79 replies to this topic

[Titus Ryan]

Remove weapon convergence from torso mounted weapons and limit the convergence on arm mounted weapons. This would up the skill level required for precise shots. You would have to learn how to aim with each weapon hard point relative to the reticle. This would solve a majority of all the issues people complain about besides lrms.

[Sean von Steinike]

New around here huh? This stuff has been suggested for a very long time.

[Titus Ryan]

I know I have been around since the beginning. Just trying to spark support for it again.

[Starbound]

I'd like to see the mouse roller used as a range convergence adjuster. You'd have to roll it up/down to increase/lower convergence based on your enemy's range otherwise all weapons would fire straight (torso would hit torse, center to center, arm to arm if two mechs stood facing one another. I think it would be a good but easy dynamic that would help minimize first of all, jump sniping, and second excessive PPFLD from gauss/ppc.

[Titus Ryan]

Not a bad idea, could be easier to implement.

[Fitzbattleaxe]

Sadly, it probably won't happen. PGI have already tried to justify removing slow convergence, and they won't want to display weakness by changing their minds.

[KAT Ayanami]

Sean von Steinike, on 26 June 2014 - 12:32 PM, said:

New around here huh? This stuff has been suggested for a very long time.

Legendary founder and Phonix overlord and you ask him if he is new?

[Joseph Mallan]

KAT Ayanami, on 26 June 2014 - 01:41 PM, said:

Legendary founder and Phonix overlord and you ask him if he is new?

Sarcasm Much?

[SilentWolff]

Remove the tears from your eyes instead.

[Joseph Mallan]

SilentWolff, on 26 June 2014 - 01:45 PM, said:

Remove the tears from your eyes instead.

I actually agree. I don't know anything that can fire 2-7 weapons and hit a paper plate with all weapons at 400m. Heck at ANY range.

[Sug]

No cone of fire because Timmy won't have any fun and Spike won't get to showcase his leet skills.

[Titus Ryan]

Im not complaining, doing Pinpoint damage is what im good at, I love sniping lights. I think it would allow better balance than the band **** that pgi keeps throwing out. And since the release of the clan mechs they are finally doing things people have been asking for, for a while now. This next patch is a good one for example.

It wouldnt let me spell bandaids

[Heffay]

Cone of fire is cone of suck. Just say no.

OPs implementation idea is good. I'd like to see that too, although convergence for torso mounted weapons should be fixed (although adjustable by the player) so there is a convergence point.

[Sug]

Titus Ryan, on 26 June 2014 - 01:57 PM, said:

It wouldnt let me spell bandaids

Don't let miSs or Egomane see that...


Incoming forum ban for circumventing the censor.

Edited by Sug, 26 June 2014 - 02:06 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Sug, on 26 June 2014 - 01:55 PM, said:

No cone of fire because Timmy won't have any fun and Spike won't get to showcase his leet skills.

You are wrong sir. I am a Timmy, and I fully support CoF. Firing 4 weapons and hitting a dinner plate with a basic Targeting computer should not happen.

[GreyGriffin]

An idea I have been kicking around is "Blooming convergence," where your selected weapon is at the center aimpoint, and other weapons "bloom" around it based on the type of hardpoint and your activity level. So, for instance, if you have a CT weapon and it's selected, your right arm and torso weapons would drift right, your left arm and torso weapons would drift left, creating a nonrandom spread of weapons fire. It would be based on instant convergence and based on reported variables, so your convergence wouldn't be constantly changing as you swing your aim around, which is what I believe cause all the server congestion.

Not really sure what could be done about over and under mounts like the Protector's or Shadow Hawk's ballistics.

[SeaRider]

I have this conspiracy theory that weapon convergence and fast convergence are allowed to continue on because it's better for a twitch based FPS style shooter E-Sport. The FPS shooter E-Sport is fast paced and frenetic, PGI wants to make MWO as plausible a E-Sport as possible and keeping the game faster is better for that, faster TTK, faster movement, faster play is better for "rounds" in a best of style match. Big Alpha kills make for more dramatic and exciting plays when watching competition. CoD and others have shown it's a solid proven system and they want this game to be successful in that particular arena. A more simulation based game probably won't have a strong draw as matches could go long and slow. Anyway that's my silly tin foil hat two cents.

I also believe spreading convergence would promote roles within a fighting unit, with support LRM boats busting up targets before brawlers close in to be more accurate with their weapons, and marksmen mechs having to be more methodical because they can't put all sixty alpha on one spot without high skill levels. The downside being FLD weapons would be even more favored over others as they have the best TTK. I dunno, again just 2 silly cents.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Trying to push the old no-torso-convergence plan is doomed to failure, not least because it's a bad idea and violates the setting.

The only place that convergence modification really ought to have is in minimum. If AC2s, GRs, etc., could only converge at their minimum range and no closer, then the game would be in a much better place with regard to short- v long-range guns.

As for more general group fire dispersion, which I assume is your goal with reviving this defunct idea, the far better solution is to implement some kind of dynamic precision reduction. As your mech's heat % climbs, as its actual throttle % goes up, and as its stability state goes down, precision reduction should be dynamically applied to all shots from your mech. This leaves accuracy as effectively perfect, while forcing players to make decisions about when or if to take shots at certain times. Running hot and running fast? Your shots will have moderate DPR and will thus deviate around your aim point, perhaps hitting a different component, or perhaps even missing altogether depending on circumstances. Should you take the shot, or should you slow down and cool off first to guarantee that your shots hit that particular weak point?

[Koniving]

From another thread...

Koniving, on 08 June 2014 - 11:14 PM, said:

(Written to a Dev)
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.)

And in the face of nay-sayers, some support from a random person who tested it for him/herself.

Spoiler

evilC, on 09 June 2014 - 06:55 AM, said:

Proof that body sway affects aim in 3PV:



Note that I turned arm lock ON in 1PV to ensure a fair comparison.

evilC, on 09 June 2014 - 07:12 AM, said:

For those unable to see it in the video, here are some screen grabs:

Further info on this.

Spoiler

"But terrain already affects your aim."

Koniving, on 09 June 2014 - 09:56 AM, said:

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.

But what about motion sickness?

Spoiler

Koniving, on 17 June 2014 - 07:37 PM, said:

I could understand that, but...

Here's my counter argument.

Have you seen the cockpit itself bob? Watch it on the Jagermech here in first person.

Considering how little that crosshair moves, then compare the cockpit bounce which...looks like its going through an earthquake.

o.O;
Or all the crosshair movement when aiming? Just moving the crosshair by itself with armlock turned off is far more movement than a bouncing crosshair from walking.

Or this bug that has been happening since 2012, has plagued the game since the beginning of time, and occurs to more than 50% of the players even if they are not aware of it. It occurs to every player (or nearly so) that uses "Post AA" as a graphics anti-aliasing.

Late 2012/early 2013.



2 weeks ago.


Many players are playing with this and will never know it until they do a screenshot.
That's a lot more motion sickness inducing than a tiny crosshair movement. And I'm saying this as someone who gets carsick if I ride in one for more than 10 minutes.

Honestly that mech bounces a lot more, the edges of the cockpit bounces a lot more...
And if properly done, this idea would look like this from the second stage MW5 concept trailer.

Reticule stays centered, the cockpit stays centered, but the entire mech to include the entire player to include your view moves with each step so the "world" appears to move instead of your crosshair.
Since that'd require a bit of work, a slightly bouncing crosshair is just as acceptable to me.

