I did this during the stream and a lot of people seemed shocked that this existed.
Did you know third person mode gave you soft targeting? Not really useful in most cases honestly, but it can be useful given the right load out.
Third Person mode @2:26
7
Third Person Soft Targeting: Did You Know?
Started by Sader325, May 04 2016 06:24 PM
54 replies to this topic
#2
Posted 04 May 2016 - 06:33 PM
It's not aim assist (sorry, I'm not sure exactly what "soft targeting" means) - the crosshairs don't move to the target, but they do move: they move to reflect where the shot will hit. The advantage is that you'll ALWAYS see if your shot will impact terrain, but the downside is that your aim is disrupted even by the regular movement of the mech, such as the sway in movement.
For example, grab a mech with long burn lasers (or chain those b*$%hes) aim them at a fixed point, then walk: As you walk, the point of the burn will shift and move as your mech sways with it's stride.
Thus, 3PV is best for long range PPFLD (such as your PPC's there) but has severe problems elsewhere.
But yeah, it's important to know that there is no aim assist, just that the crosshairs are drawn differently.
(This may have been what you were saying, of course, in which case I'm just agreeing with you; again I'm not sure what "soft targeting" means)
For example, grab a mech with long burn lasers (or chain those b*$%hes) aim them at a fixed point, then walk: As you walk, the point of the burn will shift and move as your mech sways with it's stride.
Thus, 3PV is best for long range PPFLD (such as your PPC's there) but has severe problems elsewhere.
But yeah, it's important to know that there is no aim assist, just that the crosshairs are drawn differently.
(This may have been what you were saying, of course, in which case I'm just agreeing with you; again I'm not sure what "soft targeting" means)
#3
-
-
- 1,181 posts
Member
Posted 04 May 2016 - 06:50 PM
Wintersdark, on 04 May 2016 - 06:33 PM, said:
It's not aim assist (sorry, I'm not sure exactly what "soft targeting" means) - the crosshairs don't move to the target, but they do move: they move to reflect where the shot will hit. The advantage is that you'll ALWAYS see if your shot will impact terrain, but the downside is that your aim is disrupted even by the regular movement of the mech, such as the sway in movement.
For example, grab a mech with long burn lasers (or chain those b*$%hes) aim them at a fixed point, then walk: As you walk, the point of the burn will shift and move as your mech sways with it's stride.
Thus, 3PV is best for long range PPFLD (such as your PPC's there) but has severe problems elsewhere.
But yeah, it's important to know that there is no aim assist, just that the crosshairs are drawn differently.
(This may have been what you were saying, of course, in which case I'm just agreeing with you; again I'm not sure what "soft targeting" means)
For example, grab a mech with long burn lasers (or chain those b*$%hes) aim them at a fixed point, then walk: As you walk, the point of the burn will shift and move as your mech sways with it's stride.
Thus, 3PV is best for long range PPFLD (such as your PPC's there) but has severe problems elsewhere.
But yeah, it's important to know that there is no aim assist, just that the crosshairs are drawn differently.
(This may have been what you were saying, of course, in which case I'm just agreeing with you; again I'm not sure what "soft targeting" means)
The crosshair jumps to the targeting mech and does follow it by itself.
This is what soft targeting means.
All you have to do is aim in the general area of the mech, and the crosshair will "stick" to the mech as long as you maintain a general point towards the target.
So yes it does auto aim after you've reached a threshold, however the threshold is low enough that it is not a hard lock. This is why its called soft targeting.
#4
-
-
- 1,181 posts
Member
Posted 04 May 2016 - 06:54 PM
Watch the video @ 3:20 as a Long range hit a target standing on top of HPG. Watch as my crosshair approaches the targets location it JUMPS to the mech and i immeaditly click.
I was not aiming, I was waiting for the crosshair to move into position. Perfect example of soft targeting in action.
I was not aiming, I was waiting for the crosshair to move into position. Perfect example of soft targeting in action.
#5
-
-
- 612 posts
Member
Posted 04 May 2016 - 06:59 PM
Yep, I remember noticing that quite a while back. The crosshair snaps to the mech when it gets close. Not good for targeting specific parts of a mech but pretty much selects the torso area. Never actually tried to seriously fight in that mode though.
#6
Posted 04 May 2016 - 07:00 PM
Sader325, on 04 May 2016 - 06:50 PM, said:
The crosshair jumps to the targeting mech and does follow it by itself.
This is what soft targeting means.
All you have to do is aim in the general area of the mech, and the crosshair will "stick" to the mech as long as you maintain a general point towards the target.
So yes it does auto aim after you've reached a threshold, however the threshold is low enough that it is not a hard lock. This is why its called soft targeting.
No, that is incorrect. It looks that way, but you're wrong. This was discussed and explained back when 3PV was first added.
What's happening is the crosshair in the game is simply drawn raytraced from the cockpit to the convergence point. When you're in first person view, this means that the crosshair is always drawn over the convergence point but never moves.
When you're in third person view, though, the crosshair is still drawn as a raytrace from the cockpit. The camera, however, is not in the cockpit. This means you can see things in 3PV that you can't see in FPV, as you're elevated. That's why the crosshair appears to drop down over your target.
Note that this effect is fully visible just with terrain as well as mechs, and it ONLY works vertically because the camera is locked horizontally to the cockpit, it's just at a higher angle.
It appears to be aim assist, but it isn't really. It's a trick of perspective with how the crosshair is drawn relative to the camera angle.
Edited by Wintersdark, 04 May 2016 - 07:01 PM.
#7
-
-
- 1,181 posts
Member
Posted 04 May 2016 - 07:03 PM
Wintersdark, on 04 May 2016 - 07:00 PM, said:
No, that is incorrect. It looks that way, but you're wrong. This was discussed and explained back when 3PV was first added.
What's happening is the crosshair in the game is simply drawn raytraced from the cockpit to the convergence point. When you're in first person view, this means that the crosshair is always drawn over the convergence point but never moves.
When you're in third person view, though, the crosshair is still drawn as a raytrace from the cockpit. The camera, however, is not in the cockpit. This means you can see things in 3PV that you can't see in FPV, as you're elevated. That's why the crosshair appears to drop down over your target.
Note that this effect is fully visible just with terrain as well as mechs, and it ONLY works vertically because the camera is locked horizontally to the cockpit, it's just at a higher angle.
It appears to be aim assist, but it isn't really. It's a trick of perspective with how the crosshair is drawn relative to the camera angle.
What's happening is the crosshair in the game is simply drawn raytraced from the cockpit to the convergence point. When you're in first person view, this means that the crosshair is always drawn over the convergence point but never moves.
When you're in third person view, though, the crosshair is still drawn as a raytrace from the cockpit. The camera, however, is not in the cockpit. This means you can see things in 3PV that you can't see in FPV, as you're elevated. That's why the crosshair appears to drop down over your target.
Note that this effect is fully visible just with terrain as well as mechs, and it ONLY works vertically because the camera is locked horizontally to the cockpit, it's just at a higher angle.
It appears to be aim assist, but it isn't really. It's a trick of perspective with how the crosshair is drawn relative to the camera angle.
Looks like a duck.
Quacks like a duck.
Tastes like a duck.
But you're calling it a Lexus.
#8
Posted 04 May 2016 - 07:08 PM
Sader325, on 04 May 2016 - 07:03 PM, said:
Looks like a duck.
Quacks like a duck.
Tastes like a duck.
But you're calling it a Lexus.
Sader325, on 04 May 2016 - 07:03 PM, said:
Looks like a duck.
Quacks like a duck.
Tastes like a duck.
But you're calling it a Lexus.
No, you're embarassing yourself in your haste to ascribe this to aim assist. It isn't. The game isn't adjusting your aim, your aim remains constant. Here, watch the effect with terrain:
What's happening is the crosshairs are drawn where your shot will hit. Before I move over terrain, it's high in the distance (infinite convergence point as it's skybox), once I move the crosshairs over the terrain, it jumps down.
My aim has not changed but because the crosshairs are drawn where the ray from the cockpit intersects the convergence point, it looks lower on the screen. This does not actually help aim - your aim doesn't change.
If I were to be firing a laser while doing that, sweeping horizontally, and you watching from the side, you wouldn't see the laser beam move down at all (because it doesn't).
#9
-
-
- CS 2019 Top 8 Qualifier
- 17,987 posts
Member
- LocationSnow
Posted 04 May 2016 - 07:13 PM
Oh look, this again
You're wrong Sader, it's been discussed before. Listen to Winter
You're wrong Sader, it's been discussed before. Listen to Winter
#10
Posted 04 May 2016 - 07:19 PM
Here's another video, showing that same "aim assist" working against you. Forget about what you think is happening for a minute, and pay attention to what actually happens here as I pan from side to side.
I "should" pan right into the Cataphract, but instead the crosshair jumps down to the terrain. This is because it's an elevated position that's closer to me, and that laser shooting off into the distance will hit the terrain instead of the cataphract because it's so much lower than the camera (basically, like the gorrila arms problem; despite my firing from a shoulder mount). This is purely an artifact of how the crosshairs are drawn, and how the camera adjusts to the crosshairs; the game is NOT altering my aim.
This is a side effect of how you can see things you can't actually shoot in 3PV, even if you had weapons IN your cockpit.
I "should" pan right into the Cataphract, but instead the crosshair jumps down to the terrain. This is because it's an elevated position that's closer to me, and that laser shooting off into the distance will hit the terrain instead of the cataphract because it's so much lower than the camera (basically, like the gorrila arms problem; despite my firing from a shoulder mount). This is purely an artifact of how the crosshairs are drawn, and how the camera adjusts to the crosshairs; the game is NOT altering my aim.
This is a side effect of how you can see things you can't actually shoot in 3PV, even if you had weapons IN your cockpit.
#11
-
-
- The Stryker
- 2,056 posts
Member
Posted 04 May 2016 - 07:29 PM
Right or wrong that was still some of the best shooting I've seen with PPC's Sader.
I think that hunch at the end had a CAP. It can counter ECM out to 250 or so meters.
I think that hunch at the end had a CAP. It can counter ECM out to 250 or so meters.
#12
-
-
- 1,181 posts
Member
Posted 04 May 2016 - 07:36 PM
If the crosshair is not auto targeting that still doesn't mean this doesn't qualify as a form of aim assist.
Playing in this mode (atleast with PPC's) gives you tons of feedback in order to let you know that you are going to hit your target. Even though it may not be intentional it still qualifies as an aim assist.
If the ingame crosshair shifted from neutral to a bright yellow color to let you know that your weapon will hit the target, wouldn't that also qualify as an aim assist?
The way the crosshair jumps, and the camera follows gives you what functionally amounts to aim assist.
Now if you want to go ahead and argue, no Sader you are infact an incredible PPC locust player and thats why I didn't miss a single shot (*READ 100% accuracy) while in third person thats all well and good.
However, I'm not going to pretend that there isn't some element of ASSISTING going on there, because its far easier to put down PPC shots in third person than first.
Is it soft targeting? Mechanicly? Maybe not, but you can barely tell the difference in practice.
Playing in this mode (atleast with PPC's) gives you tons of feedback in order to let you know that you are going to hit your target. Even though it may not be intentional it still qualifies as an aim assist.
If the ingame crosshair shifted from neutral to a bright yellow color to let you know that your weapon will hit the target, wouldn't that also qualify as an aim assist?
The way the crosshair jumps, and the camera follows gives you what functionally amounts to aim assist.
Now if you want to go ahead and argue, no Sader you are infact an incredible PPC locust player and thats why I didn't miss a single shot (*READ 100% accuracy) while in third person thats all well and good.
However, I'm not going to pretend that there isn't some element of ASSISTING going on there, because its far easier to put down PPC shots in third person than first.
Is it soft targeting? Mechanicly? Maybe not, but you can barely tell the difference in practice.
#13
Posted 04 May 2016 - 07:40 PM
Sader325, on 04 May 2016 - 07:36 PM, said:
If the crosshair is not auto targeting that still doesn't mean this doesn't qualify as a form of aim assist.
Playing in this mode (atleast with PPC's) gives you tons of feedback in order to let you know that you are going to hit your target. Even though it may not be intentional it still qualifies as an aim assist.
If the ingame crosshair shifted from neutral to a bright yellow color to let you know that your weapon will hit the target, wouldn't that also qualify as an aim assist?
The way the crosshair jumps, and the camera follows gives you what functionally amounts to aim assist.
Now if you want to go ahead and argue, no Sader you are infact an incredible PPC locust player and thats why I didn't miss a single shot (*READ 100% accuracy) while in third person thats all well and good.
However, I'm not going to pretend that there isn't some element of ASSISTING going on there, because its far easier to put down PPC shots in third person than first.
Is it soft targeting? Mechanicly? Maybe not, but you can barely tell the difference in practice.
Playing in this mode (atleast with PPC's) gives you tons of feedback in order to let you know that you are going to hit your target. Even though it may not be intentional it still qualifies as an aim assist.
If the ingame crosshair shifted from neutral to a bright yellow color to let you know that your weapon will hit the target, wouldn't that also qualify as an aim assist?
The way the crosshair jumps, and the camera follows gives you what functionally amounts to aim assist.
Now if you want to go ahead and argue, no Sader you are infact an incredible PPC locust player and thats why I didn't miss a single shot (*READ 100% accuracy) while in third person thats all well and good.
However, I'm not going to pretend that there isn't some element of ASSISTING going on there, because its far easier to put down PPC shots in third person than first.
Is it soft targeting? Mechanicly? Maybe not, but you can barely tell the difference in practice.
Look at my second video. If you're below your target, it's actually counterproductive. It's not assisting you at all. It's purely, 100%, a wierdness from how the crosshairs are displayed. If you were in your cockpit, it would have been exactly the same. You wouldn't have the visual jump, because your perspective is different (along the raytrace instead of above it).
So, yes, I am arguing that that was great shooting.
Quote
If the ingame crosshair shifted from neutral to a bright yellow color to let you know that your weapon will hit the target, wouldn't that also qualify as an aim assist?
So, the long and short of it is:
There is no aim assist. It doesn't help you hit your target at all. It's purely a visual artefact of perspective that in no way actually changes your aim.
Edited by Wintersdark, 04 May 2016 - 07:43 PM.
#14
Posted 04 May 2016 - 07:44 PM
Well, a small addendum:
It would actually be assistance in the case where you're physically unable to see the target mech due to REALLY dense smoke/fog. In that case, you could assume that the movement meant you were over a mech...
BUT!
The crosshairs snap like that for ANYTHING that gets in the way of the raytrace (see both my videos above) so waiting for the crosshairs to snap can just mean you're waiting for terrain to get in the way, unless you're standing completely still.
And, as evidenced by my second video, that snap can be "aim un-assist" too, where it appears to snap your crosshairs OFF the target. ggclothes.
There are circumstances where 3pv can be exploited for slightly easier aim, but there are more circumstances where it's outright harmful (see: It moves your aim with your mechs movement, a running mech burning lasers will draw an "S" pattern in the ground from 3PV and a straight line in FPV)
Edited by Wintersdark, 04 May 2016 - 07:46 PM.
#15
-
-
- 1,181 posts
Member
Posted 04 May 2016 - 07:47 PM
So what it comes down to is you won't call it aim assist because it wasn't designed that way.
And I will call it aim assist, since it has (Albeit accidentally and primarly for PPC's) created the conditions in which to assist aiming shots.
We are at an impass.
And I will call it aim assist, since it has (Albeit accidentally and primarly for PPC's) created the conditions in which to assist aiming shots.
We are at an impass.
#16
Posted 04 May 2016 - 07:53 PM
Sader325, on 04 May 2016 - 07:47 PM, said:
So what it comes down to is you won't call it aim assist because it wasn't designed that way.
And I will call it aim assist, since it has (Albeit accidentally and primarly for PPC's) created the conditions in which to assist aiming shots.
