1094 replies to this topic

[TexAce]

Given Convergence can't be fixed by PGI while still keeping HSR in tact, I think CoF is the way to go, to finally balance this game right. Insta-Converging-Pinpoint-Damage just needs to go, I'm a strong believer of this.

So that's why I made this little proposal how to change our crosshair and implement an intelligent CoF principle, which adds to the game's mechanics, is plausible and is not killing the "skill" in this game alltogether.

My proposal is a slight CoF which can be reduced with different items in the game and skill tree perks, but which can also increase if you push your heat too much or alpha your weapons

Introducing the Min-Max-CoF-Proposal

Here is a comparison of the old/actual crosshair we have now and the different states the new crosshair could have, depending on the pilot's skill, items and heat/firing conditions.



Keep in ming the min CoF is there to still keep the Crosshair's center open, since it would be neither visually pleasing nor help if the CoF would always be a full filled circle.

The actual Cof would include the inner circle.


As you see the CoF is still so small, that you could easily pick an enemie's Limb or ST if he is less than 200m away, probably even out to 300-400m, if you are not alphaing.

In detail:



(if ghost heat is activated, it automatically increases your max CoF)

So skilled and fully equipped mechs could still maintain a pinpoint behaviour if they play wise but it would not be usable all the time during combat, only on special situations.

We have a CoF at the moment on MGs, so the code is there, it would also not interfere with HSR and it would not be hard to implement. Actually the "Reduce CoF" code is already in the game, since some mechs had it as a perk for MGs.

With the new skill tree this could easily be expanded or simplified further and it would help balance the game tremendously.

Keep in mind at the moment my proposal does not differ between arm or torso-mounted weapons. But it could easily be changed to arm-mounted weapons always using only the min CoF

Here a slightly altered version which takes moving/standing into consideration (the min CoF radius while standing is only 50% of the min CoF when moving).



Very rough examples, not the exact numbers I propose, just 4u to get the idea



My idea is based on screen space, thats why the reticule stays the same when zoomed in (and because I think this is simpler and easier to understand). Alternatively it could also be based on meters. So alpha'ing your weapons while riding the heat bar at 99% and without any equpment or skills which imporove your CoF, it could be set at 20 meters (just as an example). This would have the benefit that no matter how far away your opponent is, the maximum your weapons could fire away from the center of your crosshair would be 20m. So a target 1000m away would still very likely be hit as long as you aim at him dead center.

Edited by TexAce, 08 February 2016 - 11:35 AM.

[-Vompo-]

Nice job with the pictures but personally I'm not a fan of the idea.
I'd much rather keep the current system than start rolling the dice when firing from distance.

[TexAce]

VompoVompatti, on 08 February 2016 - 05:25 AM, said:

Nice job with the pictures but personally I'm not a fan of the idea.
I'd much rather keep the current system than start rolling the dice when firing from distance.

CoF is rolling the dice in a defined radius. So basically the same. Your way would destroy snipers completely, my version still keeps them in game, if they have "sniper-equipment" like mentioned above.

Edited by TexAce, 08 February 2016 - 05:29 AM.

[iLLcapitan]

No sorry, a CoF is no fun to shoot. Just think of the first teamkills by this mechanic and the following rivers of tears.

[TexAce]

iLLcapitan, on 08 February 2016 - 05:29 AM, said:

No sorry, a CoF is no fun to shoot. Just think of the first teamkills by this mechanic and the following rivers of tears.

you mean like in any other FPS?

What we have at the moment is an exception, not the rule, also a really bad exception.
Plus even fully alpha'd the CoF is so minimal to just reduce pinpointing, its no where as big to miss a mech by thousand miles and shoot a teammate.

Edited by TexAce, 08 February 2016 - 05:36 AM.

[Metus regem]

I'm for it, its a lot more realistic. As for the people that will claim it will take away the 'skill' of shooting in MWO, there is no skill in the current system, skill would be over coming randomness to produce consistent results.

