112 replies to this topic

[azov]

I have made a crappy paint drawing of what I think will work, and almost everybody can agree on.



The radius of the circles will decrease with either a Targeting computer, or with skill over time as described by the developers.
This method benefits both the quick and agile mech as well as the the heavier and slow mechs.

[VYCanis]

its a matter of visual disconnect for me. whatever the system is, i simply don't like the implication that a mechs have wobbly stormtrooper type aim.

I can accept that it is hard to aim. heck, i WANT it to be hard to aim. between being a moving target trying to hit a moving target and all the ambient ECMs that your average mech is kicking out by default, plus all the weapon impacts and everything, fighting my aim should be a matter of course. but it should be something I can fight, not something i want to simply resolve myself to.

if there is any cone of fire, it should be for autocannons and mgs at their extreme range or for MRMs and RLs, otherwise it should be treated like a relatively accurate combat vehicle that has to deal with a lot of interference, than some guy on foot shooting from the hip in an FPS

thats my main beef

[UncleKulikov]

multiple crosshairs + cones of fire for each weapon is most attractive to me.

[Gaius Cavadus]

azov, on 06 November 2011 - 03:49 PM, said:

I have made a crappy paint drawing of what I think will work, and almost everybody can agree on.

I don't agree at all. Why would torso weapons have a CoF? They are directly mounted into the super structure of the mech. They fire at one point and one point only. Any variation in their trajectory should be minute at best unless damaged.

Take the AC-20 on the Atlas AS7-D for instance. It's mounted on the right side of the torso. The way it's mounted can either be completely parallel to the torso so that it fires straight out and therefore will never align to a centered aiming reticle or it can be canted so that it is zeroed to hit dead center at it's maximum effective range.

But the cannon's pattern of fire isn't going have much deviation. All mechs are stabilized, that AC-20 is securely attached to the Atlas' super-structure, and at best the recoil could force the torso to twist to the right but only if we arbitrarily decide that the myomer and acuators meant to stabilize the torso aren't strong enough to fully compensate.

Edit: For direct fire weapons, I mean.

Edited by Cavadus, 06 November 2011 - 04:09 PM.

[azov]

That would make sense if mechs hovered. Yes they are stabilized, but they will still suffer from mech movement. Also different hard point mounted weapons will still vary in hit location. you can try and dial them into a center point, but because of the location, it just can't hit the same point.

[CaveHermit]

Cone of fire with multiple weapons tracking cross hairs. Get all the cross hairs in the cone on alphas, Get trigger happy and the weapon may miss by a country mile. Streak missiles can go pinpoints (That is there purpose). Get your timing right an the enemy is grouped right you might get two or more lined up different cross hairs. Maybe even multple cones of fire for multiple targets. (The Mechs are capable of unleashing a missile storm at a long range target while putting a LBX round into the mech in the trees to your right.)

(Basically I want dual-joystick and foot petal controls..)

Would if it will Eye-infinity capable. (I love my 5 monitors in flight sims,)

[ice trey]

A slight modification on "Cone of Fire" - Scaling Cone of Fire.

That is to say, a parked 'mech has a considerably narrower cone than a 'mech in the process of jumping.
The 'mech's targeting computers are constantly trying to compensate for vibrations going through the 'mech, but they can only do so much.

Cone of Fire is already a great idea for eliminating the "Jump Sniper" problem that made Mechwarrior 4 multiplayer an unpleasant experience, overall; Adding the effect of a cone that grows or shrinks according to the mode of movement is a great way to go.

This way, the Jagermech that wants to snipe can park on top of a hill and fire rounds off at a distant target with reasonable chances of hitting, and the Vindicator at the apex of it's jump has little chance of hitting the distant Charger on the horizon.

My only concern is that, for a long while, LRMs have been treated as guided missiles. There's got to be some way to make sure that they are similarly affected. In the canon, LRMs are dumb-fire. It would be interesting to see them go back to that, by maybe giving them a higher speed (Claiming LRMs have more propellant, while SRMs have a larger warhead)...

Edited by ice trey, 06 November 2011 - 04:24 PM.

[Hanged Man]

Canon LRMs are not dumbfire, which is why they do not suffer from the +1 dumbfire BTH penalty that MRMs do. They are capable of indirect fire via spotting or sensors (the use of telemetry means a smart weapon) and are further upgradable with a number of different ammo types that further leverage their sensor capabilities (see http://www.sarna.net/wiki/LRM for a list, including an actual dumbfire variant).

[fearfactory]

I'm all for the cone of fire option.

[Devlin Stone]

I support the system MookieRah proposed for direct-fire weapons ( A mech should have a single targeting reticle, and multiple hardpoint indicators ), but with some addenda.

- Weapons within a hardpoint are mounted and fired in parallel, with spacing being relative to the weapon size. (Reduces pinpoint light weapons fire without ridiculous random fire cones)
- Each hardpoint has a location dependency and traverse speed. For instance the hip hardpoint on an ON1-K Orion would be torso dependent, with locked horizontal traverse.
- Traverse speed for arms would, of course be quickened, but otherwise hardpoint traverse speed should vary inversely with assigned weapon tonnage.
- When not targeting an enemy, weapons should gradually normalize to forward of their dependent locations on a Mech.
- Actual weapon's fire spread should depend on the weapon, it's condition, recoil, and Mech movement (being interpreted through the hardpoint's location dependency.)


I don't, of course, expect anything suggested here to effect the way they choose to implement weapons-fire in the game. Still fun to muse though.

Edited by Devlin Stone, 06 November 2011 - 07:09 PM.

[GreenHell]

I said earlier that I would like to see a cone of fire and separate crosshairs for torso weapons and arms weapons, with arms having 2 reticules, one for actual position and one for the players desired position. I would like to amend that now.

I believe that having the weapons be accurate out to their maximum range is good, "IF" you balance that with the mechs movement. A walking mech will bob and shake some, but a running mech will shake much more. Think Mechwarrior 3, but have that swaying motion actually affect your aim. If you are piloting a fast scout mech, your job of aiming will be very hard because the constant bobing and swaying will affect your aim. On the other hand, piloting a slow moving Atlas will be hard in a different way. The Atlas' huge steps will cause a slower, but more pronounced jarring effect, which will make Atlas users want to stop altogether before shooting, and encourage scouts to slow down a bit to engage targets in a serious fashion. This, plus having arms unlocked from torso with separate aiming reticules will solve EVERYONES problems. The only time you would ever be able to alpha strike with any chance of success is when you were sitting completely still. That would be the only time you could be absolutely sure that all your hits would not miss. Sure, with practice you could get used to the swaying/jarring effect, but that means that it would take more SKILL to pull off your alpha strikes while moving. Not some game mechanic that prevents you from doing it outright.

Basically, with this method you could still do the alpha strikes, HOWEVER, it would take a considerable amount of skill, unless you were standing still. (and thus a huge target yourself)

That's my new stance on the issue. Thanks to everyone for helping me come to this conclusion.

[fakey]

While the multiple crosshair idea does sound interesting (hell, I might even like it if I had a chance to try it) you have to also recognize that this is a videogame, and as such certain sacrifices will be made for gameplay purposes particularly if you're a company trying to draw in a large playerbase. While I'd be willing to try a system of multiple crosshairs, that would scare the **** out of someone who has never touched a Mechwarrior game before and they'd likely give up before they even tried the thing.

The best, most feasible system I can see happening is either the cone of fire in multiple form or single form (both of which would make me happy enough) or throw in some serious cockpit sway when moving/being hit/whatever that should also affect your aim. That's something that always kinda annoyed me about the mechwarrior games is that these things are the smoothest ride you've ever been in and they're flying over rough terrain. Yeah, they're futuristic warmachines and probably have some wicked sweet shocks on them, but you're still moving at 60kph for even the slowest of heavy mech out there and well over 100kph for the lights, the ride is going to be ********* bouncy.

[GreenHell]

I started a suggestion thread (title "Targeting and Weapon convergence").
Go check it out.

[Eradikitten]

Personally? I want the game to roll 2d6 for each weapon hit and apply damage to where it is indicated by the randomizer. Then apply the graphic to the correct location so that it reflects the hit correctly. Thus, fire, hit, 1 in 12 chance of headshot. Woo.

[CaveMan]

azov, on 06 November 2011 - 03:49 PM, said:

I have made a crappy paint drawing of what I think will work, and almost everybody can agree on.

The radius of the circles will decrease with either a Targeting computer, or with skill over time as described by the developers.
This method benefits both the quick and agile mech as well as the the heavier and slow mechs.

I rather like this method.

With regard to LRMs: my view on it is that they're guided, but they're not seeking.
Streak missiles are seeking, they home directly in on the target using onboard sensors.
Standard missiles are guided in the sense that radar fire-control pinpoints where to shoot them. They're aimed so they'll impact with the target, based on its position and speed at the time of launch. The missiles themselves are blind, but they use inertial guidance units to perform slight course corrections so as to intersect with that projected point.
The difference between LRMs and SRMs is that LRMs are lobbed in a ballistic trajectory, while SRMs are fired level.

[fett]

wolf74, on 31 October 2011 - 07:47 PM, said:

What system are you going to use for Weapon Convergence ?

It is my sincere hope that by being pre-clans, part of the draw of concentrated group fire goes away because doing so with too many weapons would lead to shut-down or the pilot passing out. Forces Grasshopper example is a good one though, with 22 heat sinks it actually could afford to fire quite a few lasers at one time,... but that is a rarity. A griffin for example... if it fires more than the PPC... he's risking shut-down.

[Mr T]

Well, one thing I haven't seen brought up yet is the concept of damage over time versus instantaneous damage.

Forexample, while if memory serves me correctly, lasers in the old Mechwarrior games did their damage all at once, Mechwarrior Living Legends has the lasers do constant damage as they fire, thus adding the complexity of having to move the crosshairs to keep the lasers hitting the same spot on the target versus a PPC for example that does one big hit.

Now granted, if both you and the target are standing still, theres litle problem with keeping the lasers trained on that one location, however if you or them are moving, it becomes difficult to damage one area alone since your lasers may move to another location with the difficulty in tracking the moving target. That to me seems accurate since moving about and evasion should be some of the primary counter balances in my mind, not to mention the effects that hits have on your aim in MW:LL, particularily the explosives which have a tendency to completely throw off your shots.

LRM/SRM/Cannon salvos hitting your mech have a particular tendency to make effective laser use mighty difficult in MW:LL even with the pinpoint accuracy method, especially when a wise enemy uses non-alpha strikes of these weapons to keep your aim perpetually out of whack with constant hits. That combined with the heat drain seems to balance things nicely as I've always found Autocannons and PPCs to still have their place in that sense.

If there are two targets standing still, one of them firing lasers without being shot at itself, it seems only appropriate that the target is wrecked since said player wasn't wise enough to move or fire back.

[Pht]

Convergence is one of the huge things that the past MW games have gotten wrong...

IMO some of the confusion on the issue is due to the fact that people get confused over what the pilot does and what the 'Mech does.

It is the pilot that chooses the target with his reticule - it is the 'Mech that tries to than hit that target with whatever weapons the pilot has chosen to fire.

As far as resolving weapons fire, I'd love to see the game do - hit-no hit and location actually hit calculations for each weapon a firing 'Mech carries, based upon the capability of the weapon being fired, the capability of the 'Mech to aim that weapon based upon the firing 'Mechs condition and the actions and condition of the target 'Mech. Doing this would make the game an actual armored combat sim instead of slower quake with more armor and guns.

As far as the actual mechanic - just look to the parent system for performance parameters and input that into a database for the game engine. No need to use cones or any of that jazz when there's already a definitive performance envelope set out for how well 'Mechs can get things done.

[gregsolidus]

Azov, that's the first convergence idea that didn't make me facepalm.Well played.

[knight 6]

Three reticules. Aim, Arms and Torso.
Aim directly translated from mouse followed by arms(a little sluggish) then torso(much worse).
All hardpoints on each arm fixed.
Aiming on both arms converge at adjustable distance. (Adjustable with mousewheel, middle click to reset)
Torso weapons fixed.

. (+) .

+ = aim
. . = arm weapons (one pip for each arm)
( ) = torso weapons


My arguments:
LMB fires left arm weapons, RMB for other arm. Keyboard for torso weapon groups.
- Scroll the wheel and the arm pips converge into the centre. You have to zero it right or you'll hit different areas. At minimum distance (maybe 150m) they'll have to spray and pray or be really deft with their left-right cycle-fire combos because adjusting the convergence while engaging in close range combat be damned.
- Middle click and the L/R arm pips show up again. Then he puts the right pip on the target to fire whatever's on the right arm and likewise the left, depending on the situation. Much like how someone would twist his/her torso and extend an arm to fire a pistol more accurately but if you went dual pistols, you're not going to be able to aim down both the sights. In this case, it lets you bring the torso weapons to bear.
- Weapon arrays will do what they're intended to do, rake an area. (Since they don't converge) If you put two lasers two metres apart on the same arm, they should **** well hit two metres apart. Parallel lines aren't supposed to meet.

So if you have two big hitters on each arm, you gotta work for it (adjust convergence) to fire them both on target. Or you can (aim down sights) and alternate-fire between left and right. Non-missile torso weapons are moot at long distance unless you're confident about hitting a another guy with a recoilless rifle mounted to your shoulder. Look ma, no hands! Thinking real hard with one weapon might help though(hollander anyone?).

If you are spraying with two arms, then adjusting the convergence can help distribute the damage or focus it. One increasing your odds of hitting, the other to slice off body parts(if done right), or if you can swing it, spray a horizontal-sweeping fire-pattern.

The torso houses many of the nastiest weapons, I don't want to be able to bring those around too easily or little mechs won't stand a chance so arm weapons are really great for little mechs to harass bigger mechs and for big mechs to swat little ones. Swing the mouse hard right and one arm gets to fire and once the enemy passes the back, swing left to use the other arm. I'd like to see an Atlas clothesline a Commando, though.

On a separate note: Let me play MW with two joysticks? Sorry if this is long-winded, I'm just that way.