55 replies to this topic

[Threat Doc]

Technoviking, on 14 November 2011 - 03:51 PM, said:

I got a great way to settle this. Combat. So, without dice rolls, I am in uh... a uh... Panther. And I'm in heavy woods, there's some light woods etc. There is a lake between us. You're 1300m away in the Mech of your choice. What happens next? Try to incorporate every possible thing that might happen, and see if we can't resolve it without dice rolls, but allowing us to hit what we target.

Okay, I'll take this bait because I can...
First, if we're talking TT, you're not going to hit anything at 1300m, because the fluff, lore, and dice of the game are geared towards simulating LosTech.

Second, if we're talking in an arcade game (MW2, MW4, MechAssault), all you need to do, at 1300m, is barely lead your target and you can spack 'em pretty good. There is absolutely ZERO skill involved in those games. 'Nuff said.

Kudzu, on 14 November 2011 - 03:57 PM, said:

It's not that we want it be a 2d6 system with fancy graphics, what we want is a system that properly represents WHY those +1 and -1's were in the TT game.

In the TT your average 4 gunner pilot standing still has an 8.32% chance to completely miss a target 30m away that didn't move-- and the chance to miss goes up from there as you add in modifiers for both mechs moving, terrain, heat, etc. The shots you did hit were scattered around the mech's body... because in this alternate universe the technology is less advanced in some places (like targeting) than in ours. BT is supposed to feel like WW2 fighter pilots strapped into walking tanks, piloting and shooting more by intuition than computer assistance. That feeling is what separates it from the other mecha titles out there.

In the other MW games once you got used to leading your target it was hard to miss at all, much less the specific section you were aiming at. This lead to really short fights and felt more like an FPS than Battletech. We've been down that road before, and it's ok in its own right, but what us "purists" want to finally get is a game that stays true to its roots and to share that with the people who don't know how fun it is to laugh as your enemy whiffs what should be an easy shot (ie: needs 3, rolls 2), or to get that crazy long range PPC hit you totally should have missed (needs 12, roll 12). We want a sim that rewards good maneuvering, teamwork, and heat management as much as it rewards twitch skills. That's why you see so many of us supporting ideas like expanding reticule cone of fire, canon designs, critical hits, and so on from the TT reformatted to work in a computer simulation.

To continue with pointing out another definite bonus to doing things with a more-close-to-TT-bent... what makes you sweat more, your heart pound harder, and your eyes dart about the screen looking for the best way to do something...
A) Insta-kill

Missing the shot you SHOULD have made, making that impossible shot, and having to move into the best position you can that will deny your opponent a shot on you while you have a shot on them

? I'm sorry, but in MW3 those things existed, and the game was a ton of fun, even if some players on here will tell you it was only good enough to keep their attention for a while. I want my heart rate up, again, I want to take in two or three extra breaths in a minute because I need the oxygen for my muscles, including those in my head, and I want to use my tactical skills to out-maneuver the guy on the map, without having to turn-and-burn, get into a circle of death. Slow the 'Mechs down, force people to think, to maneuver, to miss the shots that should be dead on, to hit the shots that should be impossible, and I guarantee you a fraggin' blast in-game. Kudzu and I, apparently, are of a similar mind, and it's NOT about turning the TT game into a video game, but making the video game imitate better those things that are part of BattleTech, always have been, and have not really been a part of the previous titles, thus far.

CaptainSodom, on 14 November 2011 - 03:59 PM, said:

From the OP:

What's it with the entitlement generation? Piranha/MWO is a business. They don't owe you anything. They couldn't give a rats *** about your loyalty - if you give them your money, it doesn't matter if it's from a newborn click-and-win twitch hero or a battle-hardened TT veteran.

I NEVER said anything about Piranha, or anyone else, owing me anything. I raised to understand the world, and all the people in it, owe me absolutely nothing. It would be nice to have help every so often, though. This game is going to be what IGP and PGI want it to be, and I'm very fair to express my opinion, which alternates from yours, just as you're well within your rights to express your opinion, as well. However, I would appreciate it if you 1) would not put words in my mouth, and 2) speak to me with the same respect I am affording you. If I go off my rocker, I fully expect you to go off yours.

However, more often than not these days, those who are irresponsible in their opinion and discussion, disagree with me to the point of trying to bait me into further argument or attempt to change my opinions or feelings through disparaging remarks, or who will deride me for my opinion, go into my ignore list before it will go that far. My blood pressure is high enough, and I don't need that sort of ignorance. This is a game I want to play, and I have an opinion, like everyone else, on what it is I would like to see in the game, and I have a right to be spoken to as a Human being and not what you, or anyone else, envision as an ignorant child. You may be used to dealing with many of those, but I assure you I am not one of them, and I won't put up with it. I have never used the Ignore feature on any forum, before, but I'm finding enlightenment in doing so. I have 6 people there, so far, out of more than 21,000, and that's not a bad percentage at all; if anyone find themselves there, it is because I don't need to deal with their ****, I recognize it, and I'm doing something about it.

As long as anyone speaks to me like a Human being, and not a dog, I have no problem with them; otherwise, the liberation that is IGNORE, is wonderful.

[CeeKay Boques]

Kay Wolf, on 14 November 2011 - 04:43 PM, said:

Okay, I'll take this bait because I can...
First, if we're talking TT, you're not going to hit anything at 1300m, because the fluff, lore, and dice of the game are geared towards simulating LosTech.

Second, if we're talking in an arcade game (MW2, MW4, MechAssault), all you need to do, at 1300m, is barely lead your target and you can spack 'em pretty good. There is absolutely ZERO skill involved in those games. 'Nuff said.

1300m because I wanted to give you time to manuver.

So, I go through the Heavy Woods, at half speed, into light woods. I Clip a thick oak with my leg. Do I take one damage to my leg? Nope, just scrapes some paint. But it could happen. How much damage should occur if a tree falls on you depending on type of tree? Can I pick up a...

Quote

No melee combat

Ok, so no tree picking up. But, I am now at 9 Hex.. 900meters from you. My heat is at 0, I am in light woods. There are trees in front of me and a lake. (Feels like Zork right now, oh well.) I zoom in using (UnCanon, but MW approved) zoom recticle. I have your left Torso as centered as I can at 900m through zoom. As stand still, I fire my Lord Light ppc on clear shot through light woods at your... whatever it is.

In the video game, what should happen next?

[zax]

Kay Wolf, on 14 November 2011 - 01:12 PM, said:

Don't you think all of those who've played this game from the beginning should be honored for their loyalty to the game and its universe? Don't you think so many people love this universe over many others because of the fluff, the lore, the history, and everything that comes with it? If so, then why would you advocate for a point-and-click game?

You don't deserve anything. Your opinion is no more valid than the next persons. I own every battletech novel until the dark age and have played every mechwarrior game since the first, and I see no reason why I should get anything, or why my opinion means more than anybody else's.

[Threat Doc]

Technoviking, on 14 November 2011 - 04:28 PM, said:

Me too. Except modern physics engines can handle these calculations, we don't have to compensate like we do in the TT. We don't have to make up modifiers to show "what it would be like if this happened" it can actually happen. If I fire from heavy woods and hit a tree, I hit the tree. There will be physically more trees in a heavy woods than a light woods. They really will be there, represented in full 3D.

If I'm behind partial cover, I don't need you to add +1 if you aim at my legs, you're really going to hit that object instead of me. In my opinion, TW and TacOps rules should be heavily referenced. But there shouldn't be a "and then randomly this happened! harhar!". Remember, the TT is to simulate what it would be like to pilot a mech. Now we actually can, without the restrictions that Turn Based, modifier heavy rules and RNGs bring. It can ACTUALLY happen.

Okay, but you're not ACTUALLY getting what's being said, TV... we're not looking for the actual dice roll changes, we're looking for an approximation. Yes, if you have 90m of Heavy Woods between me and you, you're more likely to hit a tree, or trees, if it's really heavy enough. I've not seen heavy woods in a game to this point. Now, you have a Gauss Rifle and you fire into Heavy Woods while moving at a high rate of speed, but your ball bounces off a tree two feet away from the weapon's barrel, lands on the ground at your feet and the tree, NOT shattered because the velocity of the Gauss round was not enough to shatter it, even if it broke the trunk of the tree. Is that alright with you? How about the ball that bounces off a tree trunk forty-five meters away, it shatters the trunk, but also sends it off away from your intended target. Still cool with that?

If you want ACTUALLY, then ALL of ACTUALLY needs to be considered. In the TT game, each point of bonus or penalty is an adjustment of, roughly, 8.3%. P = Penalty, B = Bonus. Keep in mind you have to see if every single one of these, in the TT game, exists for you.

Quote

ATTACKER (this is you firing on a target)
Movement
..... Walked, 8.3%P, not accounted for well enough previously, the cockpit and weapons should shake more the faster a 'Mech is moving
..... Ran, 16.6%P, not accounted for well enough previously
..... Jumped, 25%P, somewhat accounted for well enough previously
BattleMech Damage
..... Sensor Hit, 16.6%P, somewhat accounted for in MW2 and 3, not in 4 at all
..... Shoulder Actuator Hit, 33.2%P for weapons in that arm, never accounted for ever
..... Arm Actuator (each), 8.3%P for weapons in that arm, never accounted for ever
Heat
..... 800-1200 Kelvin, I believe, 8.3%P, somewhat accounted for in MW2 and 3, not in 4 at all
..... 1300-1600 K, 16.6%P, ditto
..... 1700-2300 K, 25%P, ditto
..... 2400+K, 33.25p, ditto
Firing from the Prone Position, 16.6%P, never accounted for ever

RANGE AND TERRAIN
Range
..... Medium, 16.6%P, this was based on weapon ranges from the game, and was never accounted for in any game but MW3
..... Long, 33.2%P
Minimum Range, 8.3%P for each 30m closer to your target, for example LRMs have a minimum of 180m minimum, so each 30m closer is an additional 8.3%P, this was accounted for in MW2 and 3, but not in 4 ever
Light Woods, 8.3% for each intervening woods hex (30m), and an additional 8.3% if your target is standing in light woods
Heavy Woods, 16.6% for each interveining woods hex, and an additional 16.6% if your target is standing in heavy woods, neither of these were ever considered in any game, and were less than a nuisance in MW4
Water
..... Depth 1, 8.3%B to-hit in water hex, use Punch Hit Location Table; 8.3%P for firing FROM a water hex
..... Depth 2, BattleMechs cannot fire into or out of a Depth 2 Water Hex, neither of these were ever considered in any game, and were less than a nuisance in MW4

TARGET
Partial Cover. 25%P, use Punch Hit Location Table
Prone, 16.6%B to-hot from within 45m, 8.3%P outside 45m range
Secondary Target, 8.3%P to switch targets
Immobile, 33.2%B to-hit
Movement (10 seconds)
..... 61-120m, 8.3%P, never accounted for in any game
..... 121-180m, 16.6%P
..... 181-270m, 25%P
..... 271+m, 33.2%P
..... Jumped, 8.3%P plus distance penalty, never ever accounted for

I've lined out all of that to let you all know how important the lore is to the actual game universe, and why BattleTech is so distinctive from other universes. Can all of these be accounted for in MWO? NO. Can a decent approximation, whether through terrain or how your world moves on the computer screen, through weather effects, etc., be done? Yes, it most assuredly can, and it most assuredly should. Many of these things can be taken care of on their own without any extraneous effects, but what about the rest that's never been represented in the game? Shall we have the best approximation possible, as the devs have expressed their desire is to do? YES!!!

[Kudzu]

Technoviking, on 14 November 2011 - 04:28 PM, said:

I'm a 1/1 though. Or so I say. How do they know what my rating is? The pilot and gunnery rating is to simulate if an actual person were piloting that mech instead, and their strengths and weaknesses.

And that's where the pilot leveling they've mentioned in interviews comes in at. Gain exp, your pilot gets better-- your sensor range gets higher, base targeting cone is smaller, etc.

Quote

In Mechwarrior, I AM that Mechwarrior

Not quite. You are still a person sitting behind a computer screen controlling your avatar who is a mechwarrior. There is a level of disconnect in MW:O, your personal twitch skills filtered through your avatar's abilities. Read the role warfare section closely and pay attention to how they've worded it.

Quote

In league play, with your name and repuation on the line, that's not fun, its frustration. Its only fun over beer and pretzels when everyone is on the same dice rolling plane.

And you know this how, exactly? If you want to improve your chances of hitting slow down, get closer, make sure the reticule is fully covering your foe-- you still have full control of how well you shoot it just takes more than point and click.

Keep in mind it works in your favor when being shot at as well as against you when shooting, keeping the field balanced.

Quote

Me too. Except modern physics engines can handle these calculations, we don't have to compensate like we do in the TT. We don't have to make up modifiers to show "what it would be like if this happened" it can actually happen. If I fire from heavy woods and hit a tree, I hit the tree. There will be physically more trees in a heavy woods than a light woods. They really will be there, represented in full 3D.

If I'm behind partial cover, I don't need you to add +1 if you aim at my legs, you're really going to hit that object instead of me. In my opinion, TW and TacOps rules should be heavily referenced. But there shouldn't be a "and then randomly this happened! harhar!". Remember, the TT is to simulate what it would be like to pilot a mech. Now we actually can, without the restrictions that Turn Based, modifier heavy rules and RNGs bring. It can ACTUALLY happen.

With perfect accuracy you won't see people hitting trees or partial cover instead of mechs, they'll just aim above or around it making them mostly pointless. With CoF all of a sudden slowing down to go into the woods makes a lot more sense since shots have a chance to scatter and actually hit the tree instead of you-- that's what the modifiers in TT represent and that's why it would be perfect for MW:O.

[VYCanis]

Just because some people don't want super inaccurate weapons that spray in random directions for no good reason, doesn't mean they want a point and click game. There are other more interesting ways of simulating that difficulty that don't involve having mechs that couldn't hit the broadside of a barn. I'm just as big a fan of battletech, but i'd rather not interpret the rules in a manner so verbatim that it starts to smash against suspension of disbelief, common sense, and ends up coming across as ridiculous and unfun.

[DFDelta]

VYCanis, on 14 November 2011 - 05:34 PM, said:

Just because some people don't want super inaccurate weapons that spray in random directions for no good reason, doesn't mean they want a point and click game. There are other more interesting ways of simulating that difficulty that don't involve having mechs that couldn't hit the broadside of a barn. I'm just as big a fan of battletech, but i'd rather not interpret the rules in a manner so verbatim that it starts to smash against suspension of disbelief, common sense, and ends up coming across as ridiculous and unfun.

This.
Total random misses (cone of fire, for examlple) are unfun and should be avoided at all costs.
Misses that have a cause are fun and a challenge to overcome. There are so many ways to add difficulties in targeting without resorting to random, and I'd love to have them in long before a cone of fire.

[Damocles]

I have not seen a single suggestion of RANDOM cone of fire in this thread, and I agree that such a thing would not be fun.

I have seen: "If you want to improve your chances of hitting slow down, get closer, make sure the reticule is fully covering your foe-- you still have full control of how well you shoot it just takes more than point and click." - Kudzu


And I love that. Major props to OP and Kudzu. Many posters who see a reference to the TT have been outright ignoring what has been posted and instead focusing on minutiae like "*** you are not entitled to anything." And it does not further the discussion.

I want to see a simulation of Battletech that is Mechwarrior. I want to see skill attached to the decisions that I make to beat my opponent. Variables that I am in control of or that I can take control of are the key(s) to victory. When the only variable is; put reticule on CT and alpha-strike. Then the idea of skill that I have is dead.

/Damo

Edited by Damocles, 14 November 2011 - 05:59 PM.

[Kudzu]

DFDelta, on 14 November 2011 - 05:39 PM, said:

This.
Total random misses (cone of fire, for examlple) are unfun and should be avoided at all costs.
Misses that have a cause are fun and a challenge to overcome. There are so many ways to add difficulties in targeting without resorting to random, and I'd love to have them in long before a cone of fire.

I've yet to see a suggestion outside of CoF that includes the possibility of misses and of damage scatter that are both integral to the BT universe. If you miss with CoF there is a cause-- you were too far out/moving too fast/heat was too high/etc. You can control these things. No one is saying that a mech that is standing still at low heat and no damage is going to have a CoF that takes up half the screen, but if you're jumping with your heat in the red zone and trying to hit a target at max range... yeah, you're probably going to miss.

As an example, watch how when the tank moves the reticule expands (giving a greater chance to miss) but when it stops it shrinks down.


A system similar to this would be perfect, especially since BT was originally designed to be a sort of futuristic WW2 tank/fighter pilot experience.

[DFDelta]

Things that can impact on your aim without bringing anything "random" into it.
- If an arm is hit it should move to the side, possibly spoiling your aim, I have suggested elsewhere to add multiple crosshairs, one for the torso weapons and one for the arms (that can be "split" in a right and a left part in such situations). Torso weapons should largely be unaffected by this.
- A noticeable drag behind your torso movement, and thus cumbersome torso weaponry. You're turning a several dozen ton torso on a pivot mount, not your own hip.
- Arm weaponry should also have a drag, but smaller in comparrison to torso weapons.
- Make the crosshairs buzz around near the point where they actually should be if the mech is running hot, but make the weapons fire at the point they are actually aiming (not the crosshair position).
- Make torso weapons move according to your torso, and make the crosshair move accordingly. No CoF, just make the crosshair move all over the place.
- Do a similar thing to weapon convergence if you are moving your crosshair from a point that is 1000m away to a place 200m away, give weapons a second time to "return" to the center of the crosshair. (Imagine a Penetrator that has 6 medium pulse lasers in a line across the whole torso. If I aim at the mountain in the background they would all be aiming at the center of the crosshair that is 1000m away (thus crossing themselves there). If I now drag the crosshair over a enemy that is 400m away they would have to move in their mounts until they are optimized for the correct range again. If I fire early they might still be aiming at a point 800m away, and thus my outer lasers might miss the enemy to the left and right.


I think I could come up with a few more if I had some more time

Edited by DFDelta, 14 November 2011 - 06:37 PM.

[Threat Doc]

Kudzu, on 14 November 2011 - 05:32 PM, said:

And that's where the pilot leveling they've mentioned in interviews comes in at. Gain exp, your pilot gets better-- your sensor range gets higher, base targeting cone is smaller, etc.

Not quite. You are still a person sitting behind a computer screen controlling your avatar who is a mechwarrior. There is a level of disconnect in MW:O, your personal twitch skills filtered through your avatar's abilities. Read the role warfare section closely and pay attention to how they've worded it.

And you know this how, exactly? If you want to improve your chances of hitting slow down, get closer, make sure the reticule is fully covering your foe-- you still have full control of how well you shoot it just takes more than point and click.

Keep in mind it works in your favor when being shot at as well as against you when shooting, keeping the field balanced.

All manner of truth in this bit; I love it. +1. As for keeping the field balanced, I agree that you need to slow down, watch intervening terrain, make sure they're not going to get the drop on you, watch your minimum's, and blast the hell out of 'em. This will add a whole new level of tactical thought, thought period, to the game, and it's fair for everyone. Pop tarters will no longer be able to do that because their CoF aperture will be so big that, despite their ability to point-and-click, they may still miss. If the tactical ability is added, people will learn it, including the twitchers, who are normally also pop-tarters, and other sorts of cheating things, and the tactical requirements will be even, as they should be.

Quote

With CoF all of a sudden slowing down to go into the woods makes a lot more sense since shots have a chance to scatter and actually hit the tree instead of you-- that's what the modifiers in TT represent and that's why it would be perfect for MW:O.

We can't forget to use the word 'approximation' here... one day, they might understand where we're coming from, that the game will be more fun if the devs build in these approximations.

Damocles, on 14 November 2011 - 05:58 PM, said:

I have not seen a single suggestion of RANDOM cone of fire in this thread, and I agree that such a thing would not be fun.

Although it would sort of be needed and, from what I saw of Kudzu's WoT video, it is precisely what is needed here.

Quote

I have seen: "If you want to improve your chances of hitting slow down, get closer, make sure the reticule is fully covering your foe-- you still have full control of how well you shoot it just takes more than point and click." - Kudzu

And I love that. Major props to OP and Kudzu. Many posters who see a reference to the TT have been outright ignoring what has been posted and instead focusing on minutiae like "*** you are not entitled to anything." And it does not further the discussion.

Thank you, Damocles.

Quote

I want to see a simulation of Battletech that is Mechwarrior. I want to see skill attached to the decisions that I make to beat my opponent. Variables that I am in control of or that I can take control of are the key(s) to victory. When the only variable is; put reticule on CT and alpha-strike. Then the idea of skill that I have is dead.

/Damo

(two thumbs up)

Kudzu, on 14 November 2011 - 06:04 PM, said:

I've yet to see a suggestion outside of CoF that includes the possibility of misses and of damage scatter that are both integral to the BT universe. If you miss with CoF there is a cause-- you were too far out/moving too fast/heat was too high/etc. You can control these things. No one is saying that a mech that is standing still at low heat and no damage is going to have a CoF that takes up half the screen, but if you're jumping with your heat in the red zone and trying to hit a target at max range... yeah, you're probably going to miss.

Kudzu, I know that's all you and I, at least, along with Damocles, seem to get that. Everyone else seems to want to scream at the top of their lungs that this sort of sweat-creating, heart-pounding system would get in the way of the game. I've been pretty short with several of them, so I'm grateful you two, at least, are here.

Still, no one has answered my question... with 25million players strongly estimated to have played the TT, the MW RPG, or read the books, and with 11million -perhaps only a third of which are TT players- who've played the sims, don't you think those who've put in the most time deserve a little something for that time? Again, I'm not saying the devs owe a single thing to any group in particular, I'm just saying it would be very nice to have the best approximation of the TT game possible without sacrificing fun.

I know I'm not going to be heard, here, but it bears asking, anyway.

@DFDelta +1

Edited by Kay Wolf, 14 November 2011 - 06:42 PM.

[SteelRat]

From my viewpoint, this is a computer game, not TT and altho a game representing the TT would interest me, as a strategy game, thats not what I envision here. How close they stick to the TT rules and dice really don't matter to me if breaks the fun.

What matters to me is a decent representation of how these mechs would operate in real time with me as a pilot. I don't need random events happening just cause. If I miss my target, its either the target did something unexpected, or maybe his teammate shot me or maybe I just choked. In TT you need that chance of a random miss because they do represent the pilot but in a computer game, you are actually at the controls. If you suck, you suck and no amount of dice rolls is going to change that. Some things just don't translate from a TT game very well. Just accept that.

The only thing Piranha owes us is a fun gaming experience that fairly represents Battletech. And if they don't deliver that, then I am sure it will show up in the number of people playing.

[mekabuser]

@ OP,\
yes...! you should be honored with laurel wreaths///
laid upon thy brow.
Cities should be named in thy honour....
great tributes should be levied for thy undying love of battletech and thy abidement of the rollings of the dice of fate.
for thy great understanding of the lore,both fractured and schitzophrenic well into the twenty first century.
For thy being a waiting man, patient under a starless sky.

For thy love of tro art craptastic.
for thy high postcount.
For thy bravery in battle Sir Robin,
For thy DEEP understanding of what is important in a combat sim.
For this and oh..... soooo... much... more....
HOnor
~S~

[CeeKay Boques]

We agree on so much... just not implementation.

Quote

ATTACKER (this is you firing on a target)


Movement
..... Walked, 8.3%P, not accounted for well enough previously, the cockpit and weapons should shake more the faster a 'Mech is moving
..... Ran, 16.6%P, not accounted for well enough previously
..... Jumped, 25%P, somewhat accounted for well enough previously

This is a 0 to 150kph meter, and the reticules jiggle as you speed up, in 1% increments. Doesn't just have to have 3 settings anymore.. More control as you slow. Jumping depends on the amount of jump jets, but the whole machine shakes. Lose a jump jet? You weave now, and jump less far/high.

Quote

BattleMech Damage


..... Sensor Hit,

(Much can be done here, I'm sure they will.)
.

Quote

.... Shoulder Actuator Hit, 33.2%P for weapons in that arm,

We're almost on the same page. I guess, rather than Cone of fire, and percentage chances, I can envision a reticule for every weapon. "Gold" reticule when they converge. (non pivot weapons never move, they are the center point, out to an adjustable meter that you set yourself. So, you shoulder actuator is hit. Your reticule moves slower, or in fact loses its much of its range.

Quote

..... Arm Actuator (each), 8.3%P for weapons in that arm, never accounted for ever

Could be power depletion, or even better, your firing is off (in a slight random direction). You, the MechWarrior, must compensate by targeting differently.

Quote

Heat

..... 800-1200 Kelvin,
..... 1300-1600 K, 16.6%P, ditto
..... 1700-2300 K, 25%P, ditto
..... 2400+K, 33.25p, ditto

Easy peasy, this is a shimmering HUD. Dimming with power change, heat waves, blur in the cockpit. It’s just harder, because you literally can't see as well.

What about things we HAVEN"T thought of. A hot mech is more susceptible to fire, because the metal is hotter and melts faster... penetration values increased by 5%.

Quote

Firing from the Prone Position, 16.6%P, never accounted for ever

MWO 2 maybe...

Quote

RANGE AND TERRAIN

Range

..... Medium, 16.6%P, this was based on weapon ranges from the game, and was never accounted for in any game but MW3
..... Long, 33.2%P
Minimum Range, 8.3%P for each 30m closer to your target, for example LRMs have a minimum of 180m minimum, so each 30m closer is an additional 8.3%P, this was accounted for in MW2 and 3, but not in 4 ever

I don't get this. Shooting things far away is harder in just about every game. Certainly MW4, far away was harder, especially under stressful conditions...? This doesn't need additional penalties. Give me slugs that travel at X speed, make me lead with them according to X.

Light Woods, 8.3% for each intervening woods hex (30m), and an additional 8.3% if your target is standing in light woods
Heavy Woods, 16.6% for each intervening woods hex, and an additional 16.6% if your target is standing in heavy woods, neither of these were ever considered in any game, and were less than a nuisance in MW4

I've had many MW4 shots blocked by trees. Could certainly be done better. This is all physics though, doesn't need compensation, either a tree is in the way or it’s not. Just need better trees.

Quote

Water
..... Depth 1, 8.3%B to-hit in water hex, use Punch Hit Location Table; 8.3%P for firing FROM a water hex

Well, can probably toss that one. If my gun is under the water, physics deflection. If its not, don't adjust.

Quote

..... Depth 2, BattleMechs cannot fire into or out of a Depth 2 Water Hex, neither of these were ever considered in any game, and were less than a nuisance in MW4

A: Completely submerged mechs has never been done... be interesting to see.

Mw4 lasers dissipated on the surface of the water.

Quote

TARGET


Partial Cover. 25%P, use Punch Hit Location Table
Prone, 16.6%B to-hot from within 45m, 8.3%P outside 45m range
Secondary Target, 8.3%P to switch targets
Immobile, 33.2%B to-hit
Movement (10 seconds)
..... 61-120m, 8.3%P, never accounted for in any game
..... 121-180m, 16.6%P
..... 181-270m, 25%P
..... 271+m, 33.2%P
..... Jumped, 8.3%P plus distance penalty, never ever accounted for

None of these things "need to be accounted for". They can all really happen with not 2001's MW4 physics, but today's physics engines. This is moving, and cover. We don't need to add modifiers for these, they are what they are. Are you moving? Guess what, you're harder to hit. You jumped? Holy smokes I better move fast you're really cookin.


And you know this how, exactly? If you want to improve your chances of hitting slow down, get closer, make sure the reticule is fully covering your foe-- you still have full control of how well you shoot it just takes more than point and click.



I know this from playing in leagues. And this "sometimes you miss factor" was there. It was called bad hit boxes and lag. And it was frustrating, not fun. Fun things were DFAs, LBX20's from behind, those sorts of giggles. Missing easy shots because they guy had 800 ping wasn't hilarious.

So we want the same things. I want everything from TacOps in there. While I see the "Cone of fire" as an option, it seems the easy way out. Make the Environment, the Mechs, so good, that the rules happen because they are coded into the game itself, not based on an "If/Then", as in "If at 4000kelvins, then change ballistic trajectory by 8%." That's not Mechwarrioring... its.. puppeteering.


