39 replies to this topic

[El Bandito]

Dakota1000, on 29 April 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

An entirely different set of skills related to simply waiting or knowing to stop before you shoot instead of actually having twitch aiming skills, ability to hold full beam durations onto a single location, leading your enemy perfectly, and on the receiving end knowing how to spread damage perfectly, whether you should deadside or spread to all torso sections, knowing how to jump jet to spread damage to legs properly, twisting in time to dodge incoming shots at long range, etc.

I prefer actually rewarding high skill intensive things. Holding a full beam on a target in a pitched battle where you are overheating and both you and your enemy are running and that one shot is all that matters and your ability to keep that crosshair where it needs to be is what determines if you win or lose is what seems to make a much better game to me rather than robbing the two players of that duel by throwing in a randomized spread because they are moving and running hot.

Personally I like having a bit more action and movement thrown into fights that just won't exist if accuracy gets bad when moving.

Then I will recommend CS:GO to you, instead of MWO. That game rewards "high skill" much better. This MW game took almost a decade to arrive after MW4, and due to technological advancements meanwhile, I want it to feel more immersive, than twitch side.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

El Bandito, on 29 April 2017 - 07:33 AM, said:

Then I will recommend CS:GO to you, instead of MWO. That game rewards "high skill" much better. This MW game took almost a decade to arrive after MW4, and due to technological advancements meanwhile, I want it to feel more immersive, than twitch side.

Then I will recommend MW5 to you, instead of MWO. That game is set to be a slower paced and more immersive single player game experience rather than a multiplayer deathmatch vehicular combat arena.

I'm just saying that what we have here is a multiplayer combat game that relies on balance and skill based combat rather than being an immersive story line in which your god among men character goes around shooting down all that he comes across and is only hindered by gameplay mechanics such as bad aim when running hot. I'd rather not have the core fundamentals of the game change up after all these years.

[Shifty McSwift]

Dakota1000, on 29 April 2017 - 08:18 AM, said:

Then I will recommend MW5 to you, instead of MWO. That game is set to be a slower paced and more immersive single player game experience rather than a multiplayer deathmatch vehicular combat arena.

I'm just saying that what we have here is a multiplayer combat game that relies on balance and skill based combat rather than being an immersive story line in which your god among men character goes around shooting down all that he comes across and is only hindered by gameplay mechanics such as bad aim when running hot. I'd rather not have the core fundamentals of the game change up after all these years.

MWO has mostly gone the moderate route, and there is a healthy medium between 5 minute solo brawls and 1 shot kills that they did at least for a while manage to maintain, and still do to some degree.

This is part of my fears about civil war tech in particular potentially making light snipers high meta, as that almost is like CoD in its own way (I really fear light/fast medium PPFLD sniping potentials, but I could be wrong about it), and with all the high hardpoints...

My PC might just not be able to keep up with the meta let alone my patience lol.

[Johnny Z]

SteelBruiser, on 29 April 2017 - 07:03 AM, said:

Yup, realism. With today's technology our tanks can hit moving targets while moving at high rates of speed, our missiles can take town other missiles before they hit their target, and we have aircraft that can destroy tanks, buildings and other structures on the ground from thousands of feet in the air while nearly out of sight of the enemy and we have targeting systems that will allow a fighter jet to simultaneously target, track and launch fire and forget missiles at multiple targets with a respectable hit rate. However, far into the future these guys would never have been able to correct a simple convergence issue? Folks keep trying to devolve the possible technology in these things, as if they could never have improved past the 80286 microprocessor. This mentality is what makes Start Wars so funny to me. Star Wars. A world where highly trained troopers can't hit the broad side of a sand dune with the latest point and shoot technology. Dumbing down the technology only helps the brawlers get more time to get close enough to brawl. In their mind, weapons shouldn't be accurate or effective until you can see the whites of your enemy's eyes. Instead of adapting the new technology or learning to work as a team to overcome the new technology, in other words "Get gud", they'd rather dumb down the game to fit the only way they feel it should be played. Throughout history, the introduction of new technology has forced the development of new tactics to defeat that technology until your side could come out with their own BFG. It's part of what makes life, and a game, dynamic. It keeps it from becoming boring. It's hard to get excited about an new mech when you know the whiners are going to cry until it gets nerfed to play the same as every other mech before it. Woohoo, I got a Kodiak...which now can easily be taken out in short order by a couple locusts...with machine guns...woo...hoo...the excitement. Wow look at those AC20's...cool unless you try to hit a light with them. Even when you hit them they can keep running, they don't even slow down, they aren't even knocked askew. