1094 replies to this topic

[Impyrium]

Saint Scarlett Johan, on 08 February 2016 - 03:35 PM, said:

If you notice, in 3PV, the reticle sways. Yet in 1PV, there is no sway. And in the 3PV videos, the faster you move, the more you sway. I don't understand why PGI just doesn't copy/paste that code over to 1PV as well.

Admittedly I wouldn't mind something like that being in there anyway. The biggest problem with that is that the cockpit animation doesn't connect at all to the actual mech's movement/animation, so if the sway was linked to the mech's bob it would look somewhat awkward from within FPV.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

adamts01, on 08 February 2016 - 03:42 PM, said:

Our bootcamp M16-A2s with barrels that were falling off and ironsights shot at least 12" at 500 yards, that's about 2 MOA. Whatever COD forum you got this 4MOA crap from is completely full of ****. And yes, there's a natural "figure 8" sway while aiming and a bounce from your heartbeat, that's completely different than maximum precision from rest, and decreasing precision as the platform becomes less stable.

According to my units armorer, the M4 is between 2 and 4 MOA using issue M855 ball ammo.

But thanks for calling me a CoD kiddie and totally discounting my service.

pyrocomp, on 08 February 2016 - 03:41 PM, said:

On integrated Intel graphics you can meet and interesting glitch when you get into the game your cockpit is not loaded. And when you move NOTHING sways. Nothing bumbs. I don't know what kind of lazy programming was that, but you 'fly' in a strait line without any sway or anything. Only image of the cockpit sways creating an illusion of mech 'sways'. The recticle in the 3PV is not swaying, it's the drone adjusting position to be exactly behind the back of the mech a model of whitch has a twist animation while walking. There is literally no code for the sway. The 3PV sway is a side effect of mech animation. Look closer, the sway differs from mech to mech based on it's animation.

So the drone is causing the sway? If that's the case, that's lazy. But I still think there needs to be speed based sway in the game and the 3PV drone helps to instantiate that claim.

Dingo Red, on 08 February 2016 - 03:44 PM, said:

Admittedly I wouldn't mind something like that being in there anyway. The biggest problem with that is that the cockpit animation doesn't connect at all to the actual mech's movement/animation, so if the sway was linked to the mech's bob it would look somewhat awkward from within FPV.

Oh I know, it's weird looking out the side of my mech and seeing the arms bounce, but the shoulders gliding along.

[Koniving]

Saint Scarlett Johan, on 08 February 2016 - 03:35 PM, said:

Again, that M4 the SF uses is still 4MOA whether he's running or prone. The bullet is going to go within 4MOA of where the rifle is pointing. Now, the human element is what decides where the rounds go and where the rifle is pointing. Moving means natural sway, there's a kinesthetic pattern of movement a trained marksman can predict and overcome to a degree with timing.



And my video here

If you notice, in 3PV, the reticle sways. Yet in 1PV, there is no sway. And in the 3PV videos, the faster you move, the more you sway. I don't understand why PGI just doesn't copy/paste that code over to 1PV as well.

Newer videos on it.


And this loooooong video has many examples first person and third of various mechs to show this would help diversify mechs, too, if the first person had the same animation-based sway which is created by a ray-trace to where the cockpit is registered to be on the 3D model... as opposed to first person's "camera neutral position".

[pyrocomp]

Saint Scarlett Johan, on 08 February 2016 - 03:49 PM, said:

So the drone is causing the sway? If that's the case, that's lazy. But I still think there needs to be speed based sway in the game and the 3PV drone helps to instantiate that claim.

As it is. May be a good idea to add sway also and then balance both mechanics byt their effects on general behaviour. Both have their logic and they are adressing different situations. PTS anyway and anyhow.

[GrimRiver]

I'm game with this idea.

This will reduce the amount of laser alpha vomit.

Reduced accuracy of laser vomit alphas will result in less criticals on brawlers moving into range and greatly increase the value of having brawlers on the team overall.

This will result in less laserboat light(s) taking on heav(y)(ies) and assault(s) by themselves when lore never supported this, only when a lance of lights vs 1 heavy/assault was ever allowed(most of the time).

This will increase TTK(hopefully) and increase better team cohesion by allowing teammates to focus fire for better results rather then going solo for the same effect(sometimes) in the games current state.

This will also increase learning curve which the current state of the game semi-lacks.

This will make AC builds more viable and more appealing over energy builds across IS and clams.

Other people are gonna say "no" but not offer an equally detailed explanation into why.

People who are opposed to the idea what to continue current easymode system, it's time to change because all in the universe changes.

[adamts01]

Saint Scarlett Johan, on 08 February 2016 - 03:43 PM, said:

If you're prone supported, you should be able to pick off coke cans at 250+m easily.

What's the variable in this equation between a moving shooter and a prone shooter? The shooter's position. The weapon is not a variable, it a constant. It's up to the shooter to point the gun in the right direction. His body is moving, and therefore the weapon is swaying.

Hitting a coke can at 250+ isn't the point. The point is one shooting position yielding better accuracy than another. the max range at which you can reliably hit the coke can prone is probably 4x the range at which you can hit it from standing. We're just arguing for a similar mechanic to be brought in to the game. Asking for shots to be a little less precise while moving isn't unrealistic. The OP's proposal definitely has flaws, but it's a decent rough draft. Whether or not it's good for the game is opinion, but the fundamentals are sound.

Saint Scarlett Johan, on 08 February 2016 - 03:43 PM, said:

Did I say match grade AR? No. I mentioned M4, which means a standard block issue government M4. And those are 2-4MOA.

According to my units armorer, the M4 is between 2 and 4 MOA using issue M855 ball ammo.

But thanks for calling me a CoD kiddie and totally discounting my service.

But you did mention SF M4s. Have you seen the nice toys they get? Many of them aren't even 5.56.

I absolutely didn't mean to discredit your service. Sorry for my statement coming across as it did. You mentioned you shot competitively, which is why the 4MOA comment took me by surprise.

Edited by adamts01, 08 February 2016 - 03:58 PM.

[Moldur]

Instead of giving us a hallowed out center dot with a huge outline, I think a solid center dot with a thin outer circle would be easier on the eyes, since we would be able to see through it.

[adamts01]

Moldur, on 08 February 2016 - 03:55 PM, said:

Instead of giving us a hallowed out center dot with a huge outline, I think a solid center dot with a thin outer circle would be easier on the eyes, since we would be able to see through it.

One of the conditions of an increasing COF would be an alpha. There is no way to predict how many weapons would be fired so the crosshair shouldn't ever change. I think OP's illustration is what the pattern would look like if one were to fire weapons in a best/worse case scenario.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

adamts01, on 08 February 2016 - 03:54 PM, said:

Hitting a coke can at 250+ isn't the point. The point is one shooting position yielding better accuracy than another. the max range at which you can reliably hit the coke can prone is probably 4x the range at which you can hit it from standing. We're just arguing for a similar mechanic to be brought in to the game. Asking for shots to be a little less precise while moving isn't unrealistic. The OP's proposal definitely has flaws, but it's a decent rough draft. Whether or not it's good for the game is opinion, but the fundamentals are sound.

I totally understand; and WoT, CoD, and their ilk have given a bad taste in my mouth from an RNG CoF. I'd like something different instead of <insert generic targeting system relying on RNG> and the sway is already in the game (3PV).

Although, if what pyrocomp says, then the 3PV is related to the drone itself. Which is a bummer.

adamts01, on 08 February 2016 - 03:54 PM, said:

But you did mention SF M4s. Have you seen the nice toys they get? Many of them aren't even 5.56.

Oh yeah, they get cool toys. But they still gotta do their bi-annual IWQ on the same POS M4 I do (although they have the FA trigger grouping due to theirs being A1s).

Edited by Saint Scarlett Johan, 08 February 2016 - 04:02 PM.

[Kuritaclan]

adamts01, on 08 February 2016 - 03:29 PM, said:

Human or machine, the more the platform moves, the less accurate the shot will be, that's all there is to it. Anyone who argues otherwise has only fired weapons in video games.

You are confused.

Clearly hard to get the focus on. But tech helps. And if gun barrels get stabilized enough to hit target 2 clicks away, than it is even easier with prismatics for lasers not to speak of guided missile systems.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 08 February 2016 - 04:10 PM.

[adamts01]

Metus regem, on 08 February 2016 - 01:37 PM, said:

Rather I was agreeing with you, a few pages back, one of the posters basicly said, how is that realistic?!? So I cited what the chin mounted chain gun on my Apache would do, when shooting it... He the process to say that hardly makes me qualified to offer comment on how realistic a CoF mechanic would be...

Actually I find the spread on SRM's with out Artemis about right, based off of what I'd see when using rocket pods on the inner mounts when we had them on the Apache.... Was fun to see them pepper the area.

Kuritaclan, on 08 February 2016 - 04:06 PM, said:

You are confused.

No, you are. ^^^^^^^ He's played with much nicer toys than your glorified ATV.


"And if gun barrels get stabilized enough to hit target 2 clicks away, than it is even easier with prismatics for lasers not to speak of guided missile systems." This game also has large bore canons with less range than my deer rifle, we can't apply too much real life to the game.

Saint Scarlett Johan, on 08 February 2016 - 04:01 PM, said:

I totally understand; and WoT, CoD, and their ilk have given a bad taste in my mouth from an RNG CoF. I'd like something different instead of <insert generic targeting system relying on RNG> and the sway is already in the game (3PV).

Half of this community wants arena e-sport, I'm on the half that want's a simulator. I don't like leaving anything to chance, which is why a COF that can be eliminated by movement is appealing. If building a dedicated sniper, this proposed COF could pretty much be eliminated. Again, OP's proposal has some issues, but something along those lines would add a lot of realism in my opinion.

Edited by adamts01, 08 February 2016 - 04:15 PM.

[K1ttykat]

Nope. Cone of fire on evetything in mwo is an irredeemably bad idea. No amount of pictures or details make it better.

"increase if you push your heat too much or alpha your weapons"

This makes it even worse. You know when your heat goes up? When you play the game. So the way to get the best accuracy is not to play eg snipe from behind a rock.

Just no, again, still.

Edited by K1ttykat, 08 February 2016 - 04:15 PM.

[oldradagast]

Kuritaclan, on 08 February 2016 - 04:06 PM, said:

You are confused.
Clearly hard to get the focus on. But tech helps. And if gun barrels get stabilized enough to hit target 2 clicks away, than it is even easier with prismatics for lasers not to speak of guided missile systems.

Which has zero meaning in a video game where "long range missiles" cap out at 1km, while in reality we can shoot them across the world.

Look, we can all stand around and show cool examples of super-accurate real-world weapons... but that is not Battletech. It's a game, not a simulator of a specific model of tank or soldier.

And, in this game, we have a serious problem with a stupid amount of damage being applied almost mindlessly to the exact pixel on which you click on a mech, regardless of range, heat, terrain over which you are traveling, your speed, the target's speed, and everything else. It's silly - it not only doesn't feel right in the game, it doesn't match Lore and has caused a host of balance issues from day one, along with goofy band-aids to paper over it.

I say we address the problems in the GAME, not debate over how accurate a real-world guided missile may be.

[InspectorG]

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

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.

Nice effort, well thought.

But CoF aint ever gonna happen. Comps said 'NO it penalizes skill' and MWO has some esport aspirations.

Now...

If you said CoF as a Heat Scale penalty....maybee different story.

[oldradagast]

K1ttykat, on 08 February 2016 - 04:14 PM, said:

Nope. Cone of fire on evetything in mwo is an irredeemably bad idea. No amount of pictures or details make it better.

"increase if you push your heat too much or alpha your weapons"

This makes it even worse. You know when your heat goes up? When you play the game. So the way to get the best accuracy is not to play eg snipe from behind a rock.

Just no, again, still.

Do you have anything to support your position other than "no?"

And what about the current slapped-together band-aid solutions, from ghost heat to jump jet nerfs to gauss rifle nerfs? Many of us would like to say "no" to them - and they haven't even fixed the actual problem since laser vomit and pinpoint meta is STILL the only viable meta, despite everything.

[adamts01]

K1ttykat, on 08 February 2016 - 04:14 PM, said:

"increase if you push your heat too much or alpha your weapons"

This makes it even worse. You know when your heat goes up? When you play the game. So the way to get the best accuracy is not to play eg snipe from behind a rock.

Or by not sniping and getting close where the slightly reduced accuracy doesn't matter. I think this would lessen the peekaboo crap we have now, not increase it. Especially if you needed a lock to get perfect accuracy.

[Hit the Deck]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 08 February 2016 - 09:42 AM, said:

...
Edit: Why does zoom level affect CoF, I know "zooming" in typically increases accuracy in MAAAS's, but why should it here?

It doesn't.

Like I mentioned earlier, the diameter of the crosshair doesn't serve real purpose except telling you the state of your CoF, i.e. how tight it is. It can't tell you how big your CoF is at certain range because to do that correctly, the diameter of the crosshair has to be constantly adjusted according to the object's range you are aiming at. Also according to the zoom level.

Like Mister Blastman's suggestion of multiple crosshairs, whose offset from the center needs to be constantly drawn/adjusted according to the range, I'm not sure if it would look good in game.

[oldradagast]

InspectorG, on 08 February 2016 - 04:16 PM, said:

Nice effort, well thought.

But CoF aint ever gonna happen. Comps said 'NO it penalizes skill' and MWO has some esport aspirations.

Now...

If you said CoF as a Heat Scale penalty....maybee different story.

The funny part is the same comps that don't want a cone of fire and who play "point-click-kill" with lasers spend way too much time pretending LRM"s are "easy mode" and "lasers take skill." Which is why you only see lasers and never LRM's at high levels of play. I guess we're to believe they only take hard to use weapons when they want to win... lol... right...

But you are correct. The sad, vocal minority who get their jollies out of one-shotting noobs with pinpoint meta controls the show, and will continue to do so as long as the "esports dream" remains alive. Nevermind how laughably boring such esports would be - oh, another exciting match between laser vomit vs. laser vomit! Watch as people peak out from behind rocks, click 1 mouse-button, and win! Ugh...

Edited by oldradagast, 08 February 2016 - 04:20 PM.

[adamts01]

oldradagast, on 08 February 2016 - 04:19 PM, said:

The funny part is the same comps that don't want a cone of fire and who play "point-click-kill" with lasers spend way too much time pretending LRM"s are "easy mode"

That's just silly. The only players who say LRMs are "easy mode" are struggling to get out of tier 4.

[Phellian]

If PGI wants me and my friends back they need something like this. The current 100% accuracy on mouse point (aka Candy Crush MWO) with massive pin point damage just isn't competitive (MWO is considered laughable to other FPS Competitive games because of this, dearly want MWO to be considered at their level so I can have Esports level compititions).

Edited by Phellian, 08 February 2016 - 04:26 PM.