Jump to content

Why a 'cone of fire' aiming system is best suited to making MWO match the setting


339 replies to this topic

#1 mithril coyote

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 135 posts
  • LocationNew Mexico

Posted 17 November 2011 - 02:32 PM

There has been alot of discussion about how best to handle aiming, which is probably the most important aspect of a game like this.

Previous mechwarrior piloting games, all the way back to Mechwarrior 1, has been your basic first person shooter set up. you have a reticle around what is basically a 'dot'. place the dot on the target, fire, and you hit what the dot covers. place it over a arm and you hit the arm. over a leg and you hit the leg. and so on.
but this approach does not match the setting of the battletech universe. obviously the board game, with it's dice, tables and 3ed person omniscient player view established the basic feel of the universe, with weapons aimed at the target hitting randomly over the target.
but many have argued, the boardgame isn't a piloting sim, so a new approach has to be taken. very true, but the previous mechwarrior sims took the universe too far the other direction, making mechs ultra-accurate snipers.

is there a point between these two styles that forms a happy medium? a style that retains the randomness of the boardgame but the simulator feel of the mechwarrior games?

in fact there is. the Battletech/mechwarrior novels, which are the medium that established the setting and the main reason the setting has been so popular.

This is an except from Ghostwar, by Michel Stackpole, part of the Finale battle. the novel is set in the 3130's, so this represents units using technology a century in advance of MWO's timeframe. Mike Stackpole is the writer who wrote the Warrior trilogy, the clan invasion trilogy, and almost a half dozen other novels that form the backbone of the battletech universe. in effect, how he wrote his novels defines how mech piloting was supposed to be in the setting.

--------------------------

"As ordered, lead." The command made sense, as the Militia troops were the only innocents in the battle. I dropped the gold crosshairs on the Black Hawk , got a pulsing dot in the heart of them to indicate a lock, then tightened up on two triggers. Ghost rocked back and down as forty missiles arced skyward, then converged on the ’Mech. Waves of heat washed over me, and watching the damage done sent a chill through me.

The missiles sowed fire all over and around the Black Hawk , pulverizing armor. It fell in a ferro-ceramic blizzard around the ’Mech’s feet, in some cases sloughing off in whole sheets. The humanoid engine of war wavered for a moment as the smoke cleared. The pilot fought to keep the machine in balance, but the sudden loss of tons of armor and the battering it had taken left him unable to control it. It pitched forward, smashing down on a knee and then its hands.

Though clearly surprised by Isabel Siwek’s treachery, Catford reacted swiftly and brutally. He spun his Jupiter with an agility I’d not expected and extended both of his ’Mech’s arms toward Siwek’s Ryoken II . The pair of PPCs mounted on the left forearm crackled with artificial lightning. Their jagged cerulean beams slashed the squat ’Mech. One seared an ugly scar up through the left side of the body while the other danced lightning over the cockpit itself. Melting armor gushed in a torrent down to the ground, where it bubbled and smoked.

The quartet of autocannons on the Jupiter ’s left forearm likewise proved terrifyingly efficient. Two chewed their way into the armor on the left arm and right thigh, leaving stippled trails of granulated armor behind. The other two, however, blasted into the cockpit, obliterating the canopy. Whether it was the hail of glass ripping her to shreds, or the heavy slugs pulping her human remains, Isabel Siwek died as ugly as the treachery she’d been a party to.



--------------------------------------

the Bolded lines are for emphasis. sadly i do not have electronic forms of the Warrior Trilogy or the clan invasion trilogy, which are closer in technology to MWO, but their depiction of mech combat is identical in style.

in the battletech universe, piloting is very much like the mechwarrior simulator games. throttle, aiming reticle, and so on. Mechwarrior 3's ability to aim the weapons seperate from unit movement is standard in the novels, but not really required to match the feel.

what is required to match the feel is randomized hit locations. in the novels, even if your aiming for a specific spot, your likely to hit anywhere on the target. even mechs with clan targeting computers find it difficult to obtain sniper type accuracy, instead merely obtaining lesser shot spread. in the novels, the closer you are the more likely you are ot hit where you are aiming, while firing at targets farther away results in a wider spread of damage over the target.


the "cone of fire" system, where your shots are randomized in an area around your reticle, matches this feel. by having this area larger against targets towards the end of the weapons range, and smaller against targets close to you, you are able to match the feel of the novels, while also solving issues prevelant in previous mechwarrior games such as cripling the target with pinpoint shots to the legs at long range. such tactics become extremely difficult to pull off intentionally. the ability of the player to aim is still important, because a poorly aimed shot is less likely to fall within the cone of fire. but a cone of fire allows more inexperianced players a chance to learn, instead of being headshoted right off the bat by those with better aiming skills.

Edited by mithril coyote, 17 November 2011 - 02:33 PM.


#2 TheRulesLawyer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,415 posts
  • LocationChicagoland

Posted 17 November 2011 - 02:37 PM

Did this really need its own thread? There are like a million threads on this already.

#3 mithril coyote

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 135 posts
  • LocationNew Mexico

Posted 17 November 2011 - 02:45 PM

actually, there are many threads where the issue came up, but none with specific discussion about it.

Edited by mithril coyote, 17 November 2011 - 02:57 PM.


#4 CeeKay Boques

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 3,371 posts
  • LocationYes

Posted 17 November 2011 - 02:47 PM

Sure thing, enjoy a C&P...


So there you are with your AC.

That's, y'know, possible cluster weapon right?

So, lets say AC20. (An example of the rating system: the Crusher Super Heavy Cannon is a 150mm weapon firing ten shells per "round" while the Chemjet Gun is a 185mm weapon firing much slower )

I got the Crusher Super Heavy cannon.

Now, I could have a steady arm, and a "cone of fire". We could do that.

Or, that gun could have a hell of a kick. And a rippin fast firing. Now, being familiar with that gun, I know I gotta start off in the Belly area, because I want the shoulder. He's moving. I give it a shot, The 10 shells rip out in in under a second, but take an entire second to fire. The shells fire the trajectory, that I manipulate with my joystick, (or mouse) fighting the force feedback to keep it under control as my arm shoots up. (Torso mounted weapons don't have this problem, they're based on my torso's movement. (hard when running).) 4 of the shots hit going up, 3 to more facing down making a "N" pattern as I push down in that second trying to control it. 3 of the shots miss, 2 hitting a far building, and one sails off into the distance.

Lasers? Lasers require charge time. I pull the trigger, it doesn't come out right then. It comes out .4 seconds later. (only a medium, the large takes .8 to charge and fire you see.) And...heat.

You're right though, cone of fire could fix all this, and I wouldn't have to plan or think, I could just paint the target and pull the trigger.

Y'know, Point and click.

#5 mithril coyote

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 135 posts
  • LocationNew Mexico

Posted 17 November 2011 - 03:11 PM

actually, having played all the previous mechwarrior games, those are far more point and click. oh ,and i do mean all. my first was mechwarrior 1.

in the mechwarrior games you point your guns, click fire, and poof, there goes your target. no tactics beyond "as many guns as my mech can hold, point at target"
want to kill the enemy fast? point your guns at the cockpit. want to play with them first? point at the legs. and so on.
and range didn't factor into accuracy beyond what you could see, so the battle went to the one who could point and click faster from across the map. recharge and reload rates just slowed down how fast the unit could fire, but didn't do anythng to effect the fact you could one shot your opponent. if you closed in to a distance where you might be able to outrun your opponents aim, your were killed by uber-accurate pinpoint fire long before you reached 'safety'


with a cone of fire, if i aim at the head i'm gonna have a chance of hitting the head, upper torso, and depending on range and weapon, maybe even the upper arms. aim at a leg and i could hit anywhere on the lower half of the mech.

if i want to get highly accurate hits, to pick off an arm or a leg or the head, i have to pilot my mech up to extremely close distance. that mech will have to fill most of my screen. but to do so i have to be able to outthink my opponent. i have a chance to get that close, but i'm going to have to risk losing some armor in the process. but i have the chance.

and there is the point that this game is set in the battletech universe, and The battletech universe dictates randomness. Cone of fire is pretty much the default in the setting.

Edited by mithril coyote, 17 November 2011 - 03:12 PM.


#6 TheRulesLawyer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,415 posts
  • LocationChicagoland

Posted 17 November 2011 - 03:14 PM

A lot of us are with you, but there are many out there who can't accept this particular bit of nonsense that is part of battletech.

