map. Then there's Vislight (night vision). Third, there's the heat sensors. just going through the TRO's, the novels, and the other source/game rule books these appear to be the only three ways to detect by electronic means FROM the cockpit. The Mk1 eyeball being the "yeah yeah, 4th detection" option. The only other is by orbital relays through either satalite or space capable craft.

I understand the frustration with the WoT system, but ffs people; RUSSIAN PROGRAMMING. 'Nuff said.

Wow. No need for the racism in this forum. MW2 actually had this issue. Just two years ago I played an MMO made with the Unreal 3 engine that had this issue as well. Being Russian doesn't have bearing on technical limitations and how devs choose to approach it.

[Alizabeth Aijou]

Quote

I understand the frustration with the WoT system, but ffs people; RUSSIAN PROGRAMMING. 'Nuff said.

Russian programming can be quite excellent, actually.
Ever seen the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series?
The devs had to put additional restrictions on the AI to make the game even possible to win by the player.
Also, it has realistic physics for the bullets (discounting magical walls after X distance, which can be removed by the player).

[SwordofLight]

Ok, this post just fails - is there a dislike? OP is complaining to the devs "Hey, the bug in WoT's system? You know, the one they've actually come out and said is broken, and they're working on several fixes? Please dont make your system buggy either."

The spotting system in WoT is broken - everyone knows that. I was sitting behind a bush in my Marder II, another Marder going full out 'appeared' not 10 meters away, saw me first, and fragged me.

Yes, its broken. Used to be much more broken (what, you fragged me in my own base from across the map before I even loaded?), but its still broken. We are promised a less broken or, gasp! Not at all broken sighting system come 0.7.

Its a bug - they tried implementing an idea for spotting that just didnt work. Its not intentional. Do I agree that a bloody great mecha with a fusion engine and heat pouring out of it should light up every sensor for km around? Sure do - and render distance should be pretty **** good too - because these things are 2, 3 stories tall and people shaped - or at leasnt not building shaped. They should be pretty **** obvious.

But whining about another game in this forum, when there are multitudes of whining posts in the WoT forum that are so over-done as to be locked for troll posting. Thats not cool.

-Don

[Anjelen]

Should say - back to topic

I also hate the invisible moving tanks, it is (sorry) just stupid, a massive cloud of dust and fumes disapears on open plane
WoT is full of stuff belongs to a arcade game - and that is actualy the main target of the programer, it is not a simulator.


Within MWO there should be BattleTech stuff, as said we have the line of sight, but this is secondary.
Each mech has heat sensors, metal detection devices and more.
Shut down mechs could be detected by Beagle active probes.

We will have urban fights, would be interesting if there are plans for different areas, for example indutrial area with high heat,
will be hard to detect mechs by heat and also impact on hot weapons.

Would be nice to have a view on possible drafts to area impacts to the game, more than buildings could be damaged or jumped on.

[UncleKulikov]

Sword_of_Light, on 12 November 2011 - 08:19 AM, said:

Ok, this post just fails - is there a dislike? OP is complaining to the devs "Hey, the bug in WoT's system? You know, the one they've actually come out and said is broken, and they're working on several fixes? Please dont make your system buggy either."

The spotting system in WoT is broken - everyone knows that. I was sitting behind a bush in my Marder II, another Marder going full out 'appeared' not 10 meters away, saw me first, and fragged me.

Yes, its broken. Used to be much more broken (what, you fragged me in my own base from across the map before I even loaded?), but its still broken. We are promised a less broken or, gasp! Not at all broken sighting system come 0.7.

Its a bug - they tried implementing an idea for spotting that just didnt work. Its not intentional. Do I agree that a bloody great mecha with a fusion engine and heat pouring out of it should light up every sensor for km around? Sure do - and render distance should be pretty **** good too - because these things are 2, 3 stories tall and people shaped - or at leasnt not building shaped. They should be pretty **** obvious.

But whining about another game in this forum, when there are multitudes of whining posts in the WoT forum that are so over-done as to be locked for troll posting. Thats not cool.

-Don

So, you don't want the developers to be aware of a serious bug in another similar game that could happen in this one, because there are people in that other game's forum complaining about it?

That doesn't make any sense.

I'm asking for True Line of Sight. Back on task.

[Omar Thirds]

Some games (especially war shooters) have camouflage that is absolutely realistic-the reason you can't see your target is that they're behind a bush being blown in the wind and they're wearing camouflage. But it would (unfortunately) be easy to cheat such a system by editing the skin files and making soldiers appear to be wearing hunter's orange. This is why World of Tanks went with total invisibility for targets you're not allowed to see-the client cannot have any way of knowing the position of a target that they aren't allowed to. The effect is that people are reluctant to break cover, camping is very effective, and an overall slower game. It's up to the developers to decide if this will be a fast paced action game or a slow paced tactical game.

[UncleKulikov]

Omar Thirds, on 12 November 2011 - 05:44 PM, said:

Some games (especially war shooters) have camouflage that is absolutely realistic-the reason you can't see your target is that they're behind a bush being blown in the wind and they're wearing camouflage. But it would (unfortunately) be easy to cheat such a system by editing the skin files and making soldiers appear to be wearing hunter's orange. This is why World of Tanks went with total invisibility for targets you're not allowed to see-the client cannot have any way of knowing the position of a target that they aren't allowed to. The effect is that people are reluctant to break cover, camping is very effective, and an overall slower game. It's up to the developers to decide if this will be a fast paced action game or a slow paced tactical game.

True line of sight would be better, because if you can pick out the target even with all of the distraction, you should be able to take advantage of the shot. It's more realistic, and is much more balanced rather than some arbitrary system. Especially since targets in WOT can't be hit if they aren't visible. That is bullcrap and shouldn't be tolerated;

Camouflage should work based on how effective it is at fooling the eye rather than an abstract system. and having the texture files on an internet client would prevent the kind of abuse you describe.

[Col Ender]

Came bit late on this post, but really people... you had to drag WoT invis issue in here?

1) There is no cloaking device, it is a camouflage.
2) Tanks can hide and be undetected even without camo.
3) Read up on proper use of bushes to hide better or how to see them.
4) Keep this junk spam about "OMGz WoT invis tank" out of this.

As for LOS/Camo effect in MWO I think will be good to have multi-layer effect. What I mean is
1) Line of Sight.. if a mech part/limb can be seen then it is visible. So in other words it doesn't disappear, just no visible from your angle of view if he is hiding properly.
2) Abstract/camo ... true it is difficult to implement such effect in game, but can be coded if done correctly. So one can be not hiding properly but not easy to detect either.
3) Mech Signature.. Mechs give out x amount of magnetic field, heat, energy or other signature. That is quiet complex but also if coded properly then it too can be quiet interesting in the game.

Combine all 3 and it would be quite good and not easy exploitable.

The one thing that bugs right out of me in many games is "visual range". That is another heated debate, but I hope they give us unlimited visual range, because if a mech is really far away which comes down to a dot on a screen and I don't see... well bad luck for me! Your car, your plane or bicycle don't change your visual range in rl. Visual range limited by human eyes, climate/weather, object, night/day., etc.

Edited by Col.Ender, 12 November 2011 - 09:12 PM.

[Draco Argentum]

UncleKulikov, on 12 November 2011 - 05:59 PM, said:

Camouflage should work based on how effective it is at fooling the eye rather than an abstract system. and having the texture files on an internet client would prevent the kind of abuse you describe.

For a start, yes you can shoot unseen tanks.

Second, having the texture files reside on the server wold make it harder to hack them. It would also require transmitting them to your PC every time a mission loads. Thats too bandwidth intense.

I would like it if they managed to only transmit mech location to the client if the mech was in LOS, it'd make wall hacking useless.