97 replies to this topic

[razenWing]

Yep, I am doing it.

I always blame the lack of progress on lack of creativity. A few months ago (or maybe it hasn't been that long, it only felt like that long ago because I stopped "regular" playing and thus stopped "regular" posting), some guy posted the idea of having "auto-aim" in game.

As I analyze the practical usefulness of such feature in real life and whether such feature would really benefit in the game world, 95% of the children chose to bash his idea as trash and cannot step off the comfort zone to even entertain the idea and the potentially revolutionary change that this might entail.

Well, I may receive the same people here, so who knows, right? It feels like only haters and weird old people that don't play the game, but lack friends to communicate in other medium of life still stroll this forum. (Dood, if you haven't played in like 2 years, why the hell are you still here giving opinions? Move on, man... damn... You know who I am talking about. Most likely, you)

Anyways, what was briefly touched on was the fact that having auto-aim does not automatically make the game dull. It will come down to clever game balances and mechanics. All of which on the technical side we can discuss.

But first, a video:



While I don't share 80% of the opinion with Rageaholics (and while his video isn't new), I recently put 2 and 2 together and decided to stir the hornet's nest. Watch from the 4 minute mark to about the 6th where he basically highlights immersion as a role in a simulation.

Obviously, people will have different opinion about this. I have a unit-mate that held the view that this game should just be a slow Call of duty with robots instead of people. But I like Rageaholics's take in that we are basically piloting a massive machine where we are just pointing in the direction of objects of erasure rather than precise aiming.

This concept is absolutely not mainstream even if held by underground fans for quite some time. Through the entire World Championship, we see the dominance of EMP essentially playing the game like a robot version of Counterstrike. Whoever can quick scope and aim the best wins the game. But increasingly to me, that doesn't quite feel like Mechwarrior.

We have a unique game of robot on robot violence unique to all other FPS title on the market. Make no mistake, everybody that wants in on this niche is playing catchup. So why are we squandering this by emulating mainstream FPS titles?

This where I found a potential use of the auto-aim. You will always have a center reticule that does not change unless zoom is engaged. Basically, it's a toggle that aims automatically at your selected target but with a caveat that your shots may land anywhere within that firing circle.

Thus, the closer you are to a target, the more "precise" you will be as your circle essentially covers the entire mech. Vice versa, the further, you might miss due to the white space that the firing circle will cover.

Your shots will spread as the impact location is randomized. But keep in mind, it IS a toggle. Thus, you can override the firing solution and still play without it if you so choose.

I can totally see this being a thing and a potentially popular tournament mode for people that want hardcore immersion. For people that want to point in the general area of death and wipe out everything with their awesome weaponry, this is a feature for you. Just like you can force third person in private lobby, PGI can make into a select-able setting for private matches.

As for neutral public games, I think most people would still choose to use manual fire (just as very VERY few people use 3rd person), but it is an option if you so choose as a toggle.

In the end, as Rageaholics said in the video, this feature will certainly boost joystick plays and force PGI to design diverse terrains as strategic placement/movement will become more important than ever. Indeed, we will finally get a chance to know what it's like to pilot a slow lumbering robot from the 31st century with weapons that can dominate the battlefield.

(And who knows, maybe World Championship 2017 can feature all joystick play. Let's see who's a real Mechwarrior than a Counterstrike flunkie)

[Mystere]

Did you just describe a convergence-based solution?

[cazidin]

Mystere, on 17 January 2017 - 06:57 PM, said:

Did you just describe a convergence-based solution?

Sadly, it simply won't work. Not with PGI, not with this engine, and not with the game as it is right now. The last time PGI tried anything close to the idea of convergence, we got ghost range.

[LordNothing]

the game does not simulate precision at all. not to be confused with accuracy, that depends on your aim. if you fire a shot and then fire another shot with out moving, they go to the same place. no known fire control system can do this. in the future you might get the grouping down significantly, but it will still be a factor. i think its mostly absent because people dont like randomness, even though in reality chaos theory will rob your precision whenever it can.

everyones favorite whipping boy, cod, actually does put some effort into simulating precision. you get tighter groupings when not moving, and can even get tighter by going prone (or was that a different game, frankly i never played cod, but this mechanic predates it considerably) makes it tighter still. i find it ironic that a game considered arcadey is more a simulator than the successor to a line of mech sims. i kind of think this should have been a mech sim from day one rather than going with a "thinking mans shooter" paradigm ignoring the fact that thinking men prefer simulators, then make it like quake.

[Anjian]

Some games have a manual aim - auto lock system. Which means you move your recticle to the target for target selection and your weapons are aim-locked at it. This is better for mobile and console games that lack a mouse, like I see with Armored Core on the console, and War Robots on tablets. Though I am not sure if this is what is best for PC games, it definitely is for games that are on a platform that lack the precision of a mouse.

[razenWing]

Anjian, on 17 January 2017 - 08:10 PM, said:

Some games have a manual aim - auto lock system. Which means you move your recticle to the target for target selection and your weapons are aim-locked at it. This is better for mobile and console games that lack a mouse, like I see with Armored Core on the console, and War Robots on tablets. Though I am not sure if this is what is best for PC games, it definitely is for games that are on a platform that lack the precision of a mouse.

I know people that use controller for this game. As rageaholics argued, it makes sense that joystick should be optimized over keyboard if we really want to push immersion and simulation. I think main problem is that PC joystick outside of controllers are just not that popular. But even optimizing for controllers I think is a step forward.

Now, don't get me wrong, you can still gain a ton of precision with controllers/joysticks with some practice, but for most people, mouse is more intuitive. Either way, a toggle-able auto-aim would go a long way to push joystick gameplay. The game would be so different and would certainly be a huge leap of faith.

[Pjwned]

So...basically it would be cone of fire except your shots would be guaranteed to not miss?

I can see how it would solve some problems, but at what cost?

I don't think I can definitively say I would leave the game forever if it happened, depending on how it actually worked out, but I think the cost of essentially removing aiming skill (or at least lowering it greatly) would be too high and I think it's more likely that I would just leave and not come back because it doesn't sound very fun.

I would also expect that light mechs would be extremely unpopular even if damage was spread out more overall as a result.

Not the worst idea possible because there are some clear benefits, but I don't think that's a good direction to go for the game.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

razenWing, on 17 January 2017 - 05:25 PM, said:

This concept is absolutely not mainstream even if held by underground fans for quite some time. Through the entire World Championship, we see the dominance of EMP essentially playing the game like a robot version of Counterstrike. Whoever can quick scope and aim the best wins the game. But increasingly to me, that doesn't quite feel like Mechwarrior.

If you think that is purely the reason they won then you don't understand how to play the game.

Don't get me wrong, gunnery is important, but being good at this game isn't just about being a crack shot.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 17 January 2017 - 10:07 PM.

[S 0 L E N Y A]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 17 January 2017 - 10:05 PM, said:

If you think that is purely the reason they won then you don't understand how to play the game.

Don't get me wrong, gunnery is important, but being good at this game isn't just about being a crack shot.

So much this

[Lily from animove]

I just think autoaim takes a big portion of fun from the game, But this is point of a shooter based game in my opinion. But aside form that I don't know how MWO with an autoaim emchanic would work, at least many mechanics would have to be implemented entirely differen, because the current implemention of weapons and their mechanics would break completely when utilised together with autoaim.

[razenWing]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 17 January 2017 - 10:05 PM, said:

If you think that is purely the reason they won then you don't understand how to play the game.

Don't get me wrong, gunnery is important, but being good at this game isn't just about being a crack shot.

No, you are definitely correct. They took up the best place to snipe and just spread all across. They were technically only "outgunned" by EON in 1 or arguable 2 matches. But at the end of the day, they won because they played the game like it was any other modern twitch shooter. Which don't get me wrong, I am not taking away from their accomplishment, they took full advantage by maximizing the utilization of game mechanics. (In layman's term, they just know the game really f-ing well)

By the same token, you also "don't know" the game if you think any other team outside of the MRBC A division and perhaps a few B division teams can spread themselves like that and still win if not for their gunnery. Either way, I am not here to argue whether EMP is legitimately the champion. Clearly, they are. I am simply making a point that the game is pushed to perform like any other twitch shooter instead of focusing on the niche of the genre.

Pjwned, on 17 January 2017 - 09:57 PM, said:

So...basically it would be cone of fire except your shots would be guaranteed to not miss?

I can see how it would solve some problems, but at what cost?

I don't think I can definitively say I would leave the game forever if it happened, depending on how it actually worked out, but I think the cost of essentially removing aiming skill (or at least lowering it greatly) would be too high and I think it's more likely that I would just leave and not come back because it doesn't sound very fun.

I would also expect that light mechs would be extremely unpopular even if damage was spread out more overall as a result.

Not the worst idea possible because there are some clear benefits, but I don't think that's a good direction to go for the game.

In my version of the mechanics at least, whether you miss or not depends on range. Cause you are firing into the general direction of your target. Think more of a shotgun aim. The closer you are, the more your target will fill the entire "reticule." The farther, the more white space, and the more chance to miss.

It's also a toggle, and is really designed for joystick/controller play. I also stated that I imagined in public neutral games, most people probably won't even use it. (Cause, landing precise shots to quickly take out a torso or any other component is far more "efficient" in winning than spreading damage everywhere.)

But it would be fun to see this as an option to push for maximum immersion, and see new tournaments spring up based on this mode. Cause this is definitely a game changer is terms of how people would play the game.

Edited by razenWing, 18 January 2017 - 05:53 AM.

[Lily from animove]

razenWing, on 18 January 2017 - 05:51 AM, said:

In my version of the mechanics at least, whether you miss or not depends on range. Cause you are firing into the general direction of your target. Think more of a shotgun aim. The closer you are, the more your target will fill the entire "reticule." The farther, the more white space, and the more chance to miss.

you know this would imbalance stuff a lot, because mechs and their hitboxes make that reticule based hitting even worse in how different mechs can get hit. and it makes the game even more RNGfor heavy and hot ranged wepaons. And thats what people don't like. Or in other words, if people would like RNG mechancis they would play card based games and others.

and I dunno what "immersion" this is supposed to be. Because in future tech I expect proper aim technics discovered. Weapon stability isn't a myth and for immerisons sake in a game more than 1k years in future I expect it to work even better.



mankind coied a lot form nature, and I expect owl like stability in future



Anything else is "pseudo immersion" of imagined cool effects that would be, but rationally and by logic wouldn't actually be.

Edited by Lily from animove, 18 January 2017 - 06:54 AM.

[TWIAFU]

Lily from animove, on 18 January 2017 - 06:27 AM, said:

and I dunno what "immersion" this is supposed to be. Because in future tech I expect proper aim technics discovered. Weapon stability isn't a myth and for immerisons sake in a game more than 1k years in future I expect it to work even better.

You would think that targeting computers 1000 years in the future in 100 ton walking machines of death would be pretty much point and hit, at least specific locations.

Then again, sounds like the proposed idea removes the 'human factor' and skill from our game and then what is the point, what are you left with?

Real world example of how bad this idea is;

http://www.tracking-...m/how-it-works/

[Lily from animove]

TWIAFU, on 18 January 2017 - 06:47 AM, said:

You would think that targeting computers 1000 years in the future in 100 ton walking machines of death would be pretty much point and hit, at least specific locations.

Then again, sounds like the proposed idea removes the 'human factor' and skill from our game and then what is the point, what are you left with?

Real world example of how bad this idea is;

http://www.tracking-...m/how-it-works/

well yes and no, sure this is what it really would look like. Yet someone still needs to make the decision on where to shoot. and that is then in the end a human doing so. unless you have a complex programm analysing pre-priorised target sequences.
But then it is a game. So things aren't always "real" But what I hate is stupid pseude immerisoin because it makes the game abstraction bad as it is destroying any logic and remainign immersion of the abstracted gaming model at all.

Thats why I disabled the cockpit glass, the old one may gamign wise not have been the best, but it was cool and kinda truly immersive. the new one is so badly made its breaking immersion.

[razenWing]

Lily from animove, on 18 January 2017 - 06:27 AM, said:

you know this would imbalance stuff a lot, because mechs and their hitboxes make that reticule based hitting even worse in how different mechs can get hit. and it makes the game even more RNGfor heavy and hot ranged wepaons. And thats what people don't like. Or in other words, if people would like RNG mechancis they would play card based games and others.

and I dunno what "immersion" this is supposed to be. Because in future tech I expect proper aim technics discovered. Weapon stability isn't a myth and for immerisons sake in a game more than 1k years in future I expect it to work even better.



mankind coied a lot form nature, and I expect owl like stability in future



Anythign else is "pseudo immersion" of imagined cool effects that would be but rationally and by logic wouldn't actually be.

You saw the rageaholics video that I posted right? It's obviously a balance between game play and "realistic" expectation. No one is disputing that computers in the future can hit a dime from 2 kilometers away. But if autoaim works like that, then no mechanics can save that from a proper game play.

At the end of the day, if you are introducing a new mechanics, it must be distinct enough to be a choice. In this case, my auto-aim is just working like how rageaholic would propose in terms of just lobbying a lot of mountain destroying weapons in 1 direction and hope to erase that thing from the horizon.

If you want precise aiming as we do now, toggle off auto-aim.

Beside, the gameplay would be different, but would not be entirely RNG based as you fear. Right now, the game plays like any other FPS with a strong reliance on gunnery. Which is fine. No one is disputing that having good aim is bad. However, in the "non precise RNG hit" scenario, your skill then shift to gaining the proper zone/terrain control where you can output the most punishment without receiving any back. You're basically changing the emphasis of your skill set and putting more emphasis on movement and positioning.

(can I engage 2v1? Can I split? Can I bait? Can I trap?)

AND AGAIN, not saying it's better, but it is different. That's all I am suggesting.

Which is also why I said repeated that it would be a TOGGLE. If you want it, you can turn it on. (like 3rd person in QP ques) If you don't like it, turn it off. Isn't it amazing how providing options actually allow people to have... more options?

Edited by razenWing, 18 January 2017 - 07:03 AM.

[Snowbluff]

TWIAFU, on 18 January 2017 - 06:47 AM, said:

You would think that targeting computers 1000 years in the future in 100 ton walking machines of death would be pretty much point and hit, at least specific locations.

Then again, sounds like the proposed idea removes the 'human factor' and skill from our game and then what is the point, what are you left with?

Real world example of how bad this idea is;

http://www.tracking-...m/how-it-works/

Well, except for jet fighters do that in real life...

[Lily from animove]

razenWing, on 18 January 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

If you want precise aiming as we do now, toggle off auto-aim.

Beside, the gameplay would be different, but would not be entirely RNG based as you fear. Right now, the game plays like any other FPS with a strong reliance on gunnery. Which is fine. No one is disputing that having good aim is bad. However, in the "non precise RNG hit" scenario, your skill then shift to gaining the proper zone/terrain control where you can output the most punishment without receiving any back. You're basically changing the emphasis of your skill set and putting more emphasis on movement and positioning.

(can I engage 2v1? Can I split? Can I bait? Can I trap?)

AND AGAIN, not saying it's better, but it is different. That's all I am suggesting.

Which is also why I said repeated that it would be a TOGGLE. If you want it, you can turn it on. (like 3rd person in QP ques) If you don't like it, turn it off. Isn't it amazing how providing options actually allow people to have... more options?

It's either better or inferior, but you can guess people will only choose the inferior, it will surely not be just different in competetiviely different. And therefore only one would be chosen ans sticke with.

in fact it would probably hugely widen the gap ebtween noobs and good palyers because noobs ever even start toggling it off and keeping their aim, but gonan fail hard vs those pilots with skill and manual proper aim. that proposed sytsem will turn out to be as binary as lrm's are.

[Mechteric]

What you are describing would be a good Phone or Tablet version of Mechwarrior, but just wouldn't be interesting enough on a platform where we have the tools we need to use our own skills (Mice, Joysticks, Gamepads).


Speaking of which, I had the idea a while back of a turn-based first person Mechwarrior game for mobile devices, maybe a bit like those Doom RPG and Wolfenstein RPG games But alas I don't have the artistic skills to pull that off

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 18 January 2017 - 07:31 AM.

[Mystere]

Lily from animove, on 18 January 2017 - 06:27 AM, said:

Ahem! I think I am seeing the beer swirling inside the mug. If that is indeed the case, that implies deviation of some sort, which could have a significant effect on the accuracy of the weapon at long ranges as opposed to point-blank range.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

razenWing, on 18 January 2017 - 05:51 AM, said:

By the same token, you also "don't know" the game if you think any other team outside of the MRBC A division and perhaps a few B division teams can spread themselves like that and still win if not for their gunnery.

Once again, you don't know what you're talking about, being spread is part of the plan. The name of the game is creating a concave firing line, it is strong as long as you can shoot straight. You want to encapsulate the enemy and force them into bad positions. You don't have to be twitch-master McGee to make it work. Bad players are the ones that think that deathball is the end-all be-all tactic and its part of why they are bad.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 18 January 2017 - 08:49 AM.