#7 Eegxeta

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 134 posts

Posted 17 November 2011 - 03:20 PM

Well I actually directly mention this is a post (can't remember which topic is was right now) that ballistic weapons should have a cone of fire type aiming along those line I also put why only ballistic weapons should have this is missiles weapons are designed to fly straight or are guided and beam weapons are lasers which can't go anywhere but straight.

Edited by Eegxeta, 17 November 2011 - 03:21 PM.


#8 Eegxeta

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 134 posts

Posted 17 November 2011 - 03:32 PM

View Postmithril coyote, on 17 November 2011 - 03:11 PM, said:

actually, having played all the previous mechwarrior games, those are far more point and click. oh ,and i do mean all. my first was mechwarrior 1.

in the mechwarrior games you point your guns, click fire, and poof, there goes your target. no tactics beyond "as many guns as my mech can hold, point at target"
want to kill the enemy fast? point your guns at the cockpit. want to play with them first? point at the legs. and so on.
and range didn't factor into accuracy beyond what you could see, so the battle went to the one who could point and click faster from across the map. recharge and reload rates just slowed down how fast the unit could fire, but didn't do anythng to effect the fact you could one shot your opponent. if you closed in to a distance where you might be able to outrun your opponents aim, your were killed by uber-accurate pinpoint fire long before you reached 'safety'


with a cone of fire, if i aim at the head i'm gonna have a chance of hitting the head, upper torso, and depending on range and weapon, maybe even the upper arms. aim at a leg and i could hit anywhere on the lower half of the mech.

if i want to get highly accurate hits, to pick off an arm or a leg or the head, i have to pilot my mech up to extremely close distance. that mech will have to fill most of my screen. but to do so i have to be able to outthink my opponent. i have a chance to get that close, but i'm going to have to risk losing some armor in the process. but i have the chance.

and there is the point that this game is set in the battletech universe, and The battletech universe dictates randomness. Cone of fire is pretty much the default in the setting.


One shot? Do you know how hard it is to actually hit the cockpit hit box? I have shot the cockpit and missed the cockpit hit box. It was near impossible to do till I learn a little trick you have to aim slightly higher than where it looks like you should be aiming to hit the cockpit works with most mechs. Also what weapon can destroy a cockpit in one hit? I hit it with a AC20 and it only went to orange(very damaged for anyone who doesn't play MW4).

#9 mithril coyote

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 135 posts
  • LocationNew Mexico

Posted 17 November 2011 - 03:37 PM

except that as you can read in the except, in the battletech setting missile weapons scatter all over a target, and two energy weapons aimed at the same point won't nessicarily hit the same spot.

you have to remember that in the battletechsetting, you are not aiming the weapon, the way your supposadly doing in Call of duty of other FPS. you are sitting in a cockpit, manipulating joysticks to place a cursor over the aimpoint, then your mechs computer is calculating how to aim the individual weapons in your mech. the battletech battlefeild is swamped with ubiquitious jamming systems and other forms of ECM, which every unit has by defualt. things like the Guardian ECM represent special extra powerful units. so your mechs computer doesn't have the kind of accurate sensor info needed to get ultra accurate shots. it's having to operate on 'best guess' calculations, with a high margin of error. "margin of error" means your shots will tend to cluster around your aim point, but will randomly deviate from that specific spot.

View PostEegxeta, on 17 November 2011 - 03:32 PM, said:


One shot? Do you know how hard it is to actually hit the cockpit hit box? I have shot the cockpit and missed the cockpit hit box. It was near impossible to do till I learn a little trick you have to aim slightly higher than where it looks like you should be aiming to hit the cockpit works with most mechs. Also what weapon can destroy a cockpit in one hit? I hit it with a AC20 and it only went to orange(very damaged for anyone who doesn't play MW4).

i didn't say one weapon, i said one shot. a shot in MW4 is any weapons in the fire grouping.because of how the game handled aiming, they all hit the exact same spot. you only need 4-5 medium lasers toggled to fire together with one pull of the trigger to one shot most targets.

and my point is that in the setting, being able to reliably hit the specific point you aim at, except at extremely close ranges, is not automatic the way it is in MW1 through MW4. it is a cone of fire setting.

Edited by mithril coyote, 17 November 2011 - 03:42 PM.


#10 wolf74

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,272 posts
  • LocationMidland, TX

Posted 17 November 2011 - 03:41 PM

If I remember right (be a long time) MW4 had a 1 shot shield, AKA you had to hit a Location a Mini of two time to destroy it to keep everyone from dying from head snipers.

View PostEegxeta, on 17 November 2011 - 03:20 PM, said:

and beam weapons are lasers which can't go anywhere but straight.


[/Smart *** on]
Ok You can have your “Straight Laser Beam” Please pick a Convergence for you laser to your cross-hire on the screen due to the fact your NOT looking down the laser barrel crystal. The Convergence point will be fixed at that range point for the match.


Posted Image
Opps you pick 180m but he at 330m

[/Smart *** off]

Edited by wolf74, 17 November 2011 - 03:46 PM.


#11 Oderint dum Metuant

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 4,758 posts
  • LocationUnited Kingdom

Posted 17 November 2011 - 03:49 PM

What is it with all these threads about removing part of the skill aspect, and adding some RnG to where your going to hit. :)

#12 Eegxeta

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 134 posts

Posted 17 November 2011 - 03:59 PM

View Postwolf74, on 17 November 2011 - 03:41 PM, said:

If I remember right (be a long time) MW4 had a 1 shot shield, AKA you had to hit a Location a Mini of two time to destroy it to keep everyone from dying from head snipers.


[/Smart *** on]
Ok You can have your “Straight Laser Beam” Please pick a Convergence for you laser to your cross-hire on the screen due to the fact your NOT looking down the laser barrel crystal. The Convergence point will be fixed at that range point for the match.
[/Smart *** off]


Convergence point? Why would I have that? I'll take separate cross-hairs for each that tell me where they would hit while pointing straight if the targeting systems won't be able to correct the point for range and I'm pretty sure they could it won't be too hard. For smart comments you sure don't think them through very well. Also I didn't play MW4 a long time ago. Another thing snipers are pusses. It takes real skill to be able to fight up close where you need to learn how to maneuver, dodge, and to turn the torso just right to take hits so your weapons aren't destroyed. It takes even more skill to fight up close when you've taken damage. So snipers can hide in their little corners, I'll be out fighting with the real men who actually have a pair.

#13 theginganinja

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 192 posts
  • LocationMinnesota

Posted 17 November 2011 - 04:19 PM

I think your idea of a cone of fire would be perfect - it would allow even those that do not have twitch-gaming trained reflexes to do well in the game, which is quite important - not all of us have killed Mechwarrior-less time with Call of Duty and games like that. With all of the electronic warfare that would be used in the setting, the fact that your weapons platform is relatively unsteady, and the fact that even lasers are not going to be pinpoint accurate (flaws happen, both in your targeting computer's calculations and in the design and installment of your weapons - there's a reason that even the most accurate modern weapons on the most steady firing platforms have a margin of error), having a cone of fire makes perfect realistic sense as well. Not to mention the fact that, as you mentioned, this cone of fire is an inherent part of the canon.
By the by, I think Clan advanced targeting computers should reduce your cone of fire by 33%-40%, and give you a rough idea of how much lead to give your target when using ballistics.

View PostEegxeta, on 17 November 2011 - 03:59 PM, said:


Convergence point? Why would I have that? I'll take separate cross-hairs for each that tell me where they would hit while pointing straight if the targeting systems won't be able to correct the point for range and I'm pretty sure they could it won't be too hard. For smart comments you sure don't think them through very well. Also I didn't play MW4 a long time ago. Another thing snipers are pusses. It takes real skill to be able to fight up close where you need to learn how to maneuver, dodge, and to turn the torso just right to take hits so your weapons aren't destroyed. It takes even more skill to fight up close when you've taken damage. So snipers can hide in their little corners, I'll be out fighting with the real men who actually have a pair.


Snipers generally have less armor, and often less speed and maneuverability than brawler 'Mechs. Plus, hiding is rarely part of the strategy once shots start flying - they must start moving, trying to get accurate hits in while on the move, and must also worry about keeping their weapons from being blown off once return fire starts coming in - after all, they frequently have less weapons than brawler 'Mechs, so every lost weapon counts more. Besides that, they have more to worry about from flanking actions and smaller 'Mechs, both of which are quick to take advantage of the easy (but often high priority) target that is a long-range support 'Mech.
So, overall, brawlers do take skill - but no more than what is required of sniping. Implementing a cone of fire would exacerbate this - brawler 'Mechs wouldn't have to worry about missing unless they are taking big hits or firing large numbers of big weapons. A sniper, meanwhile, would have to balance moving to avoid fire and to get into new positions with getting into a steady firing position that allows them to fire more accurately.

#14 Kudzu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 769 posts
  • LocationSomewhere in the SEC

Posted 17 November 2011 - 04:27 PM

View PostTechnoviking, on 17 November 2011 - 02:47 PM, said:

So, lets say AC20. (An example of the rating system: the Crusher Super Heavy Cannon is a 150mm weapon firing ten shells per "round" while the Chemjet Gun is a 185mm weapon firing much slower )

I got the Crusher Super Heavy cannon.

Now, I could have a steady arm, and a "cone of fire". We could do that.

Or, that gun could have a hell of a kick. And a rippin fast firing. Now, being familiar with that gun, I know I gotta start off in the Belly area, because I want the shoulder. He's moving. I give it a shot, The 10 shells rip out in in under a second, but take an entire second to fire. The shells fire the trajectory, that I manipulate with my joystick, (or mouse) fighting the force feedback to keep it under control as my arm shoots up. (Torso mounted weapons don't have this problem, they're based on my torso's movement. (hard when running).) 4 of the shots hit going up, 3 to more facing down making a "N" pattern as I push down in that second trying to control it. 3 of the shots miss, 2 hitting a far building, and one sails off into the distance.

Except AC/20's do all their damage to one location, it's kinda their whole point. So your burst instead needs to be one larger shell, like that from a tank, and if you do that all your recoil means nothing.

Quote

Lasers? Lasers require charge time. I pull the trigger, it doesn't come out right then. It comes out .4 seconds later. (only a medium, the large takes .8 to charge and fire you see.) And...heat.

So your great balancing tool is lag shooting? Seriously? Back in the dark days of dial up modems I was getting head shots on bunnyhoppers with a 500+ ping. Lag shooting is a skill I'd rather not have to use again. Once you get it down you still have all your lasers hitting the same spot.

Quote

You're right though, cone of fire could fix all this, and I wouldn't have to plan or think, I could just paint the target and pull the trigger.

Y'know, Point and click.

You really have no idea how expanding reticule cone of fire works, do you?

#15 Cyttorak

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts
  • LocationAlbany, OR, USA

Posted 17 November 2011 - 05:38 PM

Non-MW gamers may not understand: pinpoint accuracy has been done before in the previous games, and it ended up making the game boring for many players. There were certain ways weapons mechanics were done that *Inevitably* resulted in 2 phenomena:
1) Laser boats; loaded up with the max number of lasers that would converge on one spot (legs or center torso), resulting in an instant kill...it became a race to see who could pull the trigger first.
2) Missile boats; mechs loaded up with the max number of long-range missiles (LRMs) that did major damage at extreme range...in conjunction with many wide-open terrain maps, many mechs with shorter-range weapons were killed before they could ever fire a shot.

I don't know exactly why anyone would want a return to this, but if you get pinpoint accuracy without some other mechanic to counter it, you will end up getting the exact same result. Shortly after that, you'll get many players leaving MWO.

This has never been a discussion of what should/ought to happen based on theory, it's a discussion of gameplay balance and keeping it interesting for the players.

#16 Eegxeta

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 134 posts

Posted 17 November 2011 - 05:50 PM

View Postwolf74, on 17 November 2011 - 03:41 PM, said:

If I remember right (be a long time) MW4 had a 1 shot shield, AKA you had to hit a Location a Mini of two time to destroy it to keep everyone from dying from head snipers.


[/Smart *** on]
Ok You can have your “Straight Laser Beam” Please pick a Convergence for you laser to your cross-hire on the screen due to the fact your NOT looking down the laser barrel crystal. The Convergence point will be fixed at that range point for the match.


Posted Image
Opps you pick 180m but he at 330m

[/Smart *** off]


Oh yes I forgot to say that the average digital camera does this and it is roughly the same concept rangefinder finds the range and the camera lens refocuses have several link is not too hard you just use one rangefinder for two lens with beam weapons it would be programed so the weapons make adjustments to suit the new range. So you are implying that a simple technology everyone uses today won't be used in the future where it would not only be more powerful it would be smaller and faster. I'm pretty sure a mech is capable of such a simple task. I'm pretty sure there is a tank out there that uses this technology to aim.

View Postirishwarrior, on 17 November 2011 - 04:19 PM, said:

I think your idea of a cone of fire would be perfect - it would allow even those that do not have twitch-gaming trained reflexes to do well in the game, which is quite important - not all of us have killed Mechwarrior-less time with Call of Duty and games like that. With all of the electronic warfare that would be used in the setting, the fact that your weapons platform is relatively unsteady, and the fact that even lasers are not going to be pinpoint accurate (flaws happen, both in your targeting computer's calculations and in the design and installment of your weapons - there's a reason that even the most accurate modern weapons on the most steady firing platforms have a margin of error), having a cone of fire makes perfect realistic sense as well. Not to mention the fact that, as you mentioned, this cone of fire is an inherent part of the canon.
By the by, I think Clan advanced targeting computers should reduce your cone of fire by 33%-40%, and give you a rough idea of how much lead to give your target when using ballistics.


Now were talking. I'm glad there are people here who do know a thing or two about the common physics of a firearm.

One of the things that always bugged me was I could charge into combat at 80 to 100 mph and the ballistic weapons would shoot with pinpoint accuracy. Going that fast the weapons would be bouncing around like popcorn you would think that it would in some way affect the accuracy of the ballistic weapons.

View Postirishwarrior, on 17 November 2011 - 04:19 PM, said:

Snipers generally have less armor, and often less speed and maneuverability than brawler 'Mechs. Plus, hiding is rarely part of the strategy once shots start flying - they must start moving, trying to get accurate hits in while on the move, and must also worry about keeping their weapons from being blown off once return fire starts coming in - after all, they frequently have less weapons than brawler 'Mechs, so every lost weapon counts more. Besides that, they have more to worry about from flanking actions and smaller 'Mechs, both of which are quick to take advantage of the easy (but often high priority) target that is a long-range support 'Mech.
So, overall, brawlers do take skill - but no more than what is required of sniping. Implementing a cone of fire would exacerbate this - brawler 'Mechs wouldn't have to worry about missing unless they are taking big hits or firing large numbers of big weapons. A sniper, meanwhile, would have to balance moving to avoid fire and to get into new positions with getting into a steady firing position that allows them to fire more accurately.


I always used only about one missile, two beams, and one ballistic weapon and I never used heat sinks. I put most of the tonnage in armor and speed. I used a gargoyle which yes is an assault mech, but I fought as if I was using a light mech.

Also I remember matches where the snipers were assault mechs with that had jump jet (which is another thing that bugged me because to lift an assault mech off the ground you would need a rocket bigger than the mech to provide the thrust tonnage needed to lift it and lots of fuel) and about 3 to 5 guns, that does leave a lot of space left for armor. I also remember games where they would sit behind a hill or wall and use the jump jet to peek over and shoot. I really never remember the snipers doing any real moving. I think your thinking of CoD and Bf in those game yes a sniper has to move, but I've really never seen it happen in MW4. Most of the moving they did that I saw was getting back to their hiding corner because I went radar passive and snuck up behind them.

Oh and I found the topic I posted Mech Lab: Realistic Weapon laods it works heavy on the simulation aspect of MW and such a system would put variety in the weapon loads while also limiting the customization by a realistic amount. I just notice I spelled loads wrong in the topic title. The crapy speler striks agan.

Edited by Eegxeta, 17 November 2011 - 06:39 PM.


#17 Ratu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 214 posts
  • LocationNew Zealand

Posted 17 November 2011 - 07:15 PM

View PostEegxeta, on 17 November 2011 - 05:50 PM, said:


Oh yes I forgot to say that the average digital camera does this and it is roughly the same concept rangefinder finds the range and the camera lens refocuses have several link is not too hard you just use one rangefinder for two lens with beam weapons it would be programed so the weapons make adjustments to suit the new range. So you are implying that a simple technology everyone uses today won't be used in the future where it would not only be more powerful it would be smaller and faster. I'm pretty sure a mech is capable of such a simple task. I'm pretty sure there is a tank out there that uses this technology to aim.

Indeed there are several real world vehicles which use this technology to aim. HOWEVER, this is NOT the real world. This is a world with set rules and a very different technology tree from what we have today.
If you want to play something that keeps inline with modern technology, go play Modern Warfare or Battlefield. Otherwise, quit moaning and learn what BattleTech is all about. [/rant]

#18 Eegxeta

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 134 posts

Posted 17 November 2011 - 07:27 PM

View PostRatu, on 17 November 2011 - 07:15 PM, said:

Indeed there are several real world vehicles which use this technology to aim. HOWEVER, this is NOT the real world. This is a world with set rules and a very different technology tree from what we have today.
If you want to play something that keeps inline with modern technology, go play Modern Warfare or Battlefield. Otherwise, quit moaning and learn what BattleTech is all about. [/rant]


Ok that is true but as I said it is a pretty damn simple technology. Also considering the fact that they would see the convergence point be a problem with aiming such weapons they would solve it with TA DAH a targeting system that would compensate for range. Honestly people need to put a little more thought into their posts.

Edited by Eegxeta, 17 November 2011 - 07:29 PM.


#19 theginganinja

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 192 posts
  • LocationMinnesota

Posted 17 November 2011 - 07:28 PM

View PostEegxeta, on 17 November 2011 - 05:50 PM, said:



I always used only about one missile, two beams, and one ballistic weapon and I never used heat sinks. I put most of the tonnage in armor and speed. I used a gargoyle which yes is an assault mech, but I fought as if I was using a light mech.

Also I remember matches where the snipers were assault mechs with that had jump jet (which is another thing that bugged me because to lift an assault mech off the ground you would need a rocket bigger than the mech to provide the thrust tonnage needed to lift it and lots of fuel) and about 3 to 5 guns, that does leave a lot of space left for armor. I also remember games where they would sit behind a hill or wall and use the jump jet to peek over and shoot. I really never remember the snipers doing any real moving. I think your thinking of CoD and Bf in those game yes a sniper has to move, but I've really never seen it happen in MW4. Most of the moving they did that I saw was getting back to their hiding corner because I went radar passive and snuck up behind them.

Oh and I found the topic I posted Mech Lab: Realistic Weapon laods it works heavy on the simulation aspect of MW and such a system would put variety in the weapon loads while also limiting the customization by a realistic amount. I just notice I spelled loads wrong in the topic title. The crapy speler striks agan.


Eh, I guess I was just thinking of what I primarily saw used for those purposes - Dire Wolves, Executioners, and Atlases fitted out with max armor and as many big, short range guns as possible, with everything left put into speed (it probably doesn't help that I primarily played on no heat/unlimited ammo servers, since those were the only thing up at the time) were used for brawling. Sniping 'Mechs, meanwhile were generally Executioners or Black Knights loaded with as many Gauss Rifles and ER PPCs as possible, had all of the equipment options, tended to be very slow (it didn't help that the primary sniping tactic was to hide behind a wall or hill and use jump jets to pop up and do an alpha strike every now and then) and usually had less armor than what their 'Mech could carry. And then, of course, there was me favoring an Adder for some masochistic reason...

#20 mithril coyote

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 135 posts
  • LocationNew Mexico

Posted 17 November 2011 - 08:29 PM

View Postwolf74, on 17 November 2011 - 03:41 PM, said:

[/Smart *** on]
Ok You can have your “Straight Laser Beam” Please pick a Convergence for you laser to your cross-hire on the screen due to the fact your NOT looking down the laser barrel crystal. The Convergence point will be fixed at that range point for the match.


Posted Image
Opps you pick 180m but he at 330m

[/Smart *** off]




actually convergence point being an issue doesn't make sense given the setting. Convergence issues make sense on things like a real world fighter, where weapons are on fixed mounts, unable to move, and the aimpoints have to be carefully calibrated. in those cases the weapons mounts are engineered to point inwards by a few degrees, so the weapons fire converges on a specific point ahead of the aircraft.

but in battletech, mechs and other vehicles have their weapons mounted on individual motorized mounts, which can adjust the aimpoint of the weapon on the fly, based on the location and (calculated) range of the target. so mechs having issues hitting things due to fixed weapon convergence makes no sense given how mechs are designed.

Edited by mithril coyote, 17 November 2011 - 08:31 PM.






9 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 9 guests, 0 anonymous users