25 replies to this topic

[Yellonet]

• Why do your sight turn red when we hit an enemy?
  How do our mech know that we hit an enemy even if we cannot see it?
  
  This is not a good mechanic as it makes it possible to aim and shoot blindly in a general direction and when you see red you can continue firing there. I'm sure that lots of players use this for example when firing through leaves, smoke and other things where you shouldn't know if you hit or not.

• Could we get some kind of meter that tells us our current sensor range and detection speed, lock speed and so on?
  
  It would be most valuable in the mechlab to see what happens when you slap on a BAP or CC but could also be nice to see when you actually play.

• Could we get a sensor range ring around your own mech on the minimap and battlegrid, as well as an ECM ring around your own AND any friendlies that have ECM?
  
  This would make it easier to see what area your sensors actually cover and what area your and friendlies ECM cover which would make using effective ECM cover easier.

[Appogee]

Solid ideas.

[Davers]

I thought the whole 'red on a hit' was a way to know if the server recognized the hit.

[Yellonet]

Davers, on 06 August 2016 - 05:54 AM, said:

I thought the whole 'red on a hit' was a way to know if the server recognized the hit.

Well, it's a dumbing down mechanic IMO, a player should be able to tell if he hit his enemy without the cross-hair changing in any way.

[Davers]

Yellonet, on 06 August 2016 - 05:56 AM, said:

Well, it's a dumbing down mechanic IMO, a player should be able to tell if he hit his enemy without the cross-hair changing in any way.

It was designed to combat lag shields, where what's on the screen didn't reflect what the server was seeing.

[El Bandito]

Yellonet, on 06 August 2016 - 05:56 AM, said:

Well, it's a dumbing down mechanic IMO, a player should be able to tell if he hit his enemy without the cross-hair changing in any way.

That's easier for direct-fire weapons. Indirectly fired LRMs on the other hand, will have much harder time finding out if the missiles had hit or not. LRMs will need some compensation should we remove cross-hair flash.

[Spleenslitta]

Yellonet, on 06 August 2016 - 05:46 AM, said:

Could we get a sensor range ring around your own mech on the minimap and battlegrid, as well as an ECM ring around your own AND any friendlies that have ECM?

This would make it easier to see what area your sensors actually cover and what area your and friendlies ECM cover which would make using effective ECM cover easier.

I once made a thread in the Feature suggestions forum about something like this over a year ago.
It was about seismic sensor rather than ECM but it could be applied to either one or both i guess.
http://mwomercs.com/...sensor-monitor/

Not only would the monitors in our cockpit have a function. They would also give each mech more individuality.
One mechs monitor could be small but ideally placed for you to look at.
Another might have a bigger monitor but it's somewhat out of sight so you need to hit CTRL and look at it.

[Yellonet]

El Bandito, on 06 August 2016 - 06:06 AM, said:

That's easier for direct-fire weapons. Indirectly fired LRMs on the other hand, will have much harder time finding out if the missiles had hit or not. LRMs will need some compensation should we remove cross-hair flash.

Maybe. If you locked an enemy and the lock is kept as the missiles come down, one could assume that they are hitting the target...

[El Bandito]

Yellonet, on 06 August 2016 - 06:10 AM, said:

Maybe. If you locked an enemy and the lock is kept as the missiles come down, one could assume that they are hitting the target...

From experience, many of my LRMs landed on mechs whose locks have just been broken. Raderp module is too popular ATM. I could never know if the LRMs had hit unless the cursor flashes.

[Skoll]

Yellonet, on 06 August 2016 - 05:56 AM, said:

Well, it's a dumbing down mechanic IMO, a player should be able to tell if he hit his enemy without the cross-hair changing in any way.

Are you seriously crying about "dumbing down" mechanics in a ******* arcade arena shooter? Where have you been since beta?

Are you one of those people who ranted that "reading a map should take skill" when PGI borked the mini?

Edited by Skoll, 06 August 2016 - 06:17 AM.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

El Bandito, on 06 August 2016 - 06:06 AM, said:

That's easier for direct-fire weapons. Indirectly fired LRMs on the other hand, will have much harder time finding out if the missiles had hit or not. LRMs will need some compensation should we remove cross-hair flash.

LRMs already need a complete redesign to make them useful but not OP.

Skoll, on 06 August 2016 - 06:17 AM, said:

Are you seriously crying about "dumbing down" mechanics in a ******* arcade arena shooter? Where have you been since beta?

His location tag says Sweden so... Sweden?

Edited by Narcissistic Martyr, 06 August 2016 - 06:18 AM.

[3xnihilo]

Yellonet, on 06 August 2016 - 05:56 AM, said:

Well, it's a dumbing down mechanic IMO, a player should be able to tell if he hit his enemy without the cross-hair changing in any way.

With invisible walls and lag, this isn't necessarily true. It is also hard to tell from a distance with projectile weapons when you can see the enemy but it is difficult to see exactly where your shots are landing. Especially when visually they are hitting but the server isn't registering for some reason. I am not necessarily disagreeing with your idea so much as I don't think it is practical in the imperfect system we have.

[Skoll]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 06 August 2016 - 06:17 AM, said:

LRMs already need a complete redesign to make them useful but not OP.



His location tag says Sweden so... Sweden?

I hear the women are pretty in Sweden. C/D?

[El Bandito]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 06 August 2016 - 06:17 AM, said:

LRMs already need a complete redesign to make them useful but not OP.

That's something we asked from PGI for years. So far, no luck. Paul must have been lurmed to death on Alpine, back in 2013. That's the only feasible explanation on why does PGI idiotically keep the LRMs bad as is.

[Yellonet]

El Bandito, on 06 August 2016 - 06:13 AM, said:

From experience, many of my LRMs landed on mechs whose locks have just been broken. Raderp module is too popular ATM. I could never know if the LRMs had hit unless the cursor flashes.

True, but do you really need to know?

Anyway I would not be against keeping the hit indication for any missiles as one could imagine that each missile has a hit indication unit that sends out a signal to the firing mech just as it hits the target.

I guess energy weapons could have a light detector that can detect that special glow/reflection as mech armour is hit thus explaining how these hits are detected, but it would be difficult shooting through smoke and whatnot, but I still think it's a gameplay problem to have the indication for these weapons.

Skoll, on 06 August 2016 - 06:18 AM, said:

I hear the women are pretty in Sweden. C/D?

Aren't they everywhere?

[Yellonet]

El Bandito, on 06 August 2016 - 06:19 AM, said:

That's something we asked from PGI for years. So far, no luck. Paul must have been lurmed to death on Alpine, back in 2013. That's the only feasible explanation on why does PGI idiotically keep the LRMs bad as is.

They did fix SRM's though. When I was new around here all I heard was "SRM's are sh1t and dead weight on any mech".
Never heard even a mention of complaints about them for a long time now, so I guess PGI really got them perfectly balanced.
I think they can do it with LRM's too. Personally I'd like to be able to launch and guide them with my crosshair, and I think SSRMS should work like that too.

[Gamuray]

Skoll, on 06 August 2016 - 06:17 AM, said:

Are you seriously crying about "dumbing down" mechanics in a ******* arcade arena shooter? Where have you been since beta?

Are you one of those people who ranted that "reading a map should take skill" when PGI borked the mini?

Undeserved hostility is undeserved. Go back to playing your arcade arena shooter. We'll go back to our tactics game. Thank you.

[Novakaine]

Skoll, on 06 August 2016 - 06:18 AM, said:

I hear the women are pretty in Sweden. C/D?

Lol blonde wookies hahahahahaaha

[Spleenslitta]

I'll just copy paste in what i had in that thread. Keep in mind this could also apply to range of ECM and BAP.

You know all those monitors scattered inside the cockpit and they all have Heat sink information and "Autodetect No signal"?

What if 1 or 2 of those monitors was actually functional for the Seismic Sensor?
You could still see Seismic on the map but you can also see it on the monitor.
It would show you as an arrow in the centre with 3 or 4 rings outside that. 3 for a standard seismic sensor and 4 for an advanced version.

1 ring for each 60 meters increment. (62.5 meters for the Advanced version).
This way we know roughly how far away the enemies are and their clockwise direction to yourself without having to check the map.
It could even show a zoomed in clip of the map in your current location within 180/250 meters around you.
Although that part might be hard work for the developers.

Some mechs have bigger or better placed monitors. This will help give individuality to our mechs cockpits.
Right now the only difference from one mechs cockpit to another is hitboxes and the viewing angles it offers.

[Alistair Winter]

Please recall that they tried to remove the 'red aiming reticule' during a public test.

The forums exploded.

Why? Because when it reallly comes down to it, the majority of MWO players want arcade game mechanics like this instead of realism and combat simulator stuff. A few people feebly tried to explain that the targeting computer definitely knows whether or not your artillery strike landing 3000 meters away, or LRMs landing on the other side of a mountain, or that AC2 round landing at max range, firing through trees and smoke, actually hit a mech that was still alive. It actually knows whether you hit a dead mech or a mech that was powered down.

Everyone wants a thinking man's shooter and a sci-fi military combat simulator... until it actually means that stuff is inconvenient. If there's a fog that limits vision, or if there are too many trees in the way, or if you can't immediately get a paper doll on that Locust 800 meters away. "Ermagerd, mah retecules!"

I don't normally blame the community for decisions that PGI made, but when I do, it's because of stuff like this.

Edited by Alistair Winter, 06 August 2016 - 08:59 AM.