Speaking of such I really dislike the "my pilot will get better" idea. That means that the game is not hard enough, or interesting enough for ME to actually get better, I have to put talent points in. I don't mind some scout specialization, or little tips. But not things like "gunnery" or "piloting". I believe in this game, I don't want to play an avatar, I want to be a darn Mechwarrior, like we were in 2,3 and 4. We have the technology, we don't have to guesstimate anymore. We don't have to add situational modifiers, just situations. That building that jenner fell from in the video literally collapsed, and he literally fell on his thin back armor and was literally destroyed. I want that calc to be Distance fell times tonnage, equals damage to place it hit. PLUS damage from building debris. Just like you. I just don't want to roll for hit location. I want the location hit, to be the hit location.

We can help PGI come up with cool ways to do these things, you and you, you and I and them. It seems to me, that you want to take all these situations, and add them to the "expanding reticule." But if we take the easy way out, so will they. And there we'll be, playing World of Mechs.

Edited by Technoviking, 14 November 2011 - 10:59 PM.

[Kudzu]

Technoviking, on 14 November 2011 - 10:18 PM, said:

And you know this how, exactly? If you want to improve your chances of hitting slow down, get closer, make sure the reticule is fully covering your foe-- you still have full control of how well you shoot it just takes more than point and click.
I know this from playing in leagues. And this "sometimes you miss factor" was there. It was called bad hit boxes and lag. And it was frustrating, not fun. Fun things were DFAs, LBX20's from behind, those sorts of giggles. Missing easy shots because they guy had 800 ping wasn't hilarious.

It was frustrating because those things were out of your control, CoF isn't.

Quote

So we want the same things. I want everything from TacOps in there. While I see the "Cone of fire" as an option, it seems the easy way out. Make the Environment, the Mechs, so good, that the rules happen because they are coded into the game itself, not based on an "If/Then", as in "If at 4000kelvins, then change ballistic trajectory by 8%." That's not Mechwarrioring... its.. puppeteering.

You see it as the easy way, I see it as the most accurate way to represent Battletech in its true form. It's a simple and elegant way to add in two very important factors that the previous titles didn't-- misses and scatter. It also gives lights and mediums a chance to compete rather than being a case of "lead by X amount and core the CT in one shot".

Quote

Speaking of such I really dislike the "my pilot will get better" idea. That means that the game is not hard enough, or interesting enough for ME to actually get better, I have to put talent points in. I don't mind some scout specialization, or little tips. But not things like "gunnery" or "piloting". I believe in this game, I don't want to play an avatar, I want to be a darn Mechwarrior, like we were in 2,3 and 4.

I'll have to disagree here, I think that leveling pilots and stepping closer to TT is great. It gives an incentive to find a chassis and role you enjoy and really excel at it,and a way to measure your progress by something other than your K/D ratio.

Quote

We have the technology, we don't have to guesstimate anymore.

We might, but the BT universe doesn't. It's part of what makes Battletech different from the other mecha games out there.

Quote

We can help PGI come up with cool ways to do these things, you and you, you and I and them. It seems to me, that you want to take all these situations, and add them to the "expanding reticule." But if we take the easy way out, so will they. And there we'll be, playing World of Mechs.

No, my friend, we'll be playing Battletech, real Battletech.

[VYCanis]

I'd just like to point out. this is mechwarrior. The idea behind mechwarrior is not necessarily to recreate every aspect of the tabletop, but to simulate the mech combat of the setting.

It's two different approaches trying to simulate the same thing, not 1 trying to simulate the other

Additionally the only reason the mechs had modifiers for this and that + dice was as an easy to use abstracted game mechanic to represent the difficulties the pilot is having in landing a hit. It didn't LITERALLY mean that bullets are flying out and missing at weird angles. That would be like assuming that just because D&D uses a d20 mechanic that a realistic interpretation would involve there being an ever present 5% chance that you will succeed the hell out of something, and another 5% chance you will totally ***** up whatever it is you are doing, no matter how skilled or unskilled you are.

The range modifiers and dicerolls are a mechanic designed for a tabletop, meant for a tabletop, and don't really have a place outside of a tabletop-ish gameplay environment, especially when all the factors those modifiers are trying to abstractedly represent can be literally affecting aim in real time. or accounted for in how the given weapons behave.

[Tsen Shang]

Somebody say somethin bout a point and click game? I love those! Diablo is my FAVE

[alVolVloLy]

VYCanis, on 14 November 2011 - 11:58 PM, said:

I'd just like to point out. this is mechwarrior. The idea behind mechwarrior is not necessarily to recreate every aspect of the tabletop, but to simulate the mech combat of the setting.

