42 replies to this topic

[Livewyr]

oldradagast, on 17 October 2015 - 05:50 PM, said:

I counter with "Theory of designing a decent game" and "theory of if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

This is a game, not reality, nor some philosophical simulation, or whatever you're getting at. Also, real war isn't fun. Games about war should be. They should also be consistent and easy for new users to play. This change just masks the game's damage registration and invisible wall issues and confuses new players, so it is bad design.

You act as though they discarded it.
Hit "R"

Lots of good things happen when you do that on the PTS.

oldradagast, on 17 October 2015 - 05:50 PM, said:

And if there's one thing this game needs, it's changes that favor sniping and camping... right?

...he meant he liked that information warfare would now be a part of sniping, instead of just being able to play candy crush (click accurately).

Does not aide snipers any more or less than it aids anyone else...

Edited by Livewyr, 17 October 2015 - 06:47 PM.

[oldradagast]

Livewyr, on 17 October 2015 - 06:45 PM, said:

...he meant he liked that information warfare would now be a part of sniping, instead of just being able to play candy crush (click accurately).

Does not aide snipers any more or less than it aids anyone else...

Your attempts to deflect the issue with petty sarcasm aside, if you don't understand how having your locked target needing to take extra time to get a return lock on you to effectively shoot back favors the sniper and the camper who hides out, waiting for targets, than you probably shouldn't be commenting on this subject.

Edited by oldradagast, 18 October 2015 - 06:00 PM.

[Livewyr]

oldradagast, on 18 October 2015 - 05:59 PM, said:

Your attempts to deflect the issue with petty sarcasm aside, if you don't understand how having your locked target needing to take extra time to get a return lock on you to effectively shoot back favors the sniper and the camper who hides out, waiting for targets, than you probably shouldn't be commenting on this subject.

If you don't understand the importance of him needing a scout to (lock) snipe you at range, and you needing a (lock) scout to shoot him back at range...

You get the idea...

Edited by Livewyr, 18 October 2015 - 07:18 PM.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Livewyr, on 17 October 2015 - 06:45 PM, said:

You act as though they discarded it.
Hit "R"

Lots of good things happen when you do that on the PTS.

It would have been better if they had just discarded it altogether for consistency's sake. It's hard to unlearn hit markers when they show up sometimes and sometimes not. Besides, from an "immersion" standpoint why does a mech pilot need a hit marker, the paper-doll should tell them enough if they already have a lock.

Now let me tell you why hit markers should stay in the game and should not be tied to targeting, and why laser ghost range needs to be scrapped. It's because the targeting system is clumsy; during a push when it's a 12 mech deathball vs a 12 mech firing line, people get bunched up and the targeting system starts to crap itself.

-----

Let me set the scene. An Atlas, a Direwolf, a Maddog, and a Summoner are all next to one another. You try to target the Atlas, and then you fire your lasers. Unfortunately the targeting system thought you wanted to target the Direwolf; so not only do you lose damage off your lasers but you get no hitmarker, which leaves you scratching your head and wondering "did I actually land a hit?"

Your next reaction is to slap 'R' again and try to see if you get a hit marker on the Atlas this time. Unfortunately mechs have moved and even though you are keeping your lasers more or less on the Atlas, the targeting system has now locked onto the summoner. You laser burn then ends, still no hit markers. In the end those people using lasers fail to fully contribute to the push because of faulty targeting and your line collapses.

-----

This doesn't happen when you are sniping ofcourse, or when you're only fighting only one or two mechs at a time, but in a heated brawl the whole thing can fall apart.It does not happen every time, but it's incredibly frustrating when it does happen, and the fact that it happens with ANY regulairty means that this mechanic isn't solid enough for Live.

That's my 2 cents on the issue.

PS: yes I know the targeting system is supposed to target the enemy closest to your cross-hair. I know how targeting is supposed to work but it doesn't always work out that way, especially when you cycle past that 1st target to the second.

Edited by Jack Shayu Walker, 19 October 2015 - 07:12 AM.

[Livewyr]

Jack Shayu Walker, on 19 October 2015 - 07:05 AM, said:

It would have been better if they had just discarded it altogether for consistency's sake. It's hard to unlearn hit markers when they show up sometimes and sometimes not. Besides, from an "immersion" standpoint why does a mech pilot need a hit marker, the paper-doll should tell them enough if they already have a lock.

Now let me tell you why hit markers should stay in the game and should not be tied to targeting, and why laser ghost range needs to be scrapped. It's because the targeting system is clumsy; during a push when it's a 12 mech deathball vs a 12 mech firing line, people get bunched up and the targeting system starts to crap itself.

-----

Let me set the scene. An Atlas, a Direwolf, a Maddog, and a Summoner are all next to one another. You try to target the Atlas, and then you fire your lasers. Unfortunately the targeting system thought you wanted to target the Direwolf; so not only do you lose damage off your lasers but you get no hitmarker, which leaves you scratching your head and wondering "did I actually land a hit?"

Your next reaction is to slap 'R' again and try to see if you get a hit marker on the Atlas this time. Unfortunately mechs have moved and even though you are keeping your lasers more or less on the Atlas, the targeting system has now locked onto the summoner. You laser burn then ends, still no hit markers. In the end those people using lasers fail to fully contribute to the push because of faulty targeting and your line collapses.

-----

This doesn't happen when you are sniping ofcourse, or when you're only fighting only one or two mechs at a time, but in a heated brawl the whole thing can fall apart.It does not happen every time, but it's incredibly frustrating when it does happen, and the fact that it happens with ANY regulairty means that this mechanic isn't solid enough for Live.

That's my 2 cents on the issue.

PS: yes I know the targeting system is supposed to target the enemy closest to your cross-hair. I know how targeting is supposed to work but it doesn't always work out that way, especially when you cycle past that 1st target to the second.

If you tie the laser range into it, it sounds bad. (As we've established the laser range targeting method could be improved upon.) If you leave the laser range out of it, and just focus on the lock for hit-reg, then it isn't as bad as you make it out to be.

(Besides, if you are looking at your target, you'll know if you hit it, assuming you're not firing at specks on the other end of the map.)

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Livewyr, on 19 October 2015 - 09:12 AM, said:

(Besides, if you are looking at your target, you'll know if you hit it, assuming you're not firing at specks on the other end of the map.)

You'll think that you hit it, however, if there is a hit reg issue or a lag-spike, that can become a lot less clear. That's what the hit-marker is for in the first place; it's not for immersion. I deal with spikey ping a lot, and knowing if my hit landed after a spike ends is important.

[H Seldon]

Jack Shayu Walker, on 19 October 2015 - 09:18 AM, said:

You'll think that you hit it, however, if there is a hit reg issue or a lag-spike, that can become a lot less clear. That's what the hit-marker is for in the first place; it's not for immersion. I deal with spikey ping a lot, and knowing if my hit landed after a spike ends is important.

Why does it matter? Is there something you can do about it? I play in a hotel a lot, and wireless is sometimes all over the place. I know pretty quick if I'm having issues with ping without having to see hits register or not register.

This adds a lot of value to mechs that can scout. Especially if they were to add spread to lasers (instead of damage drop) without target lock.

[Livewyr]

H Seldon, on 19 October 2015 - 10:11 AM, said:

Why does it matter? Is there something you can do about it? I play in a hotel a lot, and wireless is sometimes all over the place. I know pretty quick if I'm having issues with ping without having to see hits register or not register.

This adds a lot of value to mechs that can scout. Especially if they were to add spread to lasers (instead of damage drop) without target lock.

This.


There will still be times when hit reg is obviously a problem, and PGI will get reports of it as they do now. I am willing to take a hit to knowing whether my round registered every single time at any range, in order to give info-tech a real purpose in combat.

[Rixsaw]

I'd have to agree either remove visual indication of hits completely or keep them completely. If you see a mech but can't target it with your computer who cares as long as your shots reach the target and hit, they should count.

I'm not sure if this is about a table top mechanic that someone wants to add or if players want ECM to be more useful. I like the idea of ECM being more useful, and it seems like this would make ECM a buff / De-buff system used to reduce or increase damage.

What tends to happen when one player, has the ability to affect all combat in an area is that player gets focused down first by everyone. Try playing an Elementalist in GW2, or a light tank in WOT, or a Destroyer in WoWS if you need to understand what i'm talking about.

In my previous experiences with CW, I found that Hellbringers were specifically difficult to handle as an IS pilot because they had ECM and weren't easy to kill like a kit fox might be, and the Clanners brought 4 or 5 of them so there was no single mech to kill first, and while you are trying to kill the hellbringers the Diashi's are pounding you.

The inverse of that is when the IS has a raven spotting or countering ECM and the LRM boats can unload on some portion of their team to devastating effect.

In the new system you describe it seems that both teams would be able to fire LRM's and would likely target the ECM mechs as fast as possible to take them out so they could do more damage, and the reverse would be equally true of the clanners, only since they are usually using lasers, they would have to carry some LRM boats thus increase weapon diversity. Then all of the sudden MAP balance becomes a big issues as areas of the map are protected from LRm's and others aren't.

The difficulty with evaluating this system you are building is that noone will ever know how much less dammage they did due to ECM unless the server wants to display that statistic some where in the post battle results or possible on the hud in some way. You can always blame your low damage totals on ECM, but maybe you were just not connecting your shots. Very hard to gauge a change like that.

[H Seldon]

Rixsaw, on 19 October 2015 - 03:11 PM, said:

The difficulty with evaluating this system you are building is that noone will ever know how much less dammage they did due to ECM unless the server wants to display that statistic some where in the post battle results or possible on the hud in some way. You can always blame your low damage totals on ECM, but maybe you were just not connecting your shots. Very hard to gauge a change like that.

There are many times weapons don't do their full damage. And it's easy to see from the weapons stats. Does it matter if it's from ECM or you are not on the target for the full duration?

Edited by H Seldon, 19 October 2015 - 04:00 PM.

[slide]

As someone who plays at a high ping all the time (150 OC, 270 NA, 340 EU) I must say that I was aghast at the concept of removing the server registration of hits or limiting it to only locked targets through the reticle.

HSR is definitely better than is used to be but I guarantee you that it is still inconsistent and that what you see is not what you get. Visual queues like AC explosions on you target are not a positive confirmation of you hitting your target or even the spot you are aiming at. I have seen and still continue to see mechs die before shots have even traveled to the target. There is a significant delay between pulling the trigger, the server calculating the hit/miss, and your client showing the result. We still have to lead targets at times to allow for this lag.

Removing or limiting this feature will unfairly penalize high ping players, making an already difficult issue harder to over come. Since closed beta the mantra has been "trust the reticle not what you see". Don't change it now. HSR is better but it is not that good.

I understand what you are trying to achieve, which is make sniping from long range less accurate, but this unfairly penalizes all weapons at all ranges for basically everyone that doesn't live on top of the server.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

H Seldon, on 19 October 2015 - 10:11 AM, said:

Why does it matter? Is there something you can do about it? I play in a hotel a lot, and wireless is sometimes all over the place. I know pretty quick if I'm having issues with ping without having to see hits register or not register.

This adds a lot of value to mechs that can scout. Especially if they were to add spread to lasers (instead of damage drop) without target lock.

knowing if my hits register during a lagspike is not significant to knowing if there was a lagspike. It helps me play the game when my connection gets bad. OIfcourse I can tell when my connection is bad.

[Rixsaw]

H Seldon, on 19 October 2015 - 03:53 PM, said:

There are many times weapons don't do their full damage. And it's easy to see from the weapons stats. Does it matter if it's from ECM or you are not on the target for the full duration?

It does if you want to fix the problem in your play style and aim better or counter ecm better... But take an LRM boat for example. The only way they know they are hitting is when the reticle turns red. The may switch targets if not getting hits. However if you don't give them feedback about that then they may fire LRM's into the mountain side for the entire game.

I'm saying its hard to evaluate if you are missing or hitting your target or if the ECM is causing a drop in damage.

[H Seldon]

Jack Shayu Walker, on 19 October 2015 - 04:24 PM, said:

knowing if my hits register during a lagspike is not significant to knowing if there was a lagspike. It helps me play the game when my connection gets bad. OIfcourse I can tell when my connection is bad.

I'm assuming a lag spike is sporadic. You will still get target hit notification when you have a target lock. If you don't have a lock then you won't know if you hit regardless if you have a lag spike or not. That's like any other player.

Rixsaw, on 19 October 2015 - 04:33 PM, said:

It does if you want to fix the problem in your play style and aim better or counter ecm better... But take an LRM boat for example. The only way they know they are hitting is when the reticle turns red. The may switch targets if not getting hits. However if you don't give them feedback about that then they may fire LRM's into the mountain side for the entire game.

I'm saying its hard to evaluate if you are missing or hitting your target or if the ECM is causing a drop in damage.

If you have a target lock, then you will know if you hit. ECM just delays lock, doesn't prevent it.

[Mad Porthos]

Just checking, in the example of a lance with Atlas, Daishi, Summoner etc, when they were covered by ecm and trying to focus on the Atlas, but kept getting another mech, isn't it the case that once you are pretty close... like brawling range, the lasers do maximum damage anyways? If I recall correctly, the optimal range comes inwards for unlocked lasers, but most lasers generally have optimal ranges near or under the max sensor range of most mech classes, with the exception of the large laser/er large and clan larges being larger than an unboosted (no BAP or module) assault/heavy sensor package. With out the sensor lock, it seems that optimal range shifts inwards without lock on correct mech, but it doesn't prevent it doing damage if you are still inside that new optimal and it's not all that big a drop off, since it still has it's max range NOT shifted inwards - so the damage is decreasing slowly now from the new inward optimal out to the old max range (2x for INNER SPHERE, not so far for clan).

So even without actual locks on the correct mech, in close brawling ranges, these lasers will be doing full damage burn regardless of who they are locked on, right? Or am I simply missing some other mechanic? Do clairify, please.

Edited by Mad Porthos, 19 October 2015 - 05:54 PM.

[DrunkenAntichrist]

Mad Porthos, on 19 October 2015 - 05:48 PM, said:

Just checking, in the example of a lance with Atlas, Daishi, Summoner etc, when they were covered by ecm and trying to focus on the Atlas, but kept getting another mech, isn't it the case that once you are pretty close... like brawling range, the lasers do maximum damage anyways? If I recall correctly, the optimal range comes inwards for unlocked lasers, but most lasers generally have optimal ranges near or under the max sensor range of most mech classes, with the exception of the large laser/er large and clan larges being larger than an unboosted (no BAP or module) assault/heavy sensor package. With out the sensor lock, it seems that optimal range shifts inwards without lock on correct mech, but it doesn't prevent it doing damage if you are still inside that new optimal and it's not all that big a drop off, since it still has it's max range NOT shifted inwards - so the damage is decreasing slowly now from the new inward optimal out to the old max range (2x for INNER SPHERE, not so far for clan).

So even without actual locks on the correct mech, in close brawling ranges, these lasers will be doing full damage burn regardless of who they are locked on, right? Or am I simply missing some other mechanic? Do clairify, please.

You are correct but that negates the tears so you must be silenced. Terribly sorry about that.

[Chuck Jager]

Keeps bad players from firing from a million miles away and still getting a "hit"

Keeps good players from using cermlas to test terrain for hidden objects and then firing an alpha.

I think this is to promote close range builds having a valid chance to get in range and do damage without being torn to shreds. Yes, brawl builds do well in the right criteria. It is many times better to bring a medium long range and do well in more matches. It is an averages math issue not which mech can score well sometimes.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

H Seldon, on 19 October 2015 - 05:14 PM, said:

I'm assuming a lag spike is sporadic. You will still get target hit notification when you have a target lock. If you don't have a lock then you won't know if you hit regardless if you have a lag spike or not. That's like any other player.

What I am telling you is that hit-markers should always be on, that way I can tell if I'm hitting during a lag-spike. Hit fishing with lasers is a much more insignificant issue compared to quality of life for a player with a bad connection.

I'm not really sure what you are trying to explain to me , I have not failed to understand how the new hit-marker system works, I know that locking will get me a hit-marker; that is the problem.

Bottom line is that the new hit-marker system is unfair for players with connection issues. Find me any online game in which hit-markers have been about Immersion, if you find 3 I will admit defeat and concede to your argument.

Edited by Jack Shayu Walker, 21 October 2015 - 04:08 PM.

[l33tworks]

Jack Shayu Walker, on 21 October 2015 - 04:06 PM, said:

What I am telling you is that hit-markers should always be on, that way I can tell if I'm hitting during a lag-spike. Hit fishing with lasers is a much more insignificant issue compared to quality of life for a player with a bad connection.

I'm not really sure what you are trying to explain to me , I have not failed to understand how the new hit-marker system works, I know that locking will get me a hit-marker; that is the problem.

Bottom line is that the new hit-marker system is unfair for players with connection issues. Find me any online game in which hit-markers have been about Immersion, if you find 3 I will admit defeat and concede to your argument.

Exactly. PGI seem and some players seem to be stunningly clueless as to what effects certain changes will have on some players but not others. They jyst willy nilly considered it as part of gameplay shows they just dont have the slightest idea what its intended purpose is. Since I doubt they have an agenda to beat down high ping players the fact they even considered it as an idea let alone took the time to pay someone to implement it is proof of this.

[Greyhart]

I in general agree with the idea behind the new hit reg not working unless locked.

The only valid argument against that I have seen is the one given by slide and the high lag areas. That would be the only reason to not implement it.

Perhaps you could have it that it shows only if locked or your ping is above say 200.