Hell real world vehicle mounted weapons are not as accurate as we see in this game. So I am all for a CoF mechanic, that would still let people keep their current accuracy by getting close to the target, rather than being 500m+ away.

[Curccu]

VompoVompatti, on 08 February 2016 - 05:25 AM, said:

Nice job with the pictures but personally I'm not a fan of the idea.
I'd much rather keep the current system than start rolling the dice when firing from distance.

TexAce, on 08 February 2016 - 05:28 AM, said:

CoF is rolling the dice in a defined radius. So basically the same. Your way would destroy snipers completely, my version still keeps them in game, if they have "sniper-equipment" like mentioned above.

Actually his way would change nothing from what we have now like he wrote...

[TexAce]

Curccu, on 08 February 2016 - 05:39 AM, said:

Actually his way would change nothing from what we have now like he wrote...

Yeah my bad, sore eyes, misread "than" with "then".

Edited by TexAce, 08 February 2016 - 05:53 AM.

[Moomtazz]

Planetside 1 had CoF and it was pretty crappy. However, those players with good aim would still consistently beat those with bad aim.

If the goal is to increase TTK, why not simply reduce weapon damage? Unless you go with a system that randomly places shots or the cone is the size of a mech, the more skilled player will win. But who would want to play in a system like that?

[TexAce]

Moomtazz, on 08 February 2016 - 05:46 AM, said:

Planetside 1 had CoF and it was pretty crappy. However, those players with good aim would still consistently beat those with bad aim.

If the goal is to increase TTK, why not simply reduce weapon damage? Unless you go with a system that randomly places shots or the cone is the size of a mech, the more skilled player will win. But who would want to play in a system like that?

I dont get your question. Of course the more skilled player should win. Its just way too easy now even for nonskilled folk to place 50 point alphas into one single pixel, and this is destroying not only TTK but also balance and the game at its core.

Edited by TexAce, 08 February 2016 - 05:49 AM.

[Duke Nedo]

TexAce, on 08 February 2016 - 05:20 AM, said:

Well worked through stuff with nice pictures.

Great job on working this through and illustrating! Though I must say I am not a fan of COF, I would love if graphics were upgraded to something along these lines, and I'd also be happy to have more reticule sway (immersion and skill without RNG) according to the rules and amplitudes you suggest, as long as my shots will still land where the reticule is. I'd love more sway for jumping, lack of TC/actuators, runnings, overheating etc. And when I think sway I think something immersive, not the parkinson-bumping you get when using MASC....

[TexAce]

Duke Nedo, on 08 February 2016 - 05:48 AM, said:

Great job on working this through and illustrating! Though I must say I am not a fan of COF, I would love if graphics were upgraded to something along these lines, and I'd also be happy to have more reticule sway (immersion and skill without RNG) according to the rules and amplitudes you suggest, as long as my shots will still land where the reticule is. I'd love more sway for jumping, lack of TC/actuators, runnings, overheating etc. And when I think sway I think something immersive, not the parkinson-bumping you get when using MASC....

You could still hit where your reticule is, you can even when alphaing under certain circumstances.
If you are running hot and have no TCs, CCs or skill perks, you might not hit the same location on the mech however.
If you DO have all the items equipped, you still can pinpoint, unless you are borderlining shutdown due to massive heat.

[Greyhart]

Ok I see the argument on the loss of skill with a CoF BUT can anyone name a FPS where there is not a CoF?

If no one can name a good FPS without a CoF it means that everyone is used to a CoF and expects it.

Of Course I would say all the 12 year olds playing CoD lack skillz as well as intelligence, but that isn't to do with CoF.

[AdamBaines]

TexAce, on 08 February 2016 - 05:20 AM, said:

Given Convergence can't be fixed by PGI while still keeping HSR in tact, I think CoF is the way to go, to finally balance this game right. Insta-Converging-Pinpoint-Damage just needs to go, I'm a strong believer of this.

I think its an interesting concept. I does bring a more lifelike aspect to it. I agree it would add a larger skill component rather then actually being a detriment to it. It would be frustrating going from the insta-kill pinpoint system we have now to this for most players. And yes as you pointed out, the torso cone of fire would need to be addressed.

Id like to see how it would practically work. This is the sort of thing I wish PGI would do more of and allow us to play test it on the PTS servers.

I guess my only reservation is, this is great for beam weapons, but for PPC, and ACs, I'm already leading a target at distance, this would make it even more difficult.

Overall I like the idea. Let get something like this in to PTS, at a basic level, and see how it really acts.

[Troutmonkey]

Moomtazz, on 08 February 2016 - 05:46 AM, said:

If the goal is to increase TTK, why not simply reduce weapon damage? Unless you go with a system that randomly places shots or the cone is the size of a mech, the more skilled player will win. But who would want to play in a system like that?

Any any system the more skilled played should win. What a cone of fire system would do is make it so that players can't simply jump out from behind cover, fire off an 80 point alpha strike into 1 pixel from 600m away and instantly blow off the side torso on your XL equipped mech. With a CoF system the player with better aiming and trigger discipline will win.

As for the OP, I'm all for CoF, but only when the player is shooting too many weapons. I'm strongly against any CoF system for "regular" considered fire, as a penalty against movement, or as a penalty for heat. It should only be used to tackle problem alpha strike builds.

http://www.qqmercs.c...ence-and-clans/

[iLLcapitan]

"Overcoming ramdomness" - like screenshake caused by enemy fire, like terrain bumping while moving, targeting components while your enemy twists? Sure, to implement a random nonsense mechanic would surely increase the "skill" barrier. Sorry guys, I don't buy your story.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Well, as it stands now, I don't see PGI making any changes to convergence anytime soon.

I think I heard that they mentioned going to a newer version of the game engine in the future. Maybe that might allow them to do something different. If the engine change is more for performance and graphics, and the HSR doesn't get improved, I don't think we will ever see a change from the current system.

If there is a change, I could see a possible hybrid between CoF and delayed convergence. Maybe weapons start out in a CoF when first moused over an opponent, then after a half second or so, the weapons converge to a pinpoint. Maybe the size of the cone depends on whether moving or not, engine size, tonnage of mech, ECM, targeting comp or not, etc... It always results in a pinpoint if the reticule hovers long enough over a target, but those above items determine how long pinpoint takes to achieve (possibly adjusting the times in a tenth of a second here or there either way).

Regardless, I wouldn't expect anything to change as the game stands now.

[Khereg]

The wider the cone (whatever the mechanic that drives it), the more it will have the effect of nerfing long range aimed weapons (gauss, small AC's, LL's) and enhancing long range weapons that acquire locks. So....LRM's. LRM buffs could be compensated with things like greater spread as distance increases, but that's again going in the direction of patchwork ideas.

This would have pretty far-reaching effects on the game in ways that I think are generally negative and would certainly take away from any type of competitive aspect of the game. Not that comp should be driving the bus, but I don't think we want to be driving the best players in the game away, either.

Bottom line, I'm not a fan of of cones of fire.

Edited by Khereg, 08 February 2016 - 05:59 AM.

[adamts01]

I like most of it. The only thing that I would change is give a much better COF to a basic mech with no heat that's standing still. As for randomness, it's not random if you play it right. If you want to be a sniper, you can still build a pinpoint build and have zero COF, you just can't ping off the red-line like we currently do. I love this, it's pretty much exactly what I envisioned it should be.

Khereg, on 08 February 2016 - 05:58 AM, said:

This would have pretty far-reaching effects on the game in ways that I think are generally negative and would certainly take away from any type of competitive aspect of the game. Not that comp should be driving the bus, but I don't think we want to be driving the best players in the game away, either.

That's a poor excuse. The comp players always adapt and learn to be the best with whatever they're given to work with.

[Khereg]

adamts01, on 08 February 2016 - 06:02 AM, said:

That's a poor excuse. The comp players always adapt and learn to be the best with whatever they're given to work with.

I'm not sure how you learn and adapt to a random number generator.