With the introduction of the static quirks modifiers (IS Mechs) and dynamic quirk modifiers (Omnimech pods) are there any plans for introducing real quirk modifiers based on mech heat and component damage/destruction via critical hits? Here are some general ideas about the kind of quirks effects:
Leg Actuator destruction - decrease acceleration, deceleration, top speed
Arm actuator destruction - decrease arm yaw, pitch, yaw speed, pitch speed
Sensor damage - decrease lock range, increased lock time
High heat - overall general debuff to all systems.
As it stands right now, mechs work perfect until they lose both legs or the engine. Adding in these kind of quirks adds to immersion and is an indirect buff to weapons that deal critical damage.
Quoting this just so people read it again - Karl, please do this!
This issue is getting light once again and it's been something that has been around since the CB.
Wins give a base reward.
Losses give a base reward.
Ties currently give no base rewards.
Even if a Tie gives the same reward as a loss then atleast it would be something. I don't think it would be your department but it is a small thing that should have been fixed a while ago.
This issue is getting light once again and it's been something that has been around since the CB.
Wins give a base reward.
Losses give a base reward.
Ties currently give no base rewards.
Even if a Tie gives the same reward as a loss then atleast it would be something. I don't think it would be your department but it is a small thing that should have been fixed a while ago.
I think you mean XP, because C-bills have the same base reward as a Win and a Loss.
I emailed support about ties once and they said it's confirmed not to be a bug but they would pass along my feedback that there should be xp rewards for ties
Hey Karl. Koniving here.
Reading the past couple of pages I see everyone has you pretty busy. I wasn't going to say anything, but apparently you would be better suited to talk to about this than mostly anyone. Since you're already looking into the crosshair anyway...
I've had a super simple solution to concentrated damage being too high and too perfectly focused. "Head bob" is what it's simply called. I'm sure you know what I'm talking about. In MWO the player's head never bobs. Some would complain of nausea or some other excuse to preserve their perfect point and click adventure.
Anyway to wrap this up quickly, in first person the aim is drawn from the pilot's head (not the camera but the head) or so the assumption goes. That or the body; I'm assuming the head. In third person there is a different point of reference, the cockpit. This is not in the same place as I am well aware. But in third person, the aim moves with the mech. If the mech is prone to hobble left and right, the aim will hobble left and right. If the mech bounces, the aim will bounce. If the mech jerks from behind being hit, the aim also appears to jerk from being hit.
This is already in the game in the third person perspective, but it'd be amazing if also applied in first person.
This would go a long way toward an alternative to delayed convergence that is 100% pinpoint, but not 100% "perfect." In a way it'd act similar to the "to hit" modifiers of tabletop for stationary shooting, walking while shooting, running while shooting and jump-jetting while shooting.
Two vids. Long one demonstrates it with several mechs and many ranges. During the Banshee I score multiple headshots through "timing" my shots with a full charge bounce. Short one is very simple, demonstrates it with a Jager at basically one range.
Long version.
Short version (for the time-constrained).
I believe almost every result of this concept would be beneficial to gameplay. Higher skill quotient for perfect shots while moving. Perfect hits rely heavily on 'timing' in a way that cannot be realistically achieved by a macro. Players slowing down for more 'guaranteed to hit' shots for those not so good with their 'gunnery' skill (lol). Mech crosshair movement patterns would be based on their animations, making them feel more unique.
(Edit: "Behind" in place of "being"....amazing what typos come up at 3:14 AM.)
This is already in the game in the third person perspective, but it'd be amazing if also applied in first person.
It is not. What you see in 3PV, is the same pointer you have in 1PV, but translated to the different visuals. The actual pointer works exactly the same as if you had arm lock on. The camera gets jerked because it follows the actual aim.
There is already a mechanic that makes firing on the move difficult -- terrain. Play a fast mech and try aiming shots while running at full speed and not jumping. This is the swaying you see in 3PV. BTW, this underscores another aspect of JJs being so strong: easy aiming during the falling phase.
It is not. What you see in 3PV, is the same pointer you have in 1PV, but translated to the different visuals. The actual pointer works exactly the same as if you had arm lock on. The camera gets jerked because it follows the actual aim.
There is already a mechanic that makes firing on the move difficult -- terrain. Play a fast mech and try aiming shots while running at full speed and not jumping. This is the swaying you see in 3PV. BTW, this underscores another aspect of JJs being so strong: easy aiming during the falling phase.
No it doesn't.
Drop into testing ground, look down (no left/right twist) and shoot the ground in front of you and notice the pattern it makes (dead straight line).
Repeat in 3PV - notice how the line is a totally different shape (A sort of S shape)
In "ASK The DEVS - VLOG 3" Matt Craig briefly mentioned that SLI, (don't know if Crossfire was included under that banner or not) was finally within sight of being addressed. How much can we read into that as far as being implemented?
I know me and a few of the other guys are in the dual GPU minority but the reason I ask is that I'm a bit of a hardware freak (probably your biggest one here) and have been trying to push MWo through a bank of 1U NVidia Teslas using a custom API, it works for a bit but does tend to hang and I'm just about ready to throw in the towel on any further attempts. You guys are causing me to lose what little is left of my hair.
It is not. What you see in 3PV, is the same pointer you have in 1PV, but translated to the different visuals. The actual pointer works exactly the same as if you had arm lock on. The camera gets jerked because it follows the actual aim.
There is already a mechanic that makes firing on the move difficult -- terrain. Play a fast mech and try aiming shots while running at full speed and not jumping. This is the swaying you see in 3PV. BTW, this underscores another aspect of JJs being so strong: easy aiming during the falling phase.
