Rampage, on 14 June 2016 - 02:32 PM, said:
If I am not mistaken, they are describing artillery shell accuracy there. I know with autocannons and gauss there may be some variation but I believe we would be talking centimeters not meters. In MWO we would be injecting a RNG factor into weapon accuracy. That is what I meant by artificial. I would be more in favor of reticle bounce which may be overcome with skill rather than depending upon luck.
Unfortunately, Cone of Failure proponents don't really
want players to be able to overcome reticle movement/inaccuracy with skill or practice. Weapons remaining accurate to the reticle, but having the reticle itself move in relation to your 'Mech's movement a'la the 3rd person view, is an excellent solution that always, always,
always gets shot down by Cone of Failure people because it doesn't do what they
actually want a Cone of Failure feature in the game to do - ensure that nobody can kill anybody else.
Most (not all, but most) Cone of Failure enthusiasts are old TT hands (and again, not all old TT hands are Cone of Failure enthusiasts) who are incurably offended at the fact that weapon hits are not determined by random dice rolls only mildly influenced by things like Player Position, Player Aim, and other factors that are usually considered to be sortakinna important in a first-person combat game. They want to get back to their TT roots and ensure that only the gods can decide who wins any given engagement, which Cone of Failure does very nicely given the fact that MWO's weapons are built
specifically for single, carefully-placed shots and are not at all the sort of things which rule the roots in any game with a CoF system.
I've pointed this out time and again - imagine a game of Call of Duty where everyone has a bolt-action sniper rifle, thirty times the normal CoD health count, and also
no ability to aim down the sights. That's what Cone of Failure folks are trying to turn MWO into, because that is, to them, the truest and most accurate representation of the TT ruleset in which nobody had any g'damned clue what they were going to hit any time they pulled the trigger.
A system such as motion-based reticle sway - NOT Cone of Failure, but predictable 'Mech-based motion of the reticle which a player can learn to compensate for - would allow players to actually have an impact on who wins any given fight, and so COne of Failure people don't want it. Even though the code is already there and it's both lore-friendly, physics-friendly, and an elegant, low-impact solution to the problem they
claim they want to fix - overly-accurate fire able to drill down onto a single target point on their enemies.
Can't be having anything like actual gunnery skill in our A BattleTech Game, after all. That's just not how TT
works.