115 replies to this topic

[Graphite]

I'm surprised that even 26% prefer a fixed reticle! The floating reticle is a beautiful thing!

Looking at the trailer, it seems MWO will have a floating reticle? (Hard to be sure...)

Edited by Graphite, 22 January 2012 - 01:15 AM.

[DEVASTATOR]

It so hard to describe something visual with words. So, to elaborate on my previous post idea I (poorly) mocked up some pcis to give an idea of what I meant.






The graphical representation of what this might look like on the screen isn't really critical here as I've just mocked up a bunch of stuff. Its the concpet that's important.

Edited by DEVASTATOR, 22 January 2012 - 08:22 AM.

[Longinus Leichenberg]

Without "poisoning" my mind with the ideas of others:

MW3 based control with automatic torso compensation as the aiming reticule begins to reach the edge of the FOV. A modifier key (or button) could be used to converge the torso angle to the reticule. The pilot's sight would also turn towards the reticule automatically. The GUI and some AI would aid the player in centering the posterior on the viewport or aligning the torso with the angle of the legs and the horizon when turning manually. This is closest to how a human behaves, and the neurohelmet tries to merge the pilot with the 'mech.

This way a simple WASD control with a mouse used in most FPS games would suffice for generally piloting the 'mech and the sensation would be way more organic. Also, a mousewheel-based menu control could simplify selecting weapon sets, giving out orders, selecting targets etc.

Of course, this is how I'd use it. The rest is a question of individual control layout customization.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

@Devastator - thanks for taking the time to give an example. I can see what you mean and agree it could be a good way forward. The longer the main reticule was on the target the closer the "arms could move towards the centre. Alternatively if you are looking off to one side it might be that only one arm could target. What I'm hoping for is that arm mounted weapons would be useful. This also is useful for mechs if they bring in restricted/slow torso twist on larger mechs.
Where you have a mech like the Panther with a PPC "held" in the right fist. If you cosider a clock face with 12 dead ahead. I envisage it being able to aim about 4 o'clock behind on right to 9 o'clock on the left. This is without torso twist.
By the way, some people in other threads have suggested group your weapons to arms and torso so that you can target the group you are using.

[DEVASTATOR]

Previous MW games allowed you to (with a joystick anyway) to hit the hat button and look out the side window (could easily do it with a keyboard key as well I suppose). That was keyed to a mech animation that would point the arm to the side so you could fire that way with the arm weapons without the need to torso twist (a reticle in the side window also appeared for aiming). In reality it wasn't used that often as it was just as easy (and almost as quick) to simply turn your mech and point all your weapons at the target. Plus, people would run into walls a lot looking one way and running the other. Voice of experience there.

The free look ability in MW3 allowed you to use a mouse to control the reticle out the side window (front window too) to a greater degree than a joystick would. Never liked the free look as it was very FPS and too easy to get pinpoint accuracy.

The suggestion i posted would work a lot like an FPS does today (no one panic). When you run with a machinegun in your hand the reticle expands a lot as you spray your shots while on the move. You're running so you aren't going to be as accurate as you would standing still.

Can't see why that wouldn't apply to a mech too.

EDIT: forgot to add that the "movement" that would trigger the reticle dots to stop converging would have to be leg movement only. You're going to have to torso twist to keep the reticle on a moving target which shouldn't penalize you.

Edited by DEVASTATOR, 22 January 2012 - 01:36 PM.

[plodder]

I just downloaded mw4merc, mektek. NO freelook, ticked me off. So I look to see what was talked about, are you serious, why block it out?!?!?!! It is such more realistic, I use mouse, but was going to setup joystick the same way. REAL MECHS WOULD AUTOMATICALLY HAVE FREE LOOK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks uncle danno

Edited by plodder, 25 January 2012 - 06:15 PM.

[Graphite]

DEVASTATOR, on 22 January 2012 - 08:02 AM, said:

It so hard to describe something visual with words. So, to elaborate on my previous post idea I (poorly) mocked up some pcis to give an idea of what I meant.

I don't see any justification for this.
There needs to be a "real life (in game)" reason to arbitrarily restrict when you can and can't point arm weapons in the same direction as torso weapons that is at least vaguely believable. After all, we're just talking about a tiny piece of trigonometry that you can do on a piece of paper, and the angle of the shoulder/arm joints - why would running affect the relationship between arms and torso?

DEVASTATOR, on 22 January 2012 - 01:24 PM, said:

You're running so you aren't going to be as accurate as you would standing still.

That makes sense (but has no impact on the angle between arms and torso).

[DEVASTATOR]

Graphite, on 22 January 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

I don't see any justification for this.
There needs to be a "real life (in game)" reason to arbitrarily restrict when you can and can't point arm weapons in the same direction as torso weapons that is at least vaguely believable. After all, we're just talking about a tiny piece of trigonometry that you can do on a piece of paper, and the angle of the shoulder/arm joints - why would running affect the relationship between arms and torso?

Same way it dos when people run with a big gun in their hands........or scissors. That's why.


I swear to god that if i posted that the sky was blue you'd post that i was dead wrong and that it was green with purple polka dots......and that little ponies and cinnamon buns were dancing above all our heads. Simply to be contrarian.




Oh yea, everything you said in this post is wrong.

[Graphite]

DEVASTATOR, on 22 January 2012 - 06:00 PM, said:

Same way it dos when people run with a big gun in their hands........or scissors. That's why.

If we were talking about a human with a gun strapped to his chest and one in each hand I'd agree, but we're talking about mechanical joints - no need for them to move outwards when moving.

Quote

I swear to god that if i posted that the sky was blue you'd post that i was dead wrong and that it was green with purple polka dots......and that little ponies and cinnamon buns were dancing above all our heads. Simply to be contrarian.

Oh yea, everything you said in this post is wrong.

Come on now, let's keep this conversation at the level of adults.

BTW, do I really need to point out that I agreed with a point you made just 1 post ago???

[DEVASTATOR]

Meh.

[Longinus Leichenberg]

So, what do you think of what I wrote a few posts back? I'm really interested in your opinions on that.

EDIT: *removed an extra dot*

Edited by Longinus Leichenberg, 24 January 2012 - 05:34 AM.

[Kaemon]

Dlardrageth, on 26 November 2011 - 09:48 PM, said:

Main problem I can see with multiple reticules (no matter if 3, 5 or a dozen) is the vulnerability to lag issues. It could easily lead to a major advantage for the player with a better connection to the server, or the latest glitz in terms of graphic boards. While others would get lagshots galore that go straight to the next moon.

Graphics board one could claim is everybody's own call how much to spend on it. Internet connections and especially packet losses unfortunately is nothing you as an individual have much influence on.

I really would like the option for multiple reticules, as long as it stays optional (Maybe you can, if you want, designate a seperate extra reticule for each weapon group or something?) Then everybody could decide if he wants to risk the performance issues due to using a multiplicity of reticules or rather stay safe with only one.

I'd agree, but multiple active reticles would be very cool, I'd also like to see different styles for different weapons (so you can immediately discern which weapon you have armed (if grouped you could set which ret you want to see).

I'd like to the reticles tied into the actual weapons more (so they float a bit when running/turning, not just fixed on the screen)

Maybe this should be optional via a module, so if people have lag/dislikes they can stick with 1 active (and I hope it's active, I really dislike dead reticles) and be happy with it.

I know for the catapult, a wireframe LRM missile window (ala Amored Core) with the option to see the med laser reticles (if they are grouped and active) would be very cool.