1) Terrain does NOT make firing difficult. If you're moving, the terrain which makes the mech JUMP in third person does NOTHING to you in first. Test it. Go on Canyon in a Stalker. Run over boulders that dont' stop you.
In first person, nothing happens.
In third person, your body is rocked 45 degrees backwards, then suddenly 90 degrees forward, and then 45 degrees backwards to level off. THAT is terrain affecting your aim.
Perfect stillness not even possible in a car on a perfect road with an amazing suspension system is NOT being affected by terrain. That's luxury dreaming. Even in tabletop they can account for that, but a real time game made 20+ years later can't even include it in first person?
That same boulder would cause you to fall over in TT, just to mention it. You can't even notice you just stepped on one in first person.
2) It is in the game and it takes 3 seconds to see it. Test it for yourself.
Get an AC/2 on a mech that can make at least 64 kph.
Try firing while in first person and charging at a stationary target from 300 meters away with an AC/2. Do this, straight at the target, without moving the mouse. Every hit impacts the exact same point. You will never, under any conditions, hit anywhere else.
Now do it again in third person. You will miss or hit other body parts multiple times because you are going full speed.
How to counter it for better accuracy at high speed: A player controlled and skill based counter that a macro can never do.
Spoiler
Of course, you can counter this by timing your shots in a way that a macro never can (because a macro can't be adjusted in real time to relate to your movement speed and real time fluctuations in speed). (Trust me, I tried because when I have an idea I test it thoroughly; the slightest little thing in the environment will throw off any set timing, causing complete misses. The amount of effort to get something that 'kinda' works about 50% of the time is enough to make some people quit macros altogether).
This, of course, ties in with fire control, better heat management, and essentially simulates the "Gunnery" skill in TT. By necessity with a reward of better accuracy even in a system with 100% pinpoint (at wherever the crosshair is) and instant convergence, we now have a system that can encourage and reward improving your own personal weapon use by timing your shots instead of spamming them.
Even better, instead of crazy stuff like faster bullets from a targeting computer which alienates lasers and increases the value of all ballistic style weapons (...as if the lasers needed MORE alienation), a targeting computer could simply 'reduce' the extremity of the 'bounce' until convergence could be included and perhaps reduce convergence time. It could even just do the reduction of 'bob and bounce' with a color change letting you know the perfect time to fire to hit the component you want.
(Seeing which of the many threads I posted the idea in.. I can trunicate this a bit).
Simply watch the videos in the original post or now that I've gone through the 45+ notifications which occurred between 4 AM to now 2:34 PM, I've had a chance to read that many others have in fact tried this and found it to be true and even had video and jpg examples.
More stuff that also ties into a possible cause of the track IR crosshair bug.
Spoiler
In first person, it is drawn from the camera's origin or place of centering (once thought pilot's head, but the pilot himself bounces while the head does not; kind of like the Team Fortress 2 Engineer's "Nope", the camera doesn't react at all to this and so it cannot be drawn from the pilot's head; though that alone would cause some interesting but awfully linear differences). This position, NEVER, moves, it never reacts, it's like a ghost that doesn't exist. Ghost aiming! Even as the cockpit around you bobs up and down with every step (in a completely vertical way with no horizontal movement I might add), the camera's origin will never shift, and therefore, the crosshair will never shift, it will glide as if magically traversing the world on a flying rail.
Even in Track IR apparently, the camera's origin 'drifts' in advanced zoom, causing the aim to be 'off'. This or the location of the crosshair hasn't properly adjusted for the range.
Unnatural versus natural movement. This is when the idea first occurred to me LONG before third person was a thing in this game.
And on the first day I played third person, I praised it for that crosshair and posted this suggestion -- and a moderator deleted it.
In "ASK The DEVS - VLOG 3" Matt Craig briefly mentioned that SLI, (don't know if Crossfire was included under that banner or not) was finally within sight of being addressed. How much can we read into that as far as being implemented?
I know me and a few of the other guys are in the dual GPU minority but the reason I ask is that I'm a bit of a hardware freak (probably your biggest one here) and have been trying to push MWo through a bank of 1U NVidia Teslas using a custom API, it works for a bit but does tend to hang and I'm just about ready to throw in the towel on any further attempts. You guys are causing me to lose what little is left of my hair.
Jin was definitely working on this very recently in fact. Just talked to him, and it seems DX11 is now nicely fixed up; but he's waiting on some responses from nVidia, and potentially some driver fixes for DX9 before it's releasable.
The new 337.5 nVidia drivers apparently have some excellent optimizations for MWO's DX11 path. Those drivers are still in beta, but apparently can have a very large impact on D3D CPU costs and game performance.
TheCaptainJZ, on 08 June 2014 - 09:10 PM, said:
I emailed support about ties once and they said it's confirmed not to be a bug but they would pass along my feedback that there should be xp rewards for ties
Interesting. I'll escalate this as well. It sounds like it's just slipped through the cracks.
edit: Indeed an oversight. QA is reopening and reassigning the bug now.
Good thread, and the aiming reticule behavior differences are fascinating. If 1PV behaved like 3PV, that could make for an interesting, FLD/Convergence balancing mechanic.Just a fast thought, if arm mounted weapons behavior were different than torso mounted weapons; because of how terrain, inertia, and momentum affected the actuators, this could be incredibly interesting.
Do we know who to ask then? (edit: I keep forgetting)
Cause we could stat up a "Paging So-and-so" thread for them as well - which Karl actually suggested for those questions.
Yes, Paul is the lead designer, but so far, Karl is the only one who has taken the time to continually engage players in regular dialog such as this. Someone can start a thread for another dev, but who knows if they will keep up with it. Karl has proven that he is keeping up and so everyone feels the need to rush him with all their questions whether it's in his field or not.
72
VanillaG, on 05 June 2014 - 04:00 PM, said:
