14 replies to this topic

[Ulris Ventis]

I might not be the most experienced MWO player out there for sure, but still have excessive experience in shooters and MW games as well. I do understand, that most of these ideas are not new at all, and most of the time they are all based on Battletech TT or Fluff, but I believe it is a relative source of ideas. Why? BT TT is a PVP game, when MW originally is not. Thus the mechanics that were great for single player MW series aren't that awesome for a team PVP game even after all those changes. These are the ideas I have, I won't hold credit for all of them since we all read the same forum, and info in the end, somewhat raw but I was more concentrated on the concept overall to walk towards a more skill based game, from an arcade feeling we have now.

The concept overall is simple - remove 100% accuracy across the range, add additional mechanics to make 'mechs more complex machines and reduce the amount of arcade we have now.
I start with aiming mechanics as those are important. All the different weapons placed in different parts of the 'mech are ideally balanced to a dot from 1 meter to 1km, even though Torso weapons are stationary. There is no logic behind it at all. For this, 'mech parts should have a little offside aiming from the center to prevent those too accurate to be true shots to be available during alpha strike.
There are 2 possible concepts, for deeper customization and for ease of implementation. We can either allow centering each of the weapons on the 'mech, or centering each part of the mech (except for CT,Head and arms with actuators).

1. The main crosshair is the one for CT/Head weapon (whether or not it present on current mech is not important). It shouldn't be huge of course, but depend on the type of weapon and the range, the further the larger, closer - smaller.
CT or Head weapon is the only one ideally centered and thus hitting the center at point blank..
2. Side torsos' weapons must be centered with your aiming sights like any real weapon and optics. There must be an optimal range you choose where each ST is centered with your Head/CT. Anything closer or further must affect the crosshair, showing where the TS weaponry might hit at this distance. Separated setup is important to have more control with different weapon combinations. There might be even deeper setup for each weapon installed, but that might be difficult to implement in UI.

On example. ST centered at 150m mark.
On 75m mark they're further from center.
On 300m mark ST are inverted.

This means, that separated fire with each torso is predictable, you only need to compensate the crosshair, left or right, while alpha strikes have a spread.

3. Arms are dependent on arm actuators and such. If those arms are the same the EBJ has, they must be centered like the ST with the same logic behind it.
If arms have actuators, that means weapons are aimed towards center with the help of 'mech targeting system. Since we already have those in the game. Let's use them. No TC might add a penalty of 10% from a predetermined range (I took 300m just as example) and the further you wish to aim with these arms will make them further from center accordingly. It would yet again, reduce 100% aiming at long range without additional Targeting computer installed and make players to compensate the crosshair. It will make them important for snipers and will affect builds.

On example. 300m mark has a slight spread from the center.
150m is a point blank range where there is no spread at all and they are perfectly centered.
600m they're twice further from the center making it difficult to heat a single component with both arms simultaneously.

For this it either requires a Targeting Computer (the further the range the better one is required to compensate), or separated fire with each arm to keep high accuracy.

4. Weapon spread. That's an important one as well. Each weapon must have some sort of spread that is range dependent. Even if a laser has - 350m optimal range and 750m maximum range it mustn't hit in a dot at 750m, that's basically where this projectile vanishes completely. So the beam from a laser weapon won't travel straight, full distance, but rather in an unpredictable pattern inside a circle increasing the further it travels. There must be a fixed point blank range where it will fly straight, that is a matter of balancing and testing, but let's assume 80% of optimal range for example.


We assume that Beam has 280m point blank range.
350m optimal range leads to a slight spread around the target, it might hit anywhere withing an area.
750m maximum range leads to a high spread around the target, and it still might hit in the center as well.

It will make energy weapon been used within proper distance, not casually sniping at maximum range in a dot with 100% chance. It also does two things for both sides:
IS with lower beam duration will be unable to change the trajectory once the weapon is shot.
Clans however will be able to adjust the trajectory for their longer duration.

With ballistics it will be a more regular FPS approach where a weapon has some spread and not 100% accurate. There must be point blank range for each ballistic weapon, but then there will be some spread however smaller then that of a laser weapon. An exception might be gauss which can have a far enough point blank range, but still some spread to prevent 100% accuracy at maximum range.
5. So far I don't believe SRM need any changes, it feels fine.
6. Since shooting on the move obviously involves some sort of stabilization system it might as well affect accuracy. The higher the speed the worse accuracy you have. As before, Targeting computer will help fix it as well as skills to a certain degree to prevent JJ, jumping and full run 100% accurate shots. This will also affect sniper builds making them more stationary while firing to prevent inaccurate shots.
No more 100% accurate ERLL 140kph shots.

7. Recoil. Firing a bunch of SRM, LRM, ballistics (or heavy ones) might make 'mech lose stability to prevent simultaneous accurate shots one after the other due to extensive recoil. You might fire 1 or 2 AC10 in quick succession but it should make your next shots less accurate until you allow your mech to stabilize itself. Same with firing AC20 after AC20 must result in a huge recoil kick reducing accuracy for the next AC20 shot. This will help balance continuous accurate ballistic shots.
On top of it, a mech getting hit by heavy ballistics should suffer some accuracy penalty as well, so if a KC shoots an enemy with 1 AC20 successfully, they both have reduced accuracy for some time, though KC will recover a little faster.
8. Of course, recoil penalty must be dependent on a weight of the 'mech and the projectiles it was hit with. I would love to have knockdowns for lights/mediums getting hit with something like AC20, but even without it the hit must affect their speed and controls for some time, like turning penalty.
This also helps making assaults more accurate due to low speed and heavy weight, gives heavies penalty for trying to shoot heavy weaponry in quick succession, or alpha strike and get away with it.
9. Heat penalty. It should mess up aim after about 65% increasing penalty till 90% heat reached. The penalty at 65% should be barely noticeable, but will affect aiming at range. Maybe add movement speed penalty and JJ efficiency reduction. Lights that enjoy running hot nowadays will penalize themselves by losing speed and JJ range. It will also make any hot laserboat more vulnerable after an alpha strike.
8. With all these changes it might be possible to make every successful shot more dangerous by adjusting damage, armor and so on.

I believe this will help make MWO more challenging, add more depth, make all weapons viable in different situation.
Thanks, if you took your time reading it.

[DivineEvil]

With all due respect, I foremost do not see any indication of aforementioned chages providing any gameplay improvements in return for an indescribable amount of work it would require to put into place. All I've seen is "making game less arcady", which I do not relate to, as I don't see how MWO is "arcady" in the first place. All that these changes would lead to is more RNG-based, non-competetive combat model and even more learning curve, which is already relatively steep.

[Ulris Ventis]

Thank you for the answer.
There is a difference in how we view the game I believe.
I don't look at MWO game as a descendant of Quake. I wish to look at it as a properly serious Mechwarrior game in BattleTech universe. Where 'mechs don't have absolute 100% accuracy across any range.
When you try to play any good enough shooter, you never complain that weapons have spread and recoil, you learn how to work with that. The only weapons that need control in MWO today are basically - ballistic, PPC, SRM. And even with these there is no spread or recoil, only projectile speed. AC has velocity as well, but it doesn't affect the game play as much.
Lasers basically have only heat and ghost heat. Not much of a deal, since many players use macro anyway. Duration, cooldown? Not important at all.

Dividing 'mech parts in groups to avoid 100% centering will change the way players aim, already. It will require a new set of skills to twist mech to get accurate shots with each set of your torso weapons, and moreover to configure your mech for certain average distance you wish to be the most effective, while using your experience to compensate the messed up aim on other distances.
I believe that making tools like TC more valuable for every player is important to reduce the amount of weapons we have on each mech today. I mean, you can still fill your mech with ML or MPL, no problem, but your accuracy will suffer for not taking TC or from heat, for not taking more HS/DHS.
I do believe that spread and recoil are important. Firing a ERLL 100% accurate across maximum range is no big deal even on a moving target. It's only basic mouse skill that is even easier to pull than Railgun in Quake. Not only those but stabilization as well. No mech should be able to hit 100% while running full speed only because a player uses a mouse. Why do most people think this is a right way to go?
Alpha strike is messed up, since it should be last resort for when a small chance to cripple an enemy is more valuable then the overall accuracy, not the regular way of playing as it is for quite a while now.

If this is random, then all infantry shooters are random based if you can't jump headshot at 200m with one bullet.
Define competitive? Any competitive shooter requires a player to learn his weapons and their recoil patterns. If it's not about recoil and spread, then it usually is about learning projectile speed to hit your targets (like Tribes or Quake).

Edited by Ulris Ventis, 18 February 2016 - 05:36 AM.

[DivineEvil]

Quote

Thank you for the answer.
There is a difference in how we view the game I believe.
I don't look at MWO game as a descendant of Quake. I wish to look at it as a properly serious Mechwarrior game in BattleTech universe. Where 'mechs don't have absolute 100% accuracy across any range.
When you try to play any good enough shooter, you never complain that weapons have spread and recoil, you learn how to work with that. The only weapons that need control in MWO today are basically - ballistic, PPC, SRM. And even with these there is no spread or recoil, only projectile speed. AC has velocity as well, but it doesn't affect the game play as much.
Lasers basically have only heat and ghost heat. Not much of a deal, since many players use macro anyway. Duration, cooldown? Not important at all.

I'm certain we do.

In all Mechwarrior games there were no recoil or spread worth remembering. In Battletech TableTop and in MechCommander games weapon accuracy were exactly tied to pilot's gunning skills, which is entirely replaced by player's personal skill in MWO. Using your own argument, implementing spread or recoil to MWO is invalid.

When I play any infantry shooter (although I don't remember the last time I did), I don't exactly complain about spread/recoil, but it affect my bias against weapons for when I unlock/buy a gun, that has unwieldly random nominator for its efficiency. In those generic shooters, more often than not, the more valuable players (and sometimes the most hated) are snipers, which are capable of using no-spread, no-recoil weapons insta-killing opponents at any range, while people preferring assault rifles are just mediocre gray mass. With assault rifles, more accurate ones are still prioritized over high-damage analogues with higher spread and recoil due to their reliability. Long story short, recoil and spread in conventional shooters is core part of the genre, that compensates for frailty of one's character, which makes complaining about it meaningless; Both however dictate players choices in predictable ways.

If you consider velocity, duration or cooldown as unimportant, then your understanding of games in general is disturbingly flawed. Velocity is what makes most players here disregard PPCs and some Ballistics, Duration is what makes people prefer pulse lasers over standard analogues despite underlying limitations, and arguably make Clan burst-fire ballistics inferior to IS alternatives, and 20% reduction in Cooldown rate is what turned a go-to Clan Gauss rifle into a useless piece of junk, as many players argued it did. Cooldown in particular is just as not important at all as fire-rate in generic shooters you admire.

Quote

Dividing 'mech parts in groups to avoid 100% centering will change the way players aim, already. It will require a new set of skills to twist mech to get accurate shots with each set of your torso weapons, and moreover to configure your mech for certain average distance you wish to be the most effective, while using your experience to compensate the messed up aim on other distances.

Give me a single reason for why MWO is supposed to become even more complex, than it already is.

Quote

I believe that making tools like TC more valuable for every player is important to reduce the amount of weapons we have on each mech today. I mean, you can still fill your mech with ML or MPL, no problem, but your accuracy will suffer for not taking TC or from heat, for not taking more HS/DHS.

IS mechs do not sport TCs. Even if there's a need to reduce the amount of weapons on a mech, I still fail to understand what accuracy has do with this at all.

Quote

I do believe that spread and recoil are important. Firing a ERLL 100% accurate across maximum range is no big deal even on a moving target. It's only basic mouse skill that is even easier to pull than Railgun in Quake. Not only those but stabilization as well. No mech should be able to hit 100% while running full speed only because a player uses a mouse. Why do most people think this is a right way to go?

Important for what? For making MWO your personal game with random chances and ambiguous denominators? Then you should probably play another game instead.

MWO is a thinking-person-shooter. It rewards your ability to make favorable decisions the most, to use the advantages of your mech in a teamwork frame, by obtaining maximum gains with minimum losses, which will determine the match outcome. Your personal skill is important, but secondary to that.

Most people think its the right way to go, because they know, that it actually does requires skill and experience to hit reliably while both are on the move. It requires skill to lead the target, it requires skill to focus the component over time, and it requires skill to navigate the mech, fire, watch the radar, spread the damage, manage heat and coordinate with your team, all at the same time. Nobody wants neither spread nor recoil on top of that.

Quote

Alpha strike is messed up, since it should be last resort for when a small chance to cripple an enemy is more valuable then the overall accuracy, not the regular way of playing as it is for quite a while now.

This is a problem of invalid heat management values. It has nothing to do with accuracy.

Quote

If this is random, then all infantry shooters are random based if you can't jump headshot at 200m with one bullet.

Yup, they are. You can jump headshot at 200m with one bullet, but probability is low. In the kingdom of random, less random is the most valuable.

Quote

Define competitive? Any competitive shooter requires a player to learn his weapons and their recoil patterns. If it's not about recoil and spread, then it usually is about learning projectile speed to hit your targets (like Tribes or Quake).

Any competetive shooter would be fine without recoil patterns, if not for the resulting difficulties. There were no recoil or spread in Quake, yet it considered to be very competetive. A competetive game is a game, where the outcome, given the roughly equal conditions and resources, is based on player's personal performance to the maximum possible degree. The more choice for playstyle game gives and the less RNG-based multipliers a game works around, the more right a game has to be called competetive. Introducing additional RNG properties into a game by definition makes it less competetive. Learning to effectively using your resources is a key for any game, but spread and recoil introduce nothing, but a uncontrollable condition a player is forced to work against.

MWO places the value on completely different factors, which you're not yet aware of, potentially due to your limited experience with the game.

Edited by DivineEvil, 18 February 2016 - 07:45 AM.

[Ulris Ventis]

DivineEvil, on 18 February 2016 - 07:27 AM, said:

In all Mechwarrior games there were no recoil or spread worth remembering. In Battletech TableTop and in MechCommander games weapon accuracy were exactly tied to pilot's gunning skills, which is entirely replaced by player's personal skill in MWO. Using your own argument, implementing spread or recoil to MWO is invalid.

That is correct, but it's literally impossible to fix the high precision of mouse aiming against the joystick that is actually placed in a cockpit of a 'Mech. MW is a single player game, which I have already mentioned before. What doesn't concern anyone in a single player game, is important in multiplayer. Since MWO is a shooter and relies solely on players' mouse skills, something else must be created in its' place. Every player in MWO is some sort of genius in terms of his aiming skills. And I was searching for a way to actually make players develop those Ace aiming skills. This is a basic thing used in PC games where it is pretty easy to develop a required reflex to compensate a recoil.

Quote

In those generic shooters, more often than not, the more valuable players (and sometimes the most hated) are snipers, which are capable of using no-spread, no-recoil weapons insta-killing opponents at any range, while people preferring assault rifles are just mediocre gray mass. With assault rifles, more accurate ones are still prioritized over high-damage analogues with higher spread and recoil due to their unreliability

Basically assault rifle is a versatile weapon, when sniper rifle is not. Even in Counter Strike (it feels like that's the one you mention), where skilled players can either outshoot it over any range, or kill a sniper with a help of smoke or flashbang. In most other games, like Battlefield, their role is quite limited since capturing points with x12 scope is an ineffective method of playing.

Quote

If you consider velocity, duration or cooldown as unimportant, then your understanding of games in general is disturbingly flawed. Velocity is what makes most players here disregard PPCs and some Ballistics, Duration is what makes people prefer pulse lasers over standard analogues despite underlying limitations, and 20% reduction in Cooldown rate is what turned a go-to Clan Gauss rifle into a useless piece of junk, as many players argued it did. Cooldown in particular is just as not important at all as fire-rate in generic shooters you admire.

I don't believe that velocity is the main problem if PPC. I'd rather believe in - minimum range, heat efficiency and splash damage for Clan ver. It's not a very versatile weapon around, that's it. But it is still used pretty often.
Can't remember any problems with velocity and ballistics, if only you don't mention AC20 shot at hunders of meters?
Statement about pulse is true, because of duration, pulse is more preferred than it's basic counterpart, but in the end of the day it's not that much of a deal. Seriously.
I don't find cooldown an issue or some complex mechanics. Gauss is not limited to close range weapon, so if utilized properly it still does the job done.
But this is a discussion about current buff/nerf status which is not my point entirely.
When mechanics behind the combat system doesn't allow much steps beside nerfing and buffing weapon stats it shows a flaw.

Quote

Give me a single reason for why MWO is supposed to become even more complex, than it already is.

Easy. I don't find MWO complex at all right now.

Quote

IS mechs do not sport TCs. Even if there's a need to reduce the amount of weapons on a mech, I still fail to understand what accuracy has do with this at all.

IS has a thing called Command Console, it might be actually useful. These are two separate things. The amount of weapons mechs carry without an issue, and 100% accuracy of alpha strike. As I've stated before, since nothing can be done about aiming accuracy with mouse it must be done with additional mechanics. I have 72-80(most around 75+)% accuracy with all lasers, how is this a proper aiming mechanics? It's a no brainer to me.

Quote

Important for what? For making MWO your personal game with random chances and ambiguous denominators? Then you should probably play another game instead.

So then, MWO is YOUR personal game and nobody have a saying in this, is that's where you're getting at? Really, by been merely rude, you won't actually make your point valid, only the opposite.

Quote

MWO is a thinking-person-shooter. It rewards your ability to make favorable decisions the most, to use the advantages of your mech in a teamwork frame, by obtaining maximum gains with minimum losses, which will determine the match outcome.

Your statement is basic for any game, or any team based game that exists. Even Chess. What I propose makes mouse precision secondary when it comes to shooting. That's all.

Quote

it actually does requires skill and experience to hit reliably while both are on the move. It requires skill to lead the target, it requires skill to focus the component over time, and it requires skill to navigate the mech, fire, watch the radar, spread the damage, manage heat and coordinate with your team at the same time. Nobody needs spread or recoil on top of that.

Honestly, - "leading target", "focusing part of the target", "watching radar", "spreading damage" and coordination with team - are basic skills required for any shooter out there. Navigating the mech is slightly different, but not miles away. Somehow in any shooter including Arma, people not only do all this, but also manage recoil, spread, velocity and ammo without any problems.

Quote

This is a problem of invalid heat management values. It has nothing to do with accuracy.

If developers will still think that the only problem is with "values" like they believe now, with their nerfes and quirks, it will never get any better.

Quote

Yup, they are. You can jump headshot at 200m with one bullet, but probability is low. In the kingdom of random, less random is the most valuable.

Does this possiblity affect the basic gameplay consisting of recoil pattern control or velocity control?

Quote

Any competetive shooter would be fine without recoil patterns, if not for the resulting difficulties. There were no recoil or spread in Quake, yet it considered to be very competetive.

And yet those games are in the past.

Quote

roughly equal conditions and resources, is based on player's personal performance to the maximum possible degree.

See, this is a flaw in your own logic right here about MWO. It doesn't give you equal conditions or resources. Mechs are different in terms of speed, twist speed, height, weight, weapon placement and hardpoints/weapons etc. Clans and IS are not equal at all.

Quote

Introducing additional RNG properties into a game by definition makes it less competetive.

Yet again. How does spread and recoil make a game "less" competitive?

Quote

but a uncontrollable condition a player is forced to work against.

You're not good in shooters, right?

Quote

MWO places the value on completely different factors, which you're not yet aware of, potentially due to your limited experience with the game.

Why don't you tell me then about any of those secret factors?

Edited by Ulris Ventis, 18 February 2016 - 10:13 AM.

[iLLcapitan]

Sorry dude, but I don't think you get far with your attitude. You seem to got a good intention, but please look up the forum considering proposals that aim at adding a cone of fire / spread to the game. There are dozens of it and every single point you mention has overly discussed in the past. Yet, if somebody who plays this game for quite a while (DivineEvil) takes his time to answer your questions you resort to snappish statements. So MWO is not complex for you? Good for you! Watch new players for a game or two, then think again please. Also you make false assumptions, like

Ulris Ventis, on 18 February 2016 - 10:12 AM, said:

I don't believe that velocity is the main problem if PPC. I'd rather believe in - minimum range, heat efficiency and splash damage for Clan ver. It's not a very versatile weapon around, that's it. But it is still used pretty often.

Then this

Ulris Ventis, on 18 February 2016 - 10:12 AM, said:

That is correct, but it's literally impossible to fix the high precision of mouse aiming against the joystick that is actually placed in a cockpit of a 'Mech.

Why should it be reflected in the game? How is that even an argument?

[Ulris Ventis]

iLLcapitan, on 18 February 2016 - 11:36 PM, said:

Sorry dude, but I don't think you get far with your attitude.

Well, I was trying to have a civil conversation, but I'm not the one tolerant to rude behavior.

Quote

look up the forum considering proposals that aim at adding a cone of fire / spread to the game. There are dozens of it and every single point you mention has overly discussed in the past.

I know very well what are you taking about.
http://mwomercs.com/...ch-the-setting/
http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1
Alike propositions were met in the past with the same fury for the most part.

Quote

you resort to snappish statements.

I don't like anyone getting high and mighty in a conversion only because of a higher xp bar.

Quote

Watch new players for a game or two, then think again please.

I know that there are lots of people who can't drive a car with AT, but does it mean it is complex? If those new players can't get the grips of the game and are in frustration and trouble, this is not a problem with the game, neither it is a proof of complicity. It barely means that the tutorial doesn't do it's job well. And it doesn't. Only because new players have no knowledge on how AC and UAC are different, IS and clans with omnipods are different, or the difference between SRM and SRRM doesn't make a game complex.
It's complex for new players, because half of trial mechs they're trying to use are garbage with their loadouts (for the current state of the game) and their choice of first mech must be important for they will be in trouble if made a bad decision. And that is thanks for quirks, meta and current game state.

Quote

Why should it be reflected in the game? How is that even an argument?

Those statements are cut out of context.
PPC in the game works like it's supposed to and it's good enough. Lasers on the other hand are hitscan weapons that have 100% accuracy in the dot 1km away. The problem is not with PPC, it's with current laser aiming mechanics. Lasers don't hit 100% in Battletech, and that is because of 'Mech electronics that actually aim those weapons. It's a logical and solid part of the universe as much as stabilization and targeting systems in battle tanks nowadays doesn't allow for 100% accuracy as well.
Since we can't implement a neurohelmet with multiple crosshairs, it still can be done in a different way. That will be more true for the BattleTech universe and it will allow to decrease armor value, since alpha striking won't be as effective and make for a better game where every hit will be more dangerous.
A Cheetah is getting shot by AC20 point blank and gets away with it? Please..

[DivineEvil]

Ulris Ventis, on 18 February 2016 - 10:12 AM, said:

That is correct, but it's literally impossible to fix the high precision of mouse aiming against the joystick that is actually placed in a cockpit of a 'Mech. MW is a single player game, which I have already mentioned before. What doesn't concern anyone in a single player game, is important in multiplayer. Since MWO is a shooter and relies solely on players' mouse skills, something else must be created in its' place. Every player in MWO is some sort of genius in terms of his aiming skills. And I was searching for a way to actually make players develop those Ace aiming skills. This is a basic thing used in PC games where it is pretty easy to develop a required reflex to compensate a recoil.

There's no need to fix something, that is not broken. I had played MWO since Closed Beta, and I still see enough people having problems with mouse aiming as is. In most simulator games, using a joystick gives you an advantage of controlled relative input for bearing control within 360 degree freedom, where mouse has binary imput and limited active area. MWO is not one of those games. Playing any shooter with a joystick will be just as inefficient as it is in MWO. So there's no reason for adressing mouse efficiency, just because a pilot's model in the cockpit has a joystick.

Quote

Basically assault rifle is a versatile weapon, when sniper rifle is not. Even in Counter Strike (it feels like that's the one you mention), where skilled players can either outshoot it over any range, or kill a sniper with a help of smoke or flashbang. In most other games, like Battlefield, their role is quite limited since capturing points with x12 scope is an ineffective method of playing.

Skilled snipers can kill a player long before he had any time to return fire or use those tactical tools. Where 12x scoped weapons are not efficient for capturing points, it is efficient at preventing enemies to do the same.

Quote

I don't believe that velocity is the main problem if PPC. I'd rather believe in - minimum range, heat efficiency and splash damage for Clan ver. It's not a very versatile weapon around, that's it. But it is still used pretty often.

Can't remember any problems with velocity and ballistics, if only you don't mention AC20 shot at hunders of meters?
Statement about pulse is true, because of duration, pulse is more preferred than it's basic counterpart, but in the end of the day it's not that much of a deal. Seriously.
I don't find cooldown an issue or some complex mechanics. Gauss is not limited to close range weapon, so if utilized properly it still does the job done.
But this is a discussion about current buff/nerf status which is not my point entirely.
When mechanics behind the combat system doesn't allow much steps beside nerfing and buffing weapon stats it shows a flaw.

I don't care about your relation to these mechanics. I don't have much problems with them either. The issue here is that you propose a change, that would affect everyone. I simply have argued enough on these forums to tell how many people will despise these changes and likely to abandon MWO as result of their implementation. People has enough problems with building viable mechs, handling them thoughtfully in combat and embracing teamwork aspects, that adding complexity to aiming and fire management seems redundant.

Quote

Easy. I don't find MWO complex at all right now.

Well then, join a unit, better someone who's participating in MRBC league. You'd be welcomed. Would be interesting to see how it will end up.

Quote

IS has a thing called Command Console, it might be actually useful.

Unrelated to targeting. It's a second cockpit compartment for tactical support officer or commander. The reason it is not useful is because there's no Infotech aspects introduced yet.

Quote

These are two separate things. The amount of weapons mechs carry without an issue, and 100% accuracy of alpha strike. As I've stated before, since nothing can be done about aiming accuracy with mouse it must be done with additional mechanics. I have 72-80(most around 75+)% accuracy with all lasers, how is this a proper aiming mechanics? It's a no brainer to me.

Neither are problems. If a mech can carry weapons, there's no an issue needed for it. 100% alpha-strike accuracy is not a problem, it's the heat management, that allows it to be used regularly.

I have 85-90% laser accuracy. It doesn't mean much, because it does not accounts for damage/range fallof.
(Total damage / damage per burn)/Fired gives you a more precise accuracy rating, and
(Total damage / damage per burn)/Hit would give you efficiency rating.
These calculations will drop your current values by 15-20% below, to around 50-55%. This is a pretty mediocre result for a instant-hit, 100% accurate weapon, so yes, aiming mechanics are valid. Comparing it with infantry shooters, accuracy ratings there are better representations for weapon's accuracy, than your own aiming skill, due to the effect spread and recoil has on it.

Quote

So then, MWO is YOUR personal game and nobody have a saying in this, is that's where you're getting at? Really, by been merely rude, you won't actually make your point valid, only the opposite.

No I'm not. I'm not being rude, I telling what I meant to tell, not what you percieve it to be. Just because infantry shooters usually has recoil and spread mechanics, doesnt mean MWO has to have them as well. It's not what determines a game's genre as a shooter. The only problem that I agree with existing, is unbound high damage alpha-strikes, but turning a game into something it never were intended to be is not the way to fix it.

Quote

Your statement is basic for any game, or any team based game that exists. Even Chess. What I propose makes mouse precision secondary when it comes to shooting. That's all.

On the contrary, for infantry shooters decision making is far secondary to aiming and weapon management. A player with better aim wielding an accustomed, more accurate weapon is capable of defeating several opponents with lower twitch skills, while tactical decisions and awareness has miscallenous impact on one's performance.

MWO is exactly different in a way, that your positioning, timing, map awareness and cooperative teamwork are the cornerstones of the game, where aiming and firing is merely a matter of applying damage. This is why weapon parameters are tied to DPS, effective range, heat value and reliability, all of which are related to tactical application of a weapon, and why spread or recoil, that introduce random chances into otherwise stable equations, has no place in the system. Even spread values for LRM, SRM, LB-X and MGs are static, and thus produce predictable results over time, rather than introducing an aspect of luck into their use.

Quote

Honestly, - leading target, focusing part of the target, watching radar, spreading damage and coordination with team - are basic skills required for any shooter out there. Navigating the mech is slightly different, but not miles away. Somehow in any shooter including Arma, people not only do all this, but also manage recoil, spread, velocity and ammo without any problems.

Arma is an exclusive shooter, where realistic physics require leading and accounting for projectile trajectory. Other than that, leading is very rare necessity, watching radar is not required, coordination is insignificant, and focusing/spreading damage just doesnt exist, because characters are brittle either way and do not have much control over it.

Quote

If developers will still think that the only problem is with values like they believe now, with their nerfes and quirks, it will never get any better.

That's you opinion. I still do not see how adjusting values in a set system doesn't work. It's merely a question of properly recognizing the values, that cause an invalid system behavior, and adjusting them to a mindfully chosen degree. This is a thing that PGI has issues with at the moment. Again, it has nothing to do with simplicity/complexity of the game.

What, in my personal opinion, people like you, who advocate for similar ideas such as cone-of-fire or complex convergence mechanics, have issues with is a perception of scale. You make implications of problems in MWO, but are arguing for solutions, that far outreach the scale of that problem. All issues has to be adressed with changes of equal scale. When a problem higes on a single value, then this specific values has to be changed. Nothing more.

Otherwise, it just seems like those people use balance problems as an excuse for promoting changes almost unrelated to these problems in the first place. I'm not trying to understand the problem, I've already accepted its presence long time ago. What I'm trying to recognize is the reason why this particular set of changes is the right way.

At this moment I have hard time believing, that the main problem of MWO is that it's not complex enough.

Quote

Does this possiblity affect the basic gameplay consisting of recoil pattern control or velocity control?

Yes. It makes a player's gameplay more affected by artificial multipliers. Bad players can get lucky hits they don't deserve, good players can get defeated because their RNG's rolled against them. It's not that generic shooters are ruined by these mechanics, but again, it's that these games are inherently built around them. MWO is not, and if these mechanics were introduced into MWO, it would have adverse, unpredictable results, and would require substantial workload and potential technical difficulties, without any justification of their necessity.

Quote

And yet those games are in the past.

Not really. For example, the upcoming Overwatch game by Blizzard Entertainment is a role-based twitch shooter, which doesnt have any significant attachments to recoil or spread control. This is making it a fairly competetive game, where only the character balance control by value adjustments is required.

Quote

See, this is a flaw in your own logic right here about MWO. It doesn't give you equal conditions or resources. Mechs are different in terms of speed, twist speed, height, weight, weapon placement and hardpoints/weapons etc. Clans and IS are not equal at all.

Same is true with generic shooters - there's different weapons and sometimes even different factions with different weapon choices. The mere idea of equal resources or conditions is often just doen't exist to begin with. Withing that framework, an engagement between two players comes to rolling several dices with increasingly random outcomes, and a single lucky spread roll can determine the result.

In MWO, players can use the same mechs with same weapons, thus have has exactly equal resources, where only their aiming and combat judgement are deciding factors. There's no spread mechanics or recoil, that subtract from their imput. They do something, and achieve exactly what they're expected to in return.

Quote

Yet again. How does spread and recoil make a game less competitive?

These mechanics introduce random multipliers, that players do not control. Spread and recoil are both random offsets with accrete boundaries. How many times do I need to write it?

Quote

You're not good in shooters, right?

I'd consider myself pretty good. Had my fair share of CS bans because I were too good in a match to be legit. I just don't like them much, because they're too dependant on raw reflexes and muscle memory, and do not require any actual thinking. Too little fun for too much stress.

Quote

Why don't you tell me then about any of those secret factors?

Because being unaware of something doesn't makes it secret.

Edited by DivineEvil, 19 February 2016 - 01:40 AM.

[Jack Spade Ward]

@ Ulris

Just ignore DivineEvil, hes not a mechwarrior, hes a forum warrior. He trolls alot and acts as he knows all. Wont acept anyone's opinion but his own.
He is known among the comunity to be an troll!

Anyway, your opinion has some merit. But my advice to you is get into a unit. Choose a unit (except TCAF), be it clans or IS, altough i would advice IS.
While inside the unit, learn with other people and listen to their opinions. You might get surprised and learn a thing or two

Good Luck man!

[DivineEvil]

Spadejack, on 19 February 2016 - 06:33 PM, said:

@ Ulris
Just ignore DivineEvil, hes not a mechwarrior, hes a forum warrior. He trolls alot and acts as he knows all. Wont acept anyone's opinion but his own.
He is known among the comunity to be an troll!

Someone like you, who's stalking the specific members to blatantly devaluate their opinion based on his own unsubtantiated, subjective reasoning, deserves a title of a forum warrior more, than I'd ever be able to match. You're a nobody to claim who I am, nobody to claim what I act like, and nobody to represent your personal opinion as the opinion of the whole community.

I use deductive reasoning to argue for and against ideas and claims, and I'm unaware of a moment when it suddenly became considered as trolling.

Edited by DivineEvil, 20 February 2016 - 12:36 AM.

[Jack Spade Ward]

DivineEvil, on 20 February 2016 - 12:35 AM, said:

Someone like you, who's stalking the specific members to blatantly devaluate their opinion based on his own unsubtantiated, subjective reasoning, deserves a title of a forum warrior more, than I'd ever be able to match. You're a nobody to claim who I am, nobody to claim what I act like, and nobody to represent your personal opinion as the opinion of the whole community.

I use deductive reasoning to argue for and against ideas and claims, and I'm unaware of a moment when it suddenly became considered as trolling.

I wont ignore you just this time to say one thing!
You say im a nobody right? LOL
Look at my Founder Tag! You know what it means? It means i will always be above you! Im ancient, older and more experienced. Unless i leave this game for a period of time, i will always have precendence over you.
You know as i do that you trolled alot on other previous posts! Because of that, i just simply chosed to ignore you!
You're nobody, you live in your own pocket universe. And please, stay there!