On a side note: Notice the visual effect on the word "PPC" on the left and right sides, as well as the charge up sound. ZrreeeeYIP, Fwoosh! That my friends is a lore proper PPC. Charge up and fire, the reasoning for the 90 meters minimum range isn't a weak gun that can't hurt but the difficulty of hitting something that close to you when dealing with a charge up mechanic. Turning off the field inhibitor significantly reduces the charge up time at the risk of the weapon blowing up in your face. ER PPCs on the other hand have significantly less (to almost no) charge up, thus warranting the extra heat despite the lack of a damage gain. But this is another topic.

And...
"You are ignoring the fact that we already have terrain affecting aim in the game, Koniving."
"He's asking for a reticule bounce that moves with the mech."
"So everything behave like tanks and you have to stop to get an accurate shot? Beep that, what about those magnificent gyros?" (In other words akin to tabletop's difficulty to hit based on movement. Still = very likely to hit. Walking, reduced chance, running, significantly reduced chance, and jumping nearly impossible to hit. Reflected in how the crosshair moves and still amazingly pinpoint but requiring a time-based skill that can't be cheated with a macro.)

Spoiler

Koniving, on 18 June 2014 - 06:03 AM, said:

Only in third person. You are ignoring that fact.
Try playing in third person.
Then play in first person.
Huge difference.

Also, keep in mind that in TT, the faster you move the more inaccurate you are. It's lore.
But in MWO you're as accurate stationary as you are moving.
Even when your mech does this.


Everything bounces with every step.
But your mech? Perfect aim.
Even at impossible angles, such as this one.


Or this one.

These are possible because of the way the first person crosshair is setup.

But in third?


Now there's a difference.

What I'm asking for is something significantly more skill based and less random chance.
From the videos, since it's CLEAR you haven't watched them, the reticule bob is very subtle and the bob is actually perfectly even whether close or long range. Which is good because if it goes into first person that'd be one aim, one reticule size, perfect pinpoint to where it goes.

And at full run, I had 3 consecutive headshots on a Spider.

It's all in timing; timing that can't be done with macros. Timing that can only be done with skill. And besides, even now with lights and lasers, you need to stop and fire to have maximum effect. It's just that it'll tie into ballistics as well for that perfect aim, unless you're good with perfect timing.

And in the video with the Thunderbolt, even with the bounce, you could keep the lasers perfectly on one side torso. It's possible even with the side to side movements of some mechs like the Stalkers.

What does it all entail? A 100% skill system.

PGI's original solution to the problems this solves?

Delayed convergence, where shots randomly miss from rushing convergence when aiming suddenly at something long range then short range as shown here in this animated 3 second gif.

Spoiler

I find my solution to be much better, and it's already in the game but only in third person. I'd like it in first.
Because right now we have this.

Spoiler

And it's because of this in jump sniping that it became a problem. But here on the ground, it's still a problem.
So long as ballistics exist, it will always be a problem. Even with everything going burst fire.

And in comparison, this solution is even better than delayed convergence. No lag, no latency, the entire thing is client side in a protected file; no one would remove animations as it removes your ability to hit things where you see them. And since your aim would depend on your animations, it's 100% solid. Not to mention perfect pinpoint is never lost. Your shots will always hit exactly where the crosshair is. So it's much better than cone of accuracy too.

Btw, did you know that the M1A1 Abrams on level ground moving at 20 kph has a 0.6% margin of error in its aim? And it increases with speed, and much more with uneven terrain? Even with that perfect computer it can never achieve perfect pinpoint.

That Gyro? It's on an ANCIENT decades to centuries old battlemech. Top this off with we're not supposed to have any convergence at all. None. Of course you could independently aim the arms, climb hills with your hands, and blast through buildings as well as slip on asphalt. But we don't have those either.

Want to know what else? Not even 2% of the battlemechs in this era could reach 150 kph as a stock speed. Many can't reach that even with MASC.

Edited by Koniving, 26 June 2014 - 02:40 PM.

[Turboferret]

I mean, it doesn't really make sense for torso guns to be even able to convergence, if you look at the model. Same goes for yaw-fixed arm weapons as well.