1094 replies to this topic

[Shredhead]

Dino Might, on 10 February 2016 - 11:07 AM, said:

I have a solution. Make the crosshair randomly move about in the pre-calculated CoF, and the shots ALWAYS go EXACTLY where the crosshair is pointing (okay, so we'll ignore realistic CoF of the weapon itself, because space magic). Now everyone is happy

I don't think the end result would be a CoF, more like a U-formed sway? Whatever, I would support any reasonable ideas how to simulate convergence and sway, as long as movement and brawling isn't punished and I can use skills and training to overcome these odds.

Mystere, on 10 February 2016 - 11:00 AM, said:

So are you saying that the OP's proposal will actually lower the skill cap? If so, explain and in detail.

Yes. What we have now is a very tactical, movement based gameplay style. Every map (outside CW of course) offers various approaches to flanking, high ground, etc. Accuracy depends on travel time, duration, bullet drop and spread. The current convergence speed allows for high speed repositioning while maintaining damage attribution to targets (the dreaded tier 3 Nascar for example). The better the tactical and map knowledge, the easier it is to reposition to break that and crush the flanks. (<-- This was me desperately searching for words to describe the dynamics at play. Just examples, hope you get the gist.)
So basically, current mechanics allow for very dynamic gameplay, where the chance to hit relies on the aforementioned factors.
If you want to hit consistently, you have to train fine motor skills and memorize travel time at different distances and target speeds, adding your own speed and pathing to the equation.

A CoF as proposed here would kill repositioning and speed, as they would be detrimental to your ability to hit reliably.
Firing on the move with weapons that have travel time would be just a waste of ammunition and heat. Let's say you have trained yourself to hit a specific location on the move at 400 meters with a reliability of 60% with, let's say, an AC5. Adding a CoF to that, you now have a chance of maybe 20%.
What would be the outcome of a CoF implementation? How do I game the proposed system? Well, I get the choice of high damage (formerly) pin point ACs or (assuming no bigger CoF for them) SRMs to go brawling, or Gauss and AC5s for some low heat long range poking. I simply choose the position with the biggest death zone in front on my side, get myself in half cover and start the poking game. By the time any brawlers arrive, they will have to stay on the move and heat up quickly, both diminishing their accuracy. Outside of turning the mech, I won't even have to move it, because CoF will do the work of spreading the damage just fine.

I hope that illustrates my points enough, as I'm a bit lost for words right now.

Quote

Shush! Dang it! Don't spoil my fun! He did not know that ... at all!!!

k

Livewyr, on 10 February 2016 - 11:54 AM, said:

Lasers favor long range engagements... (And it happens on standard maps with long range engagements...)

No, it doesn't. As long as you don't bring a full 12 man, long range games simply don't take place regularly in public matches. And even then it's quite hard to dispatch the enemy before he comes into mid range.

Quote

So much skill involved in dragging a cursor. (Can you select multiple icons on your desktop? Congrats... you can aim at a moving target with lasers.

And big fat strawman again. Desktop icons are usually bigger than mechs you aim at, not to speak of distinct components.

Quote

Gee, I wonder what the answers are... Shocker!

Muscle Memory
Mouse Sensitivity.

No ****, Sherlock. Memorizing to stand still and not heat up is so much more difficult, though, I see.

Quote

Thanks for the laugh. (You should probably look at the search results before trying to use them for an argument.)

And you should think about your arguments, they are quite ridiculous.

Quote

a: What exactly is easier to game than instant pin perfect convergence?

A system that rewards standing still and using cool weapons.

Quote

b: more challenging to handle. It's what we have now, with more factors to consider...

It's maybe numerically less factors, but the factors you add with that system are way easier to adjust to.

Quote

The aiming system could only get dumber if the system just aimed for you. Quite literally.

I would like a more challenging aiming system. Random hits within a circle aren't a challenge though, except for my patience.

Quote

Yup, king of the underhive. Yet somehow ran with Lords (before the split by Emp) and still invited to SwK even without the game installed... in case I come back.
Total Scrublord.

So? My point was that you obviously didn't play in your skill tier if the enemies didn't offer you any challenge.

Quote

(Get a grip. I know what I'm talking about.)

I doubt that.

Quote

1: If you would like to stand in the open and hope you see them first- go for it. You just can't hillhump and do it with this proposal.

Yes, I can. Do you think it's hard to come to a standstill from just moving five meters up a ridge or to the side?

Quote

2: LRMs might be useful again... SHOCK

LRMs aren't usefull in this kind of engagement, though.

Quote

3: Hitting a vulnerable component consistently is going to require some risk on your part.. sorry.

It always does.

Quote

It's still there. (AFAIK) Just not as big as the shoulder mounted hill-humping meta.

No, it's really not. There's also no "shoulder mounted hill humping meta" outside CW, where this kind of gameplay is encouraged by map layout and gamemodes. Does poking happen? Yes. But it doesn't dominate the normal public games. Are high mounts beneficial? Yes. Even to a point where it's influencing the meta. But that's due to people wanting and needing the ability to shoot stuff that's higher or lower without hitting ledges left and right.

Edited by Shredhead, 10 February 2016 - 12:43 PM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

tortuousGoddess, on 10 February 2016 - 09:45 AM, said:

Ugh, I'm tired of retyping the same responses to the same arguments, so here's what I already wrote:

Lol, now realize that your big *** battlemech also doesnt instantly aim in and put everything where you want it. There is still, if nothing more, aim time mechanic while your computer zeros in. And hell, even on a fighter plane, who has 6 guns all "converged" to a set distance, even THAT is not PP accurate like this game. There is no ******* way in the world that you will get guns all sitting in various different locations on a machine to hit the exact same pixel like this game.

While your moving around, your guns are not magically sitting in the exact same spot, they are swaying back and forth, I mean, have you seen the mechs run? Tell me THAT is going to be pixel PP accurate like this game?

No, PP accuracy actually makes less sense then a simple COF mechanic. This game's PP pixel accurate is actually LESS realistic then CoF/Aim time and deviation/RNG.

And before someone breaks out a video of a "stabilized" tank gun, where the Japanese are balancing a wine glass on the gun barrel to try to argue about "perfect PP accuracy", dont......those guys who claim tanks can shoot on the move wiht perfect accuracy, they never do show you down range where they miss......

Point blank and at the end of the day, this game's PP perfect, pixel precision accuracy is about as "realistic" as jumping to the moon......

[process]

Things I would rather have than CoF:

1. targeting-based convergence
2. lower heat capactiy
3. weaker and/or hotter lasers
4. relative buff to brawling weapons
5. faster projectiles
6. maps and game modes that don't rely on deathballs and focus fire

I like the idea of randomness, I just don't see it being fun, considering there are other mechanics we already have to navigate, e.g. heat, two crosshairs, movement, torso twisting, sensors, etc.. Which is not saying these other things don't have room to improve.

[LordKnightFandragon]

I just guess all the players who are dead set against a CoF have never played any other shooter game ever, and realized all of them had a CoF.

[FupDup]

LordKnightFandragon, on 10 February 2016 - 12:50 PM, said:

I just guess all the players who are dead set against a CoF have never played any other shooter game ever, and realized all of them had a CoF.

I have in fact played other shooters, and the shooters that I always liked the most are the ones that didn't follow the generic "ADS" formula that Call of Duty imposed on the FPS genre.

E.g. Team Fortress 2, Star Wars Battlefront (the older ones), Halo series (although less so in Halo 5...), the PC Mechwarrior game series...

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

LordKnightFandragon, on 10 February 2016 - 12:50 PM, said:

I just guess all the players who are dead set against a CoF have never played any other shooter game ever, and realized all of them had a CoF.

The reason we hate CoF is because we played those other shooters, I hated WoT's RNGesus crosshair, and I disliked CSGO's cone of fires, even though I could stop, take shots, and headshot all day, the game just felt wrong with nobody being able to get more than 3 shots on a target spraying at 1 meter away before the recoil, cone of fire, and spread patterns took them away.

I've always preferred games in which the cone of fire is minimal or non existant. Take a look at Tribes: Ascend for example, a fast paced game in which there is no cone of fire, but everything is entirely skill based with lots of target leading and drop calculations.

FupDup, on 10 February 2016 - 12:53 PM, said:

E.g. Team Fortress 2, Star Wars Battlefront (the older ones), Halo series (although less so in Halo 5...), the PC Mechwarrior game series...

Exactly those.

Edited by Dakota1000, 10 February 2016 - 12:55 PM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

FupDup, on 10 February 2016 - 12:53 PM, said:

I have in fact played other shooters, and the shooters that I always liked the most are the ones that didn't follow the generic "ADS" formula that Call of Duty imposed on the FPS genre.

E.g. Team Fortress 2, Star Wars Battlefront (the older ones), Halo series (although less so in Halo 5...), the PC Mechwarrior game series...

ADS is so much better then that 3rd person view just make the FoV zoom bigger ****.

[Shredhead]

LordKnightFandragon, on 10 February 2016 - 12:50 PM, said:

I just guess all the players who are dead set against a CoF have never played any other shooter game ever, and realized all of them had a CoF.

That's actually wrong. CS and CS:GO are the most prominent examples for successful shooters without any kind of randomness at all.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Dakota1000, on 10 February 2016 - 12:54 PM, said:

The reason we hate CoF is because we played those other shooters, I hated WoT's RNGesus crosshair, and I disliked CSGO's cone of fires, even though I could stop, take shots, and headshot all day, the game just felt wrong with nobody being able to get more than 3 shots on a target spraying at 1 meter away before the recoil, cone of fire, and spread patterns took them away.

I've always preferred games in which the cone of fire is minimal or non existant. Take a look at Tribes: Ascend for example, a fast paced game in which there is no cone of fire, but everything is entirely skill based with lots of target leading and drop calculations.

Yeah, well, WOT is an example of RNG way the **** over done, I hated WoT's RNG. CSGO, I can only imagine is likely like PLanetside 1, which, again, yeah, the CoF was way to ******* high.

I played BF2142 and BF2, whcih also had CoF unless you single shotted the gun, then you had to adjust for recoil, but it worked.

Planetside 2? Ever played it? It to has CoF, it is rather minimal overall, unless you burst fire, then you barely notice it. PLanetside 2 is how COF should be. Big if you just sit and lay on the trigger(fire all the guns), or almost non existant if you burst fire(chain fire slowly)

[Quicksilver Aberration]

LordKnightFandragon, on 10 February 2016 - 12:57 PM, said:

Big if you just sit and lay on the trigger(fire all the guns), or almost non existant if you burst fire(chain fire slowly)

The irony, burst fire is actually more analogous to alpha striking in this game than laying on the trigger (chain fire), also keeping in mind that in most FPS it often only takes 2-3 hits to kill people.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 10 February 2016 - 12:59 PM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Shredhead, on 10 February 2016 - 12:54 PM, said:

That's actually wrong. CS and CS:GO are the most prominent examples for successful shooters without any kind of randomness at all.

Or is CS so full of cheats no one has CoF cuz of hacks?

Plus, CS has recoil on the guns, so yeah, that acts as their "CoF". While not real heavy like WOT, it is still some sort of deviation if you dont counter it.

ArmA2 also has no COF, but it has bullet drop, bullet speed and weapon recoil.

At the end of the day, every game ever has some sort of "RNG/COF/Deviation" mechanic in it to prevent the guns from being 100% PP accurate like MWO.

MWO has travel time and stuff for everything but lasers though...so, maybe they just need to make Lasers projectiles like MW2 and give it velocity....

Edited by LordKnightFandragon, 10 February 2016 - 01:02 PM.

[Shredhead]

LordKnightFandragon, on 10 February 2016 - 12:57 PM, said:

Yeah, well, WOT is an example of RNG way the **** over done, I hated WoT's RNG. CSGO, I can only imagine is likely like PLanetside 1, which, again, yeah, the CoF was way to ******* high.

I played BF2142 and BF2, whcih also had CoF unless you single shotted the gun, then you had to adjust for recoil, but it worked.

Planetside 2? Ever played it? It to has CoF, it is rather minimal overall, unless you burst fire, then you barely notice it. PLanetside 2 is how COF should be. Big if you just sit and lay on the trigger(fire all the guns), or almost non existant if you burst fire(chain fire slowly)

No randomness in CS:GO at all: http://csgoskills.co...spray-patterns/

[FupDup]

LordKnightFandragon, on 10 February 2016 - 12:54 PM, said:

ADS is so much better then that 3rd person view just make the FoV zoom bigger ****.

When I say the term "ADS shooter" I mean more than just the physical action of zooming in. I'm talking about the overall paradigm where the game is designed to make you find a spot to be immobile and then use a scope or crouch or whatever to make sure your shots actually hit things.

[Mystere]

process, on 10 February 2016 - 12:23 PM, said:

The OP is about degrees of randomness, but it's randomness nonetheless. Having to remain perfectly still, with minimal heat, and extra equipment and modules to achieve a minimal cone does not sound terribly fun to me.

Why do you feel the need to stay perfectly still, among other things? Are you saying that you are incapable of managing additional variables to mitigate the inaccuracy produced by your actions?

Or is this just another one of those:

CoF --> Random Numbers --> 100% wild misses --> The Devil/Lucifer/Satan

arguments?

Edited by Mystere, 10 February 2016 - 01:03 PM.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Shredhead, on 10 February 2016 - 12:59 PM, said:

No randomness in CS:GO at all: http://csgoskills.co...spray-patterns/

I'd like to let you know that the guns all have a spray pattern and a randomization to it so that its not perfectly the same each time. You could take the time to perfectly learn the spray pattern playing on a no spread server then still miss when you go back to a normal one.

[LordKnightFandragon]

FupDup, on 10 February 2016 - 01:01 PM, said:

When I say the term "ADS shooter" I mean more than just the physical action of zooming in. I'm talking about the overall paradigm where the game is designed to make you find a spot to be immobile and then use a scope or crouch or whatever to make sure your shots actually hit things.

Only shooter ive seen that does that was BF2 and 2142. Or BF3/Red Orchestra when you use a machinegun.

All these more modern shooters you can ADADADADDAADADADADADADADADADWSWADSDWASDAWADSAWDSAW all over the place and so long as you burst fire you can get plenty of kills.

[Shredhead]

Dakota1000, on 10 February 2016 - 01:02 PM, said:

I'd like to let you know that the guns all have a spray pattern and a randomization to it so that its not perfectly the same each time. You could take the time to perfectly learn the spray pattern playing on a no spread server then still miss when you go back to a normal one.

AFAIK every action you take triggers a different "random" effect, but the difference in spread is also fix for those. So if you run and shoot the spread pattern will deviate from the standard pattern, but in the same way every time you run and shoot. Same for jump, duck etc.

[Mystere]

FupDup, on 10 February 2016 - 12:23 PM, said:

Yes it is actually. You have some control over how big the cone is, sure, but no matter what the size of the cone is you still never know WHERE in that cone that the shot will land. It just gives you the maximum boundaries of where it can/can't land.

It is really that fatal, especially even if that cone is fully within my intended target section of the Mech?

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

LordKnightFandragon, on 10 February 2016 - 12:57 PM, said:

Yeah, well, WOT is an example of RNG way the **** over done, I hated WoT's RNG. CSGO, I can only imagine is likely like PLanetside 1, which, again, yeah, the CoF was way to ******* high.

I played BF2142 and BF2, whcih also had CoF unless you single shotted the gun, then you had to adjust for recoil, but it worked.

Planetside 2? Ever played it? It to has CoF, it is rather minimal overall, unless you burst fire, then you barely notice it. PLanetside 2 is how COF should be. Big if you just sit and lay on the trigger(fire all the guns), or almost non existant if you burst fire(chain fire slowly)

Alpha striking should cause a lower cone of fire because you fired all your guns and recoiled then but give yourself time to recover from the recoil, if you are burst firing you should increase your cone of fire the more you fire because you are not giving yourself any time to recover from your recoil. This is why you burst fire in other games rather than constantly fire.

I don't agree with cone of fire, but that is how it should logically be implemented.

Shredhead, on 10 February 2016 - 01:07 PM, said:

AFAIK every action you take triggers a different "random" effect, but the difference in spread is also fix for those. So if you run and shoot the spread pattern will deviate from the standard pattern, but in the same way every time you run and shoot. Same for jump, duck etc.

I do remember seeing various videos about spray patterns, a friend of mine and I like to look into game mechanics at times and pick them apart. We took awhile to look at the spray patterns and the bit of deviation they had. The deviations while standing perfectly still and just firing something like a burst of 3 shots from your AK would cause the shots to go to different places each time the trial was repeated.

There was a randomness factor, one that was influenced by actions of the player, but in the end still random, very much like the OP.

Edited by Dakota1000, 10 February 2016 - 01:12 PM.

[process]

Mystere, on 10 February 2016 - 01:01 PM, said:

Why do you feel the need to stay perfectly still, among other things? Are you saying that you are incapable of managing additional variables to mitigate the inaccuracy produced by your actions?

Or is this just another one of those:

CoF --> Random Numbers --> 100% wild misses --> The Devil/Lucifer/Satan

arguments?

Because the OP shows movement as a contributing factor to a larger CoF. How else do I mitigate that? The only circle with the equivalent size as standing still is TC+module+skill unlock.