We are at an impass.
And I will call it aim assist, since it has (Albeit accidentally and primarly for PPC's) created the conditions in which to assist aiming shots.
We are at an impass.
Well, or you're stubbornly refusing to admit that you're flatly wrong - again, see my second video. How is that assisting? I'm using lasers, because lasers make it more visible to see what's going on, but the behaviour is identical no matter what weapon your using. There's specific angles where it's helpful, and others where it makes it very hard to actually hit a mech you can see just fine (again, see my second video).
"Aim assist" means a very specific thing in gaming, and calling this aim assist is extremely misleading because it doesn't alter your aim at all. You can even hear in your video how you're saying it's pulling your aim onto the target, which it objectively isn't doing.
This is purely a case of your being wrong, and refusing to admit it.
Again, how is this aim assist:
#17
-
-
- 1,181 posts
Member
Posted 04 May 2016 - 08:03 PM
Wintersdark, on 04 May 2016 - 07:53 PM, said:
Well, or you're stubbornly refusing to admit that you're flatly wrong - again, see my second video. How is that assisting? I'm using lasers, because lasers make it more visible to see what's going on, but the behaviour is identical no matter what weapon your using. There's specific angles where it's helpful, and others where it makes it very hard to actually hit a mech you can see just fine (again, see my second video).
"Aim assist" means a very specific thing in gaming, and calling this aim assist is extremely misleading because it doesn't alter your aim at all. You can even hear in your video how you're saying it's pulling your aim onto the target, which it objectively isn't doing.
This is purely a case of your being wrong, and refusing to admit it.
Again, how is this aim assist:
"Aim assist" means a very specific thing in gaming, and calling this aim assist is extremely misleading because it doesn't alter your aim at all. You can even hear in your video how you're saying it's pulling your aim onto the target, which it objectively isn't doing.
This is purely a case of your being wrong, and refusing to admit it.
Again, how is this aim assist:
I thought I was pretty clear?
Quote
it soft targeting? Mechanicly? Maybe not, but you can barely tell the difference in practice.
I am no longer arguing the MECHANICS of whether it is an aim assist, that does not mean it is not FUNCTIONALLY an aim assist.
The crosshair gives a very clear indicator of when you will or will not hit your target, there is no such feedback when in first person. Beyond your weapon ranges changing color (something you don't really pay much attention to.) There is no visceral feedback that lets you know when a target is going to be hit.
Was it DESIGNED to be an aim assist? No, but that doesn't matter. Under the correct circumstances it acts, functions, feels, tastes, smells and like an aim assist.
It gives you feedback, it basically screams at you letting you know when to shoot as long as you interpret the signs correctly.
In the case of the video it is an assist in all but name.
#18
Posted 04 May 2016 - 08:26 PM
Which is exactly the same indication whether you will or will not hit your target in FPV too. Cross hairs over target? You'll hit the target. Well, in as much as it applies in 3pv, anyways, leading and weapon-cockpit distance notwithstanding.
#19
Posted 04 May 2016 - 08:29 PM
"Oh my god! I have cross hairs, and if they're over my target, I'm reasonably likely to hit the target! Mein gott!"
The only reason there's (perceived) movement is because the camera is in a different place, and the cross hairs are relative to your cockpit not the camera. The visual feedback is no different than FPV.
The only reason there's (perceived) movement is because the camera is in a different place, and the cross hairs are relative to your cockpit not the camera. The visual feedback is no different than FPV.
#20
-
-
- 1,181 posts
Member
Posted 04 May 2016 - 08:31 PM
Wintersdark, on 04 May 2016 - 08:29 PM, said:
"Oh my god! I have cross hairs, and if they're over my target, I'm reasonably likely to hit the target! Mein gott!"
The only reason there's (perceived) movement is because the camera is in a different place, and the cross hairs are relative to your cockpit not the camera. The visual feedback is no different than FPV.
The only reason there's (perceived) movement is because the camera is in a different place, and the cross hairs are relative to your cockpit not the camera. The visual feedback is no different than FPV.
Now who's being stubborn?
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