[DivineEvil]

Spadejack, on 20 February 2016 - 05:57 PM, said:

I wont ignore you just this time to say one thing!
You say im a nobody right? LOL
Look at my Founder Tag! You know what it means? It means i will always be above you! Im ancient, older and more experienced. Unless i leave this game for a period of time, i will always have precendence over you.
You know as i do that you trolled alot on other previous posts! Because of that, i just simply chosed to ignore you!
You're nobody, you live in your own pocket universe. And please, stay there!

The depths of your arrogance knows no light. You're a miserable, pathetic creature.

[Jack Spade Ward]

DivineEvil, on 20 February 2016 - 11:24 PM, said:

The depths of your arrogance knows no light. You're a miserable, pathetic creature.

LMAO

[Strength Damage Cliff Racer]

What I really think needs to be overhauled is to give some edge to ammo-dependent mechs with new mechanic to them - dynamic weight.

Let's say, we take a Blackjack BJ-1 for a spin with rather "Classic" loadout: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...8dd4e05fa69a103
Like any good guy, he keeps blasting at enemy, trying to hit him close to the cockpit with desynced guns for extra annoyance. Enemy is whiny noob clanner which panics without big red box helping him (Blackjack got ECM guy close, oh god, oh the humanity!) and doesn't return fire (These random laser circles that can't hit a thing don't count), so our little blackjack goes medieval on him. After some time, our clanner is down and our blackjack smiles because of almost free kill. Blackjack checks the ammo and now he got 525, like this: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...41d19c6fbfa45c3
Then our brave IS pilot hears a gauss impact and spots a confetti. It's shadow cat at very long range "inviting" into peek wars with his MASC and gauss. Blackjack says the estimate coordinates of enemy and then bails at speed of, nope, not 90.9kmph as he should with his engine, tonnage and speed tweak. Because now he spent 1 ton of ammo and for now his weight is treated not as 45t but as 44t. That gives (235/44)*16.2*1.075 = 93kmph.

After quite some time blackjack is out of ammo http://mwo.smurfy-ne...dc1001cc04a837d deep orange in his torsos, alone against beaten LRM Mad Dog and a Panther.Mad Dog goes down after some struggle, Panther almost eats away the legs (Still, leg obsession is not as bad as CTR. Even when just CT stripped, mech is helpless and red on CT structure). Hoping for the best, our blackjack starts running to a panther. In current scenario, competent panther will just never get blackjack to get close. However, our brave guy got 37 effective tons without all his ammo, which gives him more speed: (235/37)*16.2*1.075 = whooping 110.6 kmph which, coupled with his jumpjet, allows him to get into safe zone and stab a Panther with a dull spoon (Actually, 4 of them).

Why do it? Well, because after ammo is gone, guns/missile launchers are useless and quite some mechs can't really fit sensible backup. Many of them just ditch backup since they won't be able to do anything with it. This little tweak, however, will give them more speed and more chances to use these puny backups, making them a bit more competitive against full boating.
Also, it gives some advantages to "few guns, a lot of ammo" way of thinking which is heavily hit with enormous ammo explosion damage which is extremely more likely than with your average "Max guns with baseline ammo pool".

tl:dr: Let mechs get weight reduction via spending ammo to get more speed, thus increasing possibilities to use backup weapon effectively.

[Strength Damage Cliff Racer]

Ulris Ventis, on 18 February 2016 - 10:12 AM, said:

Since MWO is a shooter and relies solely on players' mouse skills

It's not a shooter. It's 3d co-op tactical fp/tp action.
In regular shooter, your aim and being quick on the draw is all that matters.. then you go derp with a shotgun and flashbang, getting a lucky one and two frags on very skilled players. Why? Because RNG and small collective TTK

In MWO, you actually PICK your draw speed (LRM, Streaks, Heavy ballistics and PPC can't be quick about it. It doesn't make them useless though, you'll be glad to see that Stormcrow parking near you to fend off these pesky Arctic Cheaters/IIC Jenners/Oxides)
In MWO, types of hardpoints is just third of the deal. PLACEMENT of said hardpoints matters a lot more. Arm hardpoints may have good angles, but low placement, rendering them almost useless at trading, Filling that missile hardpoint may "reward" you with big piece of geometry, making you easier to hit and spot.
In MWO, you sit on actual choices between your mobility and armament without any RNG to it. You want to run faster? Get engine with better rating, which will hump your free tonnage. Need more tonnage? You may go slower or hump your already limited volume.
And what about TTK? Yes, you may pop a guy in single hit on several meta loadouts if you'll be lucky and the guy will be a squishy light (Most likely caught standing off guard) or a bit beaten med. But, you know, as people say, "If you got a fair fight, you both failed". Why? Because while MWO got relatively small individual TTK, it's got colossal collective TTK, making nearly impossible to go 1 on 3 even failfit guys and live.