180 replies to this topic

[oldradagast]

Hotthedd, on 14 October 2015 - 03:48 AM, said:

Press "R".

...and switch to decaf.

Seriously, this is going to be on the TEST SERVER. If it doesn't work as intended it will not make it into the live game...hopefully. But if it DOES work to make targeting an enemy worthwhile (which it is, because your team sees that an enemy is targeted) then it does not break the game.

PGI doesn't have the best track record on this stuff.

Balance Test 1: Game was full of insane nerfs and random typos, making many mechs unplayable, blind, or both. Oops...

Balance Test 2: Now, the game has "ghost armor," randomly vanishing laser damage, cross-hairs that don't flash, more blind mechs, etc. Oops...

I'd have far more faith in them if they'd stop spending so much time coming up with patched together, illogical "solutions" to the game's issues.

[MischiefSC]

Honestly these changes are some of the most rational we've had in a very long time. Sensors are dialed back enough to make information valuable, which you need for information warfare to be relevant. No auto detect on hits at any range so to snipe you need a spotter or to devote resources to getting your own spotter info. Lasers that deal with focal length and attenuation to deal with damage outside optimal design range.

The point being that to make IW work you either need to power creep in some exceptionally op info advantages or you scale back critical ones and sell them back for resources/effort/risk. It's some good concepts and it affects weapon balance without a direct universal damage nerf. It adds tangible rewards to IW and that was needed.

Honestly I mocked the **** out of IW on the last patch. These changes are pleasantly surprising and with giving a shot.

[WarHippy]

Galenit, on 14 October 2015 - 02:03 PM, said:

How does it detect a hit and if its hitting a mech or a rock?

Lets take a missile:
It can give you information on hit/detonation, but in this moment, the transmitter is gone, you know it is destroyed, but not if its destroyed by hitting a mech, a rock or if its killed by ams.

It knows the location of the enemy mech in real time, and it know when you fired, the trajectory, and in the case of ACs the muzzle velocity. The on board computer would be able to determine if the shot would hit, and the on board sensors would be able to detect impact.

Dimento Graven, on 14 October 2015 - 02:14 PM, said:

I disagree, while yes, the targeting computer can note "non-friendly" mech positions, for any 'mech in frontal view of a friendly or in front of you, that's, it can be argued logically, a 'passive' scan event. 'Passive' scanning is something that won't really tell you anything beyond, "It's 'there', and it's 'moving this direction', and 'facing this direction.' Beyond that, you know nothing.

See above. There is more involved and more going on than just passive scanning. Mechs are more advanced and capable than people are giving them credit.

Dimento Graven, on 14 October 2015 - 02:14 PM, said:

Now when you actually target something, you're actively scanning that target, and you of course, get LOTS more info: What kind of 'mech it is, what its percentage health is, where it's crit, weapons load out, etc. etc. etc.

Correct, but that is entirely separate from something as basic as hit detection.

Dimento Graven, on 14 October 2015 - 02:14 PM, said:

Honestly reporting damage on something you're not actively targeting makes no logical sense, HOWEVER, as a stop gap while PGI fixes (or more probably, does very little to) the bastardized Crysis3 engine they're using to resolve terrain drawing issues, it's good to have the game report whether you're hitting or not, JUST SO, we don't spend an entire 50 tons of ammo on an object that has an invisible rock/wall/what have you, between you and it.

Fix the engine, then change the reticule function. Until the engine can reliably draw EVERYTHING between you and your target, it's a bad idea.

I just don't see the need to change it. The mechanic is fine, and it makes at least as much sense if not more than a lot of other things in this game.

[Troutmonkey]

MeiSooHaityu, on 14 October 2015 - 03:55 AM, said:

PGI is going to see how it works out. If there is overwhelming negative feedback, it probably won't be added in the main game anyway.

hahahaaha
you so funny

[DAYLEET]

We don't need reticle flash any more than we need health regen or wall jump. But if we're going to have it, might as well give it to the people who can lock their target because at least it make some sense.

[Troutmonkey]

l33tworks, on 14 October 2015 - 07:28 AM, said:

Well this is the problem, People including the devs don't realise how much of a disadvantage playing with over 250 pings are.

Its not just hit detection, its Target lock on, Paper dool information, Zoom in and out, Shutdown startup sequence when overheated, missle locks, Heat vision/nigh vision on off, everything is delayed by a huge margin.
This will just be another kick in the butt for high ping players.

They really need to minus double your ping off all the acquisition times.

For example if you ping average is 250 your target acquisition and radar times should be -500ms the values. If it is 50ms it should be -100ms etc.

I was excited to see an Australian server announced, but nup, suddenly Singapore, still 270 ping, still sad.

I really have no idea with Vision / Zoom isn't client side. It's really irritating to press zoom, have nothing happen, press zoom again and then it finally happens twice and zooms you back out. Same goes for heat modes, which is funny because you can actually get to a state where you have to toggle the vision mode twice to get back into it because of the desync.

[Troutmonkey]

Piney, on 14 October 2015 - 02:02 PM, said:

And all of the rage and QQ over a TEST.

LOL!

Because in recent history, anything that makes it to a test server made it to live servers without change - no matter how broken it was.
See UI 2.0 and UI 2.5 as recent examples...

[Troutmonkey]

Now, as for the test as a whole, I agree with most of these changes. Nerfs to ECM and Clan Lasers are overdue, and some form of infotech probably needs to be in the game.

Now in a perfect world with perfect hit reg and perfect geometry collision, a hit marker wouldn't be needed.
As it stands with average HSR and dodgy terrain everywhere, the red marker is required.

Sure, sometimes people abuse it by sweeping for hits, but I think the feedback it offers for players with average connections (aka Australians like me) far outweigh the possibility of occasional abuse.

[Troutmonkey]

KisumiKitsune, on 14 October 2015 - 10:09 PM, said:

How he made it to Tier 2 without pressing R is anyone's guess

[l33tworks]

For all those arguing the realism of whether your mech can detect hits or not, you are really looking at the whole reasoning behind a reticle flash completely wrong, and not understanding the purpose behind its creation in the first place on a fundamental level (even though I appreciate the effort for those who are arguing for it)

The hit detection flash has nothing to do with the world of Mechwarrior whatsoever! It has nothing to do with any games "world" or story whatsoever. It exists in a layer above the game, the same way that the settings screen exists, or the volume button exists or the resolution. You cannot mix these worlds, you shouldn't. PGis is trying to use a game feature as a balancing mechanism which is just mind boggling because its different for each player.

Its purpose is to simply tell you when the server has received your information and its a very important one.

It doesn't have anything to do with the type of mech you have, weapon, or you or anything consistent like that that a player has control over. It has to do ONLY with the variable nature of the internet, and informing you about that pattern, and nothing else.

Removing it would be like removing the ability to bind your keys, or see your ping, it would bother some but not all. It would be like being able to turn your footsteps sound down to other players by turning down the volume, or changing the size of your mech scale to other players by changing your resolution. It makes no sense and the whole idea is fubar.

The reticle flash is unique to each player. It cannot be used to balance. It is simply a means of informing you about the state of communication between you and the server.

If you shoot a mech with a PPC, watch the shot hit a mech, then disconnect the internet almost immediately afterwards, if your ping is high you will not see the reticle flash, but if its low it flashes almost instantly so you may see it!

Same weapons, same loadouts, same PCs, the ONLY VARIABLE is the internet speed. Completely different outcomes. On people with very low ping, the reticle flashes red the instant they hit, on people on the other end with worse connections, it can take a few seconds to flash. It is completely independent of any gameplay mechanics whatsoever.

So don't talk about balance when it comes to reticle flash. It is a necessary means of informing when the most important part of why you are playing, to communicate your data across and to know exactly when that happens.

I would 99.9% honestly stop playing if they took it, out because I just could not handle landing shot after shot on enemy mechs not knowing if its having any impact whatsoever. I know, "see ya", "can I have your stuff", "no one cares", but imo just a damn shame because I am willing to put up with almost anything normally, and I always have loved MWO, even putting up with 270 ping for its entire live, always hoping for an Australian server, and even though that fell through, Its still wasn't even close to a deal breaker for me whereas for other games it would have.

But this is just something of a doomsday event, where the oceans boil and there is no hope. Its ripping the heart right out of the gaming experience.

Edited by l33tworks, 14 October 2015 - 11:37 PM.

[Bayamon]

Hit indication isnt a gameplay mechanic in my eyes.
Its a necessity for online play in many cases.

As the OP said, there is a disconnect between what you see and what actually happens on the server.

I can hit a moving target with say an AC20 just fine...but whether i saw the shell hit the enemy is irrelevant, because i have to deliberatly miss the target by aiming way ahead of it, for the reticule to flash and the damage to register.

So when i "actually hit" the target and do the proper damage, my onscreen animation will tell me i aimed too far ahead.

I have to adjust my aim depending on the server (US or EU) and my ping of the day(dorm internet :/).
Removing hit indication feels like a kick in the ****.

Other games dont suffer from this as badly. Mainly small scale games like CS or Q3 because hit detection is handled differently. I could totally live without the hit sounds in Q3 because i dont have to "aim ahead" at all and "what i see is what i get", as opposed to something like Battlefield and, in this instance, MWO.

Even if its just for non-locked targets. Often you cant get a lock or i keep something else locked to provide an LRM target while myself firing at something else.

[Karl Streiger]

oldradagast, on 14 October 2015 - 02:52 PM, said:

PGI doesn't have the best track record on this stuff.

Balance Test 1: Game was full of insane nerfs and random typos, making many mechs unplayable, blind, or both. Oops...

Balance Test 2: Now, the game has "ghost armor," randomly vanishing laser damage, cross-hairs that don't flash, more blind mechs, etc. Oops...

did you even think about that it is the idea behind the current TEST - that you have blind Mechs.
When you can play as you are used to play -the complete test is nonsence.

You don't need to test something when you know it works - right?
So you got all that complaints you don't hit, you don't know if you have hit, you don't deal full damage.... and in the next session - PGI may add Gauss and PPC nerfs - and again all are complaining and complaining....

and then PGI adds C3 network or a other kind of information warfare - and there will be some guy nobody knows before that think C3... well lets try.... and suddenly your lasers work, your gauss works, your crosshair works.... and you are happy.... seconds before such a docubag in a Stormcrow streaked that little guy to dead - and all systems are falling again.

[Speedy Plysitkos]

when I see a player not pressing R, I always said to myself. how the frack, can he play the game ? weirdo.

[Inflatable Fish]

l33tworks, on 14 October 2015 - 04:40 AM, said:

What people like you dont seem to get is you CANT use your eyes. Your EYES will see that you hit but as long as the server doesn't agree, it means nothing. BTW, Real life doesn't have "HIT DETECTION",

You don't punch someone in the head in real life and have the shot not register

that analogy is just plain stupid. the reticle not flashing doesn't mean the shot didn't register. you still deal damage if you hit, you just can't know for sure unless you either have the enemy targeted or have some other cue like armour glow. and that's it. noone's taking away your 360 noscope dual gauss headshots.

[Doman Hugin]

I33works & Bayamon, What you say is true. They are purposly blinding you, but only in certain situations: snap shots before you get a lock, long range sniping without support & idiots that cant press R.

But these must be the exception, as everyone plays with enemy paper doll up so they know where to shoot them.

[Lykaon]

l33tworks, on 14 October 2015 - 03:33 AM, said:

I am not normally one to care too much about changes devs make. Sure I speak my mind but i dont "rage" or get up in arms over it. I don't care about clans vs IS or balance in general, I just still try to have fun and use whatever works.

But for the first time in MWO History, I am Pi$$sed of with a PROPOSED change, because its so fundamental and game breakingly ludicrous

I am pissed. Very pissed with the little line here.

"The targeting reticle will no longer flash when a hit is detected on a ‘Mech that is not target-locked."
no longer flash
no longer flash
no longer flash


I hardly ever target enemy mechs even in the current state of the game, but even if I am FORCED to, just to get a reticle flash, I will not able to in MANY cases. Therefore there will be no reticle flash, in MANY cases

Now there will be scenarios where I will be shooting mechs in plain sight and not know whether I am doing damage?
How can they possibly think thats ok? Do PGI not realise its a server side game? How will i know I am hitting a mech? Its the same as a Bank account that doesn't let you see how much money you have in it. Its Insane.

The explosion and weapon effects are all CLIENT side and has never correlated with whether I am doing damage or not, the reticle flash is SERVER side which is the only thing that matters. Its the only way for me to know the damage I have placed has been confirmed by the server. Its not realistic but its necessary for a network based game. IF this was real life, you wouldnt need a reticle flash, IF YOU HIT YOU KNOW YOU HIT, but this is a game, and it doesn't work like that.

Next step is they will start to "pull" or retract damage that landed on non-targeted mechs as balance mechanic for matchmaker because the shot will be taken as missed, but really it just didn't register on purpose and you wont have any way of knowing. Now that you have no reticle flash, how will you know?!

I know why PGi did this. They don't want people to "feel around" for mechs without seeing them on their radar by waving a laser around. Hardly anyone does that now, and if they rarely ever do, its only lasers, but my suggestion is to increase the needed duration for reticle flash with lasers, but NOT REMOVE IT ENTIRELY. For example if greater than 60% of a burn time landed, show you reticle flash. OR if you hit with a ballistic, show flash. No one will waste ballistics to feel for mechs anyway

This is only ludicrus because you personaly do not lock targets.From a game mechanics standpoint it makes sense with the intent of the information warfare alterations.Also how do you determine where to hit a target if you have no armor status? do you just always aim CT ?

I would say you are one of those players I find less than optimal on a team because you do not provide any transmited target data because you refuse to press the "R" key.You may not see a value in transmited target data from a team mate (or maybe you do but are to lazy to pitch in by pressing one button) but be assured there are several benefits to locking targets for the rest of your team.

This also makes sense from a perspective of how mech sensors should function.Why would your mech's sensors know to register damage if the target is not locked in to the battle computer.How would the sensors know that you are targeting a mech or just discharging weapons into some random object unless the target is locked?

With the proposed information warfare alterations locking targets becomes very important.If a target is within your sensor range it will not neccissarily be in a teammates sensor range.If you refuse to lock that target only you will be aware of that target.With no lock no information is transmitted down the line to the rest of your team.

If your team is blind to the enemy location they will not neccissarily know to move in to back you up.So you die alone and outnumbered because nobody knew you were fighting 5 mechs because you never locked onto anything.

[Hotthedd]

oldradagast, on 14 October 2015 - 02:52 PM, said:

PGI doesn't have the best track record on this stuff.

Balance Test 1: Game was full of insane nerfs and random typos, making many mechs unplayable, blind, or both. Oops...

Balance Test 2: Now, the game has "ghost armor," randomly vanishing laser damage, cross-hairs that don't flash, more blind mechs, etc. Oops...

I'd have far more faith in them if they'd stop spending so much time coming up with patched together, illogical "solutions" to the game's issues.

Okay, but how much of those things made it to the live game?

I would rather find out if it is broken on the test server. There is no need to get too upset yet.

[l33tworks]

Inflatable Fish, on 15 October 2015 - 12:00 AM, said:

that analogy is just plain stupid. the reticle not flashing doesn't mean the shot didn't register. you still deal damage if you hit, you just can't know for sure unless you either have the enemy targeted or have some other cue like armour glow. and that's it. noone's taking away your 360 noscope dual gauss headshots.

Ok. I am not going to reply to people that have this deluded "use eyeballs mk1" mentality. The idea in their heads is that you can use visual cues to know if you hit or not, like armour glow, and think the rest of us are just really stupid for not knowing the obvious, "well look if you hit".
They fail to understand the concept of hit detection even though its been explained here a few times, not to mention they should know better before all of this went down, so no more replies to this.

When i see person after person posting this, I just want to give up and not even try.

http://mwomercs.com/...56#entry4766256

Livewyr, on 15 October 2015 - 04:11 AM, said:

At close range, you know because you watch it hit.
know because you watch it hit
because you watch it hit
watch it hit
At long range, you can either observe the graphic of a Guass round hitting (sparks) or you can follow it with your eyes with advanced zoom.
observe the graphic of a Guass round hitting (sparks)
observe
hitting
sparks

or you can follow it with your eyes

follow it with your eyes
with your eyes
eyes

Lykaon, on 15 October 2015 - 01:04 AM, said:

This is only ludicrus because you personaly do not lock targets.From a game mechanics standpoint it makes sense with the intent of the information warfare alterations.Also how do you determine where to hit a target if you have no armor status? do you just always aim CT ?

I would say you are one of those players I find less than optimal on a team because you do not provide any transmited target data because you refuse to press the "R" key.You may not see a value in transmited target data from a team mate (or maybe you do but are to lazy to pitch in by pressing one button) but be assured there are several benefits to locking targets for the rest of your team.

This also makes sense from a perspective of how mech sensors should function.Why would your mech's sensors know to register damage if the target is not locked in to the battle computer.How would the sensors know that you are targeting a mech or just discharging weapons into some random object unless the target is locked?

With the proposed information warfare alterations locking targets becomes very important.If a target is within your sensor range it will not neccissarily be in a teammates sensor range.If you refuse to lock that target only you will be aware of that target.With no lock no information is transmitted down the line to the rest of your team.

If your team is blind to the enemy location they will not neccissarily know to move in to back you up.So you die alone and outnumbered because nobody knew you were fighting 5 mechs because you never locked onto anything.

Its not true that this is an issue just because I don't tend to lock targets, though it is true that it would negatively affect some people more than others, and I am one of them, but unfairly so, and thats a bad thing.

The notion that you need a hit detect marker has been explained here a few times, it has nothing to do with whether you lock targets or not as a player. But if you must know, I generally aim for the area where I think I will land a shot. Its not always the CT, sometimes its thin air, sometimes the the shoulder of a mech if only a part is exposed.

Trying to isolate a component on a moving mech is pointless to me, its too unpredictable to matter because the shot rarely registers where I see it due to my poor internet. Especially back in the day when the hit detection was much much worse than it is now. So I just have never had good reason to use the paper doll. Its an unfair disadvantage, but its one I've learned to work with. I'm ok with it, as long as the shot registers at all I am happy.

Credit to PGI though, hit detection now is the best I have ever seen it, I can isolate components on slower moving mechs, but still not good enough to do away with a hit detection marker, that just never happens on a server side game, you always need it continually.

You have to understand that no matter how good PGI code their game, there will always be uncertainty in the internet connections of the world, meaning no matter what mistakes will be made, and you need to know when that is happening.

Yes I agree with you that it doesn't make sense that your mech should know if it hit or not, even though you could argue it should, I perfectly understand where people are coming from when they say this and i what may surprise many is I perfectly agree with them.

The problem is it also doesn't make sense to shoot a mech and have NO damage register, the shot just disappears into thin air. That makes much less sense to me than worrying about how your mech can know if it it did damage or not. So obviously something is wrong and a comporise has to be made.

So, What is the problem?

The problem is on a server side game, what the client sees and what the server says happened are two totally separate things.

So you need some kind of way of knowing that what you saw on your end, was also seen on the server side. Thus the idea of the hit detection notification is born, and has been implented since the dawn of gaming, including the dawn of MWO.

There is a reason is exists and why MWO has had it all this time. Changing this is like changing round wheels to square ones. There is just no need for it, its like that for a reason. There is a reason wheels have been round since they were invented, and they should stay that way.

Edited by l33tworks, 15 October 2015 - 05:32 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

l33tworks, on 15 October 2015 - 05:02 AM, said:

So you need some kind of way of knowing that what you saw on your end, was also seen on the server side. Thus the idea of the hit detection notification is born, and has been implented since the dawn of gaming, including the dawn of MWO.

so what will you do when your client see the hit but the server does not
- aim 10m left?
- 5m right?
- 2 m high?
- 1cm low?

Maybe i have rose colored glasses but i don't see any "additional" information gain.
The only time the "blinking" cursor is of worth - when shooting Doritos and/or using LRMs

[l33tworks]

Karl Streiger, on 15 October 2015 - 05:47 AM, said:

so what will you do when your client see the hit but the server does not
- aim 10m left?
- 5m right?
- 2 m high?
- 1cm low?

Maybe i have rose colored glasses but i don't see any "additional" information gain.
The only time the "blinking" cursor is of worth - when shooting Doritos and/or using LRMs

You have never heard of this concept before? Its existed since online gaming has been around. Yes exactly that, Its called lag shooting. You compensate to a point to where you are registering damage.

Not to mention just for your sanity to know its working.