It's two different approaches trying to simulate the same thing, not 1 trying to simulate the other

Additionally the only reason the mechs had modifiers for this and that + dice was as an easy to use abstracted game mechanic to represent the difficulties the pilot is having in landing a hit. It didn't LITERALLY mean that bullets are flying out and missing at weird angles. That would be like assuming that just because D&D uses a d20 mechanic that a realistic interpretation would involve there being an ever present 5% chance that you will succeed the hell out of something, and another 5% chance you will totally ***** up whatever it is you are doing, no matter how skilled or unskilled you are.

The range modifiers and dicerolls are a mechanic designed for a tabletop, meant for a tabletop, and don't really have a place outside of a tabletop-ish gameplay environment, especially when all the factors those modifiers are trying to abstractedly represent can be literally affecting aim in real time. or accounted for in how the given weapons behave.

Agreed.

Make the reticle bob, more when moving faster, less when moving slower. Have the terrain affect movement, obstruct views, slow you down. Included all of this stuff, but if you CAN get the shot you should get credit and score the hit. A person should be able to practice, work on their aim, and see results.

It should not be a case of you pick your shot, score the hit, but then are left at the mercy of a dice roll or some other random factor "just because" it was in the tabletop game.

[Cyber Carns]

Kay Wolf, on 14 November 2011 - 04:43 PM, said:

Second, if we're talking in an arcade game (MW2, MW4, MechAssault), all you need to do, at 1300m, is barely lead your target and you can spack 'em pretty good. There is absolutely ZERO skill involved in those games. 'Nuff said.

Ok this may seem like nit picking, you make some good points, but I have to pull the BS Card on this one. In all iritarations of the Mechwarrior Games (MW2-MW4 and MW:LL) if you have a target out at 1300m and you dont have a weapon that reaches that distance, no matter how many times you shoot outside the range of your weapons, you will not hit the target. In all the games all weapons had max ranges and most had also weapons min range when they can hit. ie UAC2 range 1200 meters, Light Gauss range 1200m. If i was dumb enough and keep shooting you at 1300m none of those weapons would hit you no matter how much I lead you at that range.. I would have to get in range of what my weapons range is to be able to hit you. So with me trying to get in range of you and you trying to stay out at that range is where the skill come into. Tactics. Im mean play MW:LL and test that out and then tell me you can hit beyond the range of your weapons.


This to those in regards to how targeting and hitting a target suggestions about having the reticle bob and weave oe shake to make it harder to hit your target.

Here is a RL example: the M1 Abrams has computres to compensate for the movemanet of the tank to keep the gun pointed at the target:

The Abrams is equipped with a ballistic fire-control computer that uses user and system-supplied data from a variety of sources, to compute, display, and incorporate the three components of a ballistic solution—lead angle, ammunition type, and range to the target—to accurately fire the tank. These three components are determined using a YAG rod laser rangefinder, crosswind sensor, a pendulum static cant sensor, data concerning performance and flight characteristics of each specific type of round, tank-specific boresight alignment data, ammunition temperature, air temperature, barometric pressure, a muzzle reference system (MRS) that determines and compensates for barrel droop at the muzzle due to gravitational pull and barrel heating due to firing or sunlight, and target speed determined by tracking rate tachometers in the Gunner's or Commander's Controls Handles. All of these factors are computed into a ballistic solution and updated 30 times per second. The updated solution is displayed in the Gunner's or Tank Commander's field of view in the form of a reticle in both day and Thermal modes. The ballistic computer manipulates the turret and a complex arrangement of mirrors so that all one has to do is keep the reticle on the target and fire to achieve a hit. Proper lead and gun tube elevation are applied to the turret by the computer, greatly simplifying the job of the gunner
The fire-control system uses these data to compute a firing solution for the gunner. The ballistic solution generated ensures a hit percentage greater than 95 percent at nominal ranges. Either the commander or gunner can fire the main gun. Additionally, the Commander's Independent Thermal Viewer (CITV) on the M1A2 can be used to locate targets and pass them on for the gunner to engage while the commander scans for new targets. In the event of a malfunction or damage to the primary sight system, the main and coaxial weapons can be manually aimed using a telescopic scope boresighted to the main gun known as the Gunner's Auxiliary Sight (GAS). The GAS has two interchangeable reticles; one for HEAT and MPAT (MultiPurpose AntiTank) rounds and one for APFSDS and STAFF (Smart Target-Activated Fire and Forget) ammunition. Turret traverse and main gun elevation can be accomplished with manual handles and cranks in the event of a Fire Control System or Hydraulic System failure.

This from Wikipedia on the M1A2


So in 1000 years of Technology innovations,updates and upgrades a mech would not be able to pin point fire and hit its target with heck of alot better computers?

Edited by Cyber Carns, 15 November 2011 - 06:12 AM.

[Threat Doc]

I'm tired of explaining myself to you people. I don't know if it's a lack of education, or ADD, but you're not listening, and you're assuming too much, and I won't deal with it, anymore.

Edited by Kay Wolf, 15 November 2011 - 07:27 AM.