Weapon Convergence?
#1
Posted 31 October 2011 - 07:47 PM
1. Pin Point auto Convergence whatever is under the Target Recital is auto-magic now at Prefect Convergence for all your weapon (Current MW4 Game)
2. Cone of Fire, The Cone of fire for a Weapon in centered on the Target Recital, The Size of the Cone is set to one size for the "Long Range" Point (Assault Tech 1 is currently on this path)
3. Manual Convergence: The Player Set the Range for the weapons too Converge at or is With Targeting Computer Converged at the range of the current Target(but Much Slower than Manual)
If you cannot answer this because your all are not ready or don't wish to share this info yet. Just Say Comstar Blackout the Com-center. Otherwise I would like to know how you're going to overcome the Weapon VS Armor Convergence problem that have Pledged pass game forcing a Lowering in weapon damage or raising of Armor level to 3x CBT values. We thank you for your time in Reading this
Wolf74
A 3025 pilot in a 3067 world
Assault Tech 1; Mechwarrior / Director - Book Guy
#2
Posted 01 November 2011 - 12:32 PM
IMO this is such an important topic and I'm surprised no one has replied to this. I always referred to weapon convergence as "grouped fire and concentrated damage."
In MW2, 3, and 4, option 1, pinpoint accuracy, was the standard. This has always been bad because it makes 4 medium lasers just as powerful as an AC20. This is not true to btech roots.
Maybe it won't be an issue in MWO if they did something like not allow full customization, but even then what about the mechs like the Grasshopper with 4 med and 1 larger lasers? If those are grouped together its more powerful than an AC20...
If the devs want to make this game more true to its btech roots, should this be addressed? How?
#3
Posted 01 November 2011 - 12:52 PM
1. The persistent character element will help reduce the size on the on screen circle reticule. This makes players who specialize in gunnery skills dangerous even at range.
2.Movement would expand the size of the reticule, making those "circle strafing parties" less frequent. moving top speed makes your aim suck.
3. Even with a smaller reticule due to skill and staying still, if your target doesn't fill up that reticule then your shot may still fly by.
Edited by ArgentumLupus, 01 November 2011 - 12:52 PM.
#4
Posted 01 November 2011 - 12:52 PM
Maybe getting a targeting computer installed would tighten the cone, or if we level skills then a higher gunnery would do the same. That would be cool without suddenly making any one player too over powered.
#5
Posted 01 November 2011 - 01:00 PM
#6
Posted 01 November 2011 - 01:08 PM
#7
Posted 01 November 2011 - 02:14 PM
But honestly it never made much sense to begin with. On most mechs you have some weapons that are fixed and some that aren't. Take the Wolfhound, for example. 3 Mediums in the chest which must be set to a certain convergence (or just dead ahead, a convergence of 0) ... meanwhile the arm mounted laser is free to move about. Under certain circumstances they will converge, and others not. And that's the best case scenario (all weapons are energy based and thus suffer no environmental effects like gravity drop).
Then there is different weapon types to take into consideration. Gravity drop of ballistic weapons ... not to mention it is fully possible to have multiple ballistic weapons of various sizes and thus different tragectories.
Perhaps you should only have a set of crosshairs appear only when you have a single category/size or weapon selected to fire (all AC5s, or all lasers, for example). If you have multiple weapon types then you get a circular aiming point where most weapons will impact somewhere within that circle.
Shrugs. In ages past they kept it with one crosshair due to pc processing power and simplicity. It will be interesting if they stick to that.
#8
Posted 01 November 2011 - 02:22 PM
#9
Posted 01 November 2011 - 02:25 PM
Alternatively, in the original announcement video we see weapons discharging in a variety of ways aimed at different points by a single reticle. So maybe there's hope for that.
Maybe they'll even let us hook up multiple joysticks and have multiple crosshairs for various weapon groups (arm-mounted, torso-mounted, shoulder-mounted)! But let's not get ahead of ourselves. A long way to go until Summer 2012.
#10
Posted 01 November 2011 - 02:43 PM
I really hope they make ballistic weapons more useful in relation to energy this time around, energy weapons just have too many advantages in tabletop.
#11
Posted 01 November 2011 - 02:53 PM
topgun505, on 01 November 2011 - 02:14 PM, said:
Category = group, so my 4 m lasers are still just as powerful as an AC20, unless there was a forced chain fired when you press the "fire group" button and you had to hold the cross hair on target.
Some other ideas:
1. Group fire = cone of fire where all weapons in the group fire at once and damage is distributed randomly like in btech.
2. Pinpoint fire = chain firing a group of weapons where you have to click the fire button multiple times and hold the cross hair on target.
Edited by theforce, 01 November 2011 - 03:14 PM.
#12
Posted 02 November 2011 - 04:11 AM
Maybe some kind of mechanic where the player targets an enemy 'mech, and then the targeting computer takes over, aligning the lasers towards the 'mech that is being targeted? The longer the player holds off firing, the more likely the laser is to hit inside any eventual reticule?
Althought, being a mostly pc-gamer, that sounds way too close to having aim assist than I'm comfortable with.. tricky, this.
theforce's idea seems interesting, though.
#13
Posted 02 November 2011 - 04:16 AM
The more still you are the quicker they will align together.
Perhaps the longer you hold the targeting reticle over an enemy the quicker they will converge via your computer - but the enemy would get a warning beep they are about to get alpha striked or something.
This would allow additional skills and upgrades to come into it to reduce lock on time or the overall cone of fire etc.
#14
Posted 02 November 2011 - 04:19 AM
wolf74, on 31 October 2011 - 07:47 PM, said:
1. Pin Point auto Convergence whatever is under the Target Recital is auto-magic now at Prefect Convergence for all your weapon (Current MW4 Game)
2. Cone of Fire, The Cone of fire for a Weapon in centered on the Target Recital, The Size of the Cone is set to one size for the "Long Range" Point (Assault Tech 1 is currently on this path)
3. Manual Convergence: The Player Set the Range for the weapons too Converge at or is With Targeting Computer Converged at the range of the current Target(but Much Slower than Manual)
If you cannot answer this because your all are not ready or don't wish to share this info yet. Just Say Comstar Blackout the Com-center. Otherwise I would like to know how you're going to overcome the Weapon VS Armor Convergence problem that have Pledged pass game forcing a Lowering in weapon damage or raising of Armor level to 3x CBT values. We thank you for your time in Reading this
Wolf74
A 3025 pilot in a 3067 world
Assault Tech 1; Mechwarrior / Director - Book Guy
Now there is a name I've not seen in a long while. Glad to see you on the forums Wolf74 :-)
#15
Posted 02 November 2011 - 04:23 AM
I don't think there should be a difference and essential that makes 4 MLasers as powerful as an AC20 with less weight.
Does BT have a rule where you can group weapons and use one aiming modifier for the sum rather than each individual?
#16
Posted 02 November 2011 - 04:23 AM
Erhardt, on 01 November 2011 - 12:52 PM, said:
Maybe getting a targeting computer installed would tighten the cone, or if we level skills then a higher gunnery would do the same. That would be cool without suddenly making any one player too over powered.
Never thought of multiple targeting reticules but I really really like this idea, no pinpoint accuracy, cone of fire is ok firing all weapons straight at the point from their mount, but multiple reticules showing where each weapon would go in genius, although that would take quite a bit of development work.
#17
Posted 02 November 2011 - 04:29 AM
I think this is an excellent idea.
Asmudius Heng, on 02 November 2011 - 04:16 AM, said:
#18
Posted 02 November 2011 - 04:31 AM
Especially as all shots in the original board game were rolled separately. So one volley did not mean hit or miss for all weapons. But some would hit and some would miss and the ones that did hit could strike anywhere on the target mech.
So I for one would love for a cone option. Have the number of weapons in the alpha strike effect the size of the targeting circle. With one direct fire weapon having a traditional crosshairs but the more weapons that are added makes the target area grow and grow.
I like the idea of moving having an effect also. So the longer you are 'aiming' the tighter the circle becomes. Upto a certain point.
This would allow the head location to be kept closer to canon (9 armour and 3 internal structure) as it would be practically impossible to just snipe the head with this system.
In one of the announcements I heard that missiles would impact in an area to stay closer to canon effects which I hope suggests that this topic is on their radar!
Woodstock (Rik)
#19
Posted 02 November 2011 - 04:31 AM
- weapon convergence is about 2+ weapons that hit the same spot at range.
- accuracy - introducing a level of randomness in targeting - the way most FPS do it nowadays.
i would say auto-convergence on the target reticule is a must. but have a circle of dispersion for each weapon, and so even if they fire together some would hit dead center, some would miss and some..in between. (so an alpha strike would be a lottery - maybe increase dispersion with more weapons fired at the same time).
for accuracy - see World of Tanks. that game handles it very well (but it;s only 1 gun)
#20
Posted 02 November 2011 - 04:51 AM
4 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users