[plodder]

Because of this topic, I bought a joystick yesterday. I know i overspent, even though it is an older joystick, it seemed to work fine, I did not even need to load any software. I think it was a thrustmaster firefox topgun. It worked for torso and turning. I liked being able to fire different weapon groups with only pushing the next button. I would really like to reconfigure it with some kind of software. Anyone know how? Software outside of mechwarrior, Like I do my mouse. For giggles, I used the joystick with my left hand for a while. I then used my mouse with the right, it was pretty effective. I will try two joysticks later. I also bought a car racing setup for the pc. It has the steering wheel with buttons(hopefully programmable), and foot pedals. I will see how best to integrate what I have. I paid the same for the car stuff as the joystick.
I know I overspent, it was $1.29 each +tax, so it was under 3 bucks for the setup LOL. Blue tag day on monday at goodwill.I wanted to buy them at the twenty bucks at their normal price, but gambled nobody else would want that lostech. Thanks uncle danno

Edited by plodder, 25 January 2012 - 06:40 PM.

[plodder]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 25 November 2011 - 11:54 AM, said:

I was thinking of 3 reticules, obviously each arm would only be able to track on their own side and to a little the other side of centre.
What it would mean is theoretically you could target 3 separate mechs. Ideal for flea swatting

This is more like my thinking. If you have the 2 free floating reticles aimed at the same spot, they turn a beautiful gold glow color showing optimal destruction shot. Trigger the the laser half a second after the lbx 10, or vice versa. Or have the left reticule targeting the hunchback that is about to wither your flank, but you rake him with your ac 5 to buy a sec. while you right look and with the right reticle, deliver the last destruct'o shot to the Centurion that has been giving you Armour Depletion Syndrome(A.D.S). Now the Centurions buddy, the Jenner hanging back, plinking as opportunity allowed, now gets a face full of lrm 5's from your permanent reticle centered, that was locking while you shot the Centurion. You fire then turn to the pesky Hunchy that is starting to wither your left flank. All that took between 2 & 5 seconds

Multiple freelooking, floating, fluidity equals, freaking fabulous fun, if you can fathom that fanatics...thanks uncle danno

[Dlardrageth]

As long as it remains optional, sure, why not. But PGI won't want to lag out people on older computers with too many reticles, free-floating and what not. Think "MVP" again, not everybody has bought or will buy a lot of gadgetry for steering a Mech. Which is somewhat prudent, I wouldn't as a random newb taking a look into that new game want to spend money on extra gear right away either. Even if it is just 3 US$ or whatever (could be relatively lots more in other countries).

[davidusmaximus]

I like the mw5 demo, the autoaiming or probability hit leads to some really long firefights, which is like the novels, which I do enjoy.
Second of all the opportunity to spend perhaps even 5 minutes to take down a mech would lead to some hopefully long lived rivalries.
Anyone spending 4 hours watching a triple overtime hockey playoff game knows what I'm talking about.

just saying.

[Liam]

I didn't read this topic, because I have no time at the moment (need to work). So if already posted before 4gvme

The posted pictures of Devastator are correct only for very short range (< 20 m !?), where your separated weapon mounts would need a maximum aiming correction twist.

For long range targets there should be one reticule. The higher is target range the less your weapons mounts would need to perform aiming correction twisting.

I don't know how difficult to implement both in the game ...
slightly movable reticule (for >50m range) in a fast running mech speed would be okay. In a walking mech reticule should be very stable depending on terrain.

Edited by Liam, 27 January 2012 - 03:59 AM.

[chill1ray]

isnt this really only important if your trying to do an alpha-strike? as far as full convergance goes!

I personally like to fix my mech so I fire sets of weapons based on - left arm/ center /right arm that is usually energy and ammo.

Also I dont like linking missles to other types of fire because the dam things dont do hillsides or buildings very well its nice I hit with the lazer

but all 15 missles just wiped out the factory I was protecting!

[guardian wolf]

That's no joke, I'm one who kind of links his missiles together (if I even have multiple ones on) but usually I go for configs that have a mix of all ranges, and some big punch. I will link my small stuff together, and then medium and/or longer ranged equipment. After that it can go long range direct fire, or BFG, then fourth will be I haven't put it in, will be a BFG.

[The Count]

Check this out what if it was based on weapon groups. And you could change the reticle graphic before each mission. That's not including the idea of targeting computers.