97 replies to this topic

[Johnny Z]

The game play is excellent as it is. If some want another kind of gameplay they should add mine layer/scout mech/ npc caller/ artillery spots on drops. Or something like that.

Mech commander had 2 spot for this in addition to 3 lances. That would be perfect for this game.

Edited by Johnny Z, 18 January 2017 - 08:52 AM.

[meteorol]

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.

You won't be able to win solely based on twitch shooting and aiming on the highest level of MWO, simply because MWOs skill ceiling is way too low. The game is simply too slow, aiming is too easy to really win purely based on it. You won't be able to get a high enough skillgap between your team and the enemy team for that. Quite frankly speaking, MWO is simply too easy for that.

That aside... if you really believe MWOWC had muchin common with esports level Counterstrike, you either didn't watch MWOWC or you don't watch a whole lot of competitice CS:GO.

Edited by meteorol, 18 January 2017 - 09:10 AM.

[Lily from animove]

Mystere, on 18 January 2017 - 08:46 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.

surely not on the pitiful 1km range we us ein MWO. also the liquid movement may just come form the acceleration movement. So not sure how much vetical movement made the bear swirling. if I would know what tank that is we could probably google for the accuracy it has during movement. But I don't know i just randomly came across that vid and then some time later this thread appeared and it made me remember the vid.

Edited by Lily from animove, 18 January 2017 - 09:18 AM.

[Rock Roller]

So two things strike me in this need for future logic.

1st is the premis that in the future Super Targeting systems would do much of the aiming for you. Agreed to the point that it kills the fantasy world of Battletech from even existing. Take modern fighter aircraft for example. There has not been a skill to skill dog fight that produced a kill with 4th generation aircraft since the 80's. Modern avionics and missile systems have largely replaced the personal pilot to pilot fight. If you carry your future argument into the level of technology present in Battletech... no Battletech.

2nd is why do you want a participant award? Why not work on your skill level to improve your results? I have a way to go to get to the levels I see in spectator mode from the best players. That being said I have improved with effort to better than most I see or their equal. For me getting good at aim is far easier than battle situation awareness. The other skill is knowing when to be aggressive or defensive. If your targeting systems did that it would once again remove the pilot from the mech.

[Jman5]

I guess I'm confused. We have a variety of weapon types in the game that seemingly satisfy different playstyles.

If you want some sort of aim-assist we have the LRM and Streak SRM weapons. These weapons provide two very different game styles and an aim-assist feature for those who like that sort of stuff.

Quote

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.

If this guy wanted some sort of point in the general direction and blast em weapons we have those in the game too. LBX autocannons and SRMs do precisely this. There are 4 different LBX cannons and 3 different SRMs.

This game has an incredible variety of weapon types out there for different playstyles and despite what some people might say you can succeed with all of them.

[razenWing]

Rock Roller, on 18 January 2017 - 10:02 AM, said:

So two things strike me in this need for future logic.

1st is the premis that in the future Super Targeting systems would do much of the aiming for you. Agreed to the point that it kills the fantasy world of Battletech from even existing. Take modern fighter aircraft for example. There has not been a skill to skill dog fight that produced a kill with 4th generation aircraft since the 80's. Modern avionics and missile systems have largely replaced the personal pilot to pilot fight. If you carry your future argument into the level of technology present in Battletech... no Battletech.

2nd is why do you want a participant award? Why not work on your skill level to improve your results? I have a way to go to get to the levels I see in spectator mode from the best players. That being said I have improved with effort to better than most I see or their equal. For me getting good at aim is far easier than battle situation awareness. The other skill is knowing when to be aggressive or defensive. If your targeting systems did that it would once again remove the pilot from the mech.

So just going to restate this LAST time. This has nothing to do with whether you shoot great or whether it's going to help noob do damage. In fact, I tried very hard to steer away from this.

But like you or quicksilver, it's like you guys are trying to steer all topics to be about skill nerf.

So let me make it bold:

THIS IMPLEMENTATION IS ABOUT POTENTIALLY A NEW GAME PLAY MECHANICS WHICH WOULD BRING MORE IMMERSION TO THE NICHE GENRE OF ROBOT SIMULATION... TO CONFORM MORE TO THE ORIGINAL VISION OF MECH TO MECH COMBAT PER SE.

IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER EMP CAN KICK @SS OR IF YOU CAN MANUALLY SHOOT A DIME OFF OF SOMEONE FROM 10 KILOMETERS AWAY. IF YOU CAN, GOOD FOR YOU. I AM REALLY PROUD OF YOU. BUT IN CONTEXT OF THIS THREAD, I REALLY DON'T GIVE A FLYING FOCK.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

razenWing, on 18 January 2017 - 11:02 AM, said:

THIS IMPLEMENTATION IS ABOUT POTENTIALLY A NEW GAME PLAY MECHANICS WHICH WOULD BRING MORE IMMERSION TO THE NICHE GENRE OF ROBOT SIMULATION... TO CONFORM MORE TO THE ORIGINAL VISION OF MECH TO MECH COMBAT PER SE.

How does auto-aim bring immersion into the game exactly? What is this "original vision" of mech to mech combat that you speak about?

As for the part about EmP, the point is you used it as part of your example of how this game doesn't fit the vision of mech combat when your understanding of the entire situation was wrong and full of misunderstanding.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 18 January 2017 - 11:11 AM.

[Kyrie]

This idea goes against the entire direction the game has taken since pre-alpha. Implementing it on a [separare] mobile-version sounds interesting though.

[razenWing]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 18 January 2017 - 11:10 AM, said:

How does auto-aim bring immersion into the game exactly? What is this "original vision" of mech to mech combat that you speak about?

As for the part about EmP, the point is you used it as part of your example of how this game doesn't fit the vision of mech combat when your understanding of the entire situation was wrong and full of misunderstanding.

Again, I refer you to rageaholic's video. The original vision is referring to the singular perspective that mechs are more... AoE type destroyers, not pinpoint machines. So the whole thing with bringing auto aim is because if we simply scratch the current system into a wide reticule (which... to be quite honest, wouldn't be a bad idea, for manual aiming, cause we can bring convergeance and movement accuracy degradation into effect), then we are doing a flat replacement and won't be a toggle-able setting. Cause, why would you toggle a button to make all weapons shoot like lbx instead of pinpoint?

That's where the auto-aim aspect comes in, to incorporate that to create a new system more align with the whole "point at one direction and destroy everything along the horizon" idea without compromising the old system where people can still do massive pinpoint alpha strike.

Now obviously I know most people are comfortable with what they use now. Sure, I am not against that in any ways. But why is it so bad to have something entirely new as a side option for people that want to hop into a mech and experience something drastically different in both game play and style? That's the point I am trying to make.

As for the EMP bit, it's just an example of how the game is more similar to twitch shooter than ever. Is it exactly the same as Counterstrike or CoD? Not at all. But is it similar and is it trending that way? You bet. And again, that's the whole point of rageaholic's video is to illustrate that point.

Also check out his followup video on Mechwarrior 5 announcement. (Either that or some other mech related video at a later post date, I don't recall for sure) It's basically him saying the same thing, and he does have a point. If we are simulating piloting robots, why not go all the way and simulate the crap out of it? Ultimately, is it a clean streamline shooter? Or is it a grunge, gritty, dirty, and messy shooter? Both have merits, but it's something that can be totally tried and tested if we add the auto-aim option.

Edited by razenWing, 18 January 2017 - 01:02 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

razenWing, on 18 January 2017 - 12:59 PM, said:

Again, I refer you to rageaholic's video. The original vision is referring to the singular perspective that mechs are more... AoE type destroyers, not pinpoint machines.

That is his vision, not everyone elses. The funny part is that MW4 was more pinpoint than this game because LBX behaved like cERPPCs do now, they didn't fire multiple bullets but the single shell "splashed" other sections. The only thing he is REALLY complaining about is the reticle style and how this one is more pinpoint oriented than MW4's stock reticle (which could be customized using the hud mod tool from mektek). There was no real cone-of-destruction style weapon in MW4.

Basically, he is a moron with a loud mouth.

razenWing, on 18 January 2017 - 12:59 PM, said:

As for the EMP bit, it's just an example of how the game is more similar to twitch shooter than ever. Is it exactly the same as Counterstrike or CoD? Not at all. But is it similar and is it trending that way? You bet. And again, that's the whole point of rageaholic's video is to illustrate that point.

Then you either never paid attention to any of the previous entries or are willingly blind because MW4 was definitely the most arcade-y of them all. What exactly do you consider "trending" towards CS:GO other than the sad attempt to make this more e-sport friendly with spectator stuff?

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 18 January 2017 - 01:10 PM.

[razenWing]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 18 January 2017 - 01:07 PM, said:

That is his vision, not everyone elses. The funny part is that MW4 was more pinpoint than this game because LBX behaved like cERPPCs do now, they didn't fire multiple bullets but the single shell "splashed" other sections. The only thing he is REALLY complaining about is the reticle style and how this one is more pinpoint oriented than MW4's stock reticle (which could be customized using the hud mod tool from mektek). There was no real cone-of-destruction style weapon in MW4.

Basically, he is a moron with a loud mouth.


Then you either never paid attention to any of the previous entries or are willingly blind because MW4 was definitely the most arcade-y of them all. What exactly do you consider "trending" towards CS:GO other than the sad attempt to make this more e-sport friendly with spectator stuff?

So in your mind, Mechwarrior is NOT a twitch shooter? But you don't need to answer. I know what you going to say. And that's quite honestly where we see things differently. But that's more of a matter of opinion.

And while rageaholics is not the bible (as I said, I only agree to about 20% of his video), that point is none the less a valid one to push the Mechwarrior title into a completely new territory. And why not? I played Mechwarrior 3 where you have a floating mouse independent reticule. I played Mechwarrior 4 where the check to have an absolute 100% shot is to press the 0% acceleration to have the perfectly steady shot. I do agree that what he's saying have honestly never really appeared before.

But I do share his sentiment that when I think of robots, I also tend to think of very messy gritty combats. But hey, that's to everyone, right?

Edited by razenWing, 18 January 2017 - 01:17 PM.

[Mystere]

Oooohh! I just had a thought: eye tracking hardware like the Tobii Eye Tracking System.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

razenWing, on 18 January 2017 - 01:11 PM, said:

So in your mind, Mechwarrior is NOT a twitch shooter?

No, play Overwatch or CS:GO and then go play MWO and try and tell me with a straight face the pace is the exact same as those games. People in my unit including myself play twitch shooters on the side and going from this game is like a night-n-day difference in pacing. If anything this is more like Overwatch which has a bit more emphasis on positioning than typical FPS, the pace though is wildly different.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 18 January 2017 - 01:13 PM.

[William Pryde]

I would just be happy if only arm-mounted weapons converged and torso-mounted weapons fired in a straight line - that would force people to be a bit more careful with alpha strikes and what not and would make it harder to load all damage into a single point. Of course, that would likely bring in a whole host of other problems, ruin some chassis, and all sorts of stuff I do not have the time or desire to think about right now.

[razenWing]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 18 January 2017 - 01:12 PM, said:

No, play Overwatch or CS:GO and then go play MWO and try and tell me with a straight face the pace is the exact same as those games. People in my unit including myself play twitch shooters on the side and going from this game is like a night-n-day difference in pacing. If anything this is more like Overwatch which has a bit more emphasis on positioning than typical FPS, the pace though is wildly different.

No pacing is way different. I agree again. But stylistically with the pinpoint firing, there's not that much difference. Hence, I called it "slower pace modern FPS shooter," or something to that effect in my first post.

Which brings me in mind with another game, Crysis 2 and 3 where you pick up the HMG. Bullets don't track in a precise line and bullet 1 and 2 might land in different places despite firing from the same starting location. That's more or less close to my implementation (and what rageaholics is talking about). You basically unleash hell toward the general direction of the enemies until nothing is alive and/or you ran out of bullets.

We can never replace the current precise aiming model with that, but we can certainly test that on the unproven auto-aim, as it perfectly balances with drawbacks.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

razenWing, on 18 January 2017 - 07:10 PM, said:

You basically unleash hell toward the general direction of the enemies until nothing is alive and/or you ran out of bullets.

Yeah, I don't consider that Mechwarrior because no Mechwarrior has ever worked like that afaik except maybe the ********** of death from before MW4.

razenWing, on 18 January 2017 - 07:10 PM, said:

I called it "slower pace modern FPS shooter," or something to that effect in my first post.

slower pace modern FPS shooter =/= twitch shooter because they don't require near the same reaction times to be good.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 18 January 2017 - 07:29 PM.

[chucklesMuch]

razenWing, on 18 January 2017 - 01:11 PM, said:

So in your mind, Mechwarrior is NOT a twitch shooter? But you don't need to answer. I know what you going to say. And that's quite honestly where we see things differently. But that's more of a matter of opinion.

This mind doesn't consider MWO to be a 'twitch shooter', or even close.

[Anjian]

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 am going to add that the mentioned games here, using an autolock system, also use dispersion on certain weapons, which means DPS is at its highest when these weapons are up close and the firing cone tightens, and at its lowest when these weapons are farther away and the firing cone loosens. However, this only works with ballistic weapons, not with energy weapons and missiles. Energy weapons always has pin point accuracy, which are either limited with longer cooldowns, lower firing rates, or reduced damage.

Auto aim systems also have a problem, they don't do peek and boo well. If for a mech for example, is under cover, but head and arms are showing, the auto aim would aim for the torso, which is under cover, and your shot will hit the covering rock instead, unable to hit the selected parts that are exposed out of cover. This makes head shots impossible.

Another problem of auto aim is that if this is the target mech, but another mech runs close to it and goes into the aim cone instead between you and the original target, the aim lock towards the original target is lost and shifts to the other mech. In a meatball situation, this can get ugly as your reticle may end up constantly shifting. Again if mechs are constantly doing peek and boo, the aim would lock and lost, lock and lost, so it can also be annoying.

Given this, it would be wise to keep the option of manual aim, maybe in a sniper mode?

Edited by Anjian, 18 January 2017 - 08:53 PM.

[Mawai]

My opinion ...

Auto aim does not increase immersion, make it more like a sim or really balance anything better.

One thing auto aim with a cone of fire would do would be to make the game more like Battletech the board game by introducing a random element to where and how many of your weapons hit when you fire. All you are doing with the "auto-aim" is designating a target which is pretty much how HBS Battletech game and the board game work.

However, for mechwarrior or any first person shooter, this takes most of the first person fun out of the game in my opinion. Part of the fun is aiming for specific weak points on your opponent (whether I can hit them or not) rather than just pointing at a target, pressing fire and hoping that some of the munitions hit the red torso.

This gets back to the question of ... What is MWO "simulating"? if anything. MWO is a first person implementation of mech combat, it is not, in my opinion, a first person simulation of the Battletech board game. Again, in my opinion, this means that the random elements of aiming and firing at your opponent are generally minimized. This was the approach taken in all the previous mechwarrior video games (MW -> MW4) and, personally, this is what I expect from a MW title.

Finally, from the point of view of simulation and immersion, I would have appreciated convergence and cones of fire representing the natural inaccuracy of the weapons ... I think that could have been implemented and justified to the community if done early enough and if the cones were small enough that the player aim was still the dominant factor in determining hits and damage. The reason that, in my opinion, player aim should matter is because you are being placed into a first person experience in the role of a mechwarrior ... the immersion of this is heightened if your aim and firing decisions have a greater impact on the outcome of the engagement ... in my opinion it makes the game more engaging and fun to play.

[Dino Might]

I actually like the idea. It would be neat for joystick users. TMS up short to lock the target. Then DMS or other 4 way hat to move the targeting cursor that is center mass on mech to different components or sections on mech. Fire with dispersion based on movement, heat, number and type of weapons fired.

It would definitely make the game more thinking based, more mental coordination than physical coordination.

I liken this to my flight sims. Usually time enough to think and maneuver, but you have to make the right choices, and your initial choices limit your future options. The one who puts together the best set of tactics consistently is the one who wins. It's not about singular skill of who can fly through the eye of a needle, but rather who knows how to fly while balancing energy, aspect, range, and g load best.

MWO currently is very one dimensional. All the MWOWC talk is pretty overblown. It's kind of simple to set up firing lines with a coordinated team, and that is the most complicated tactic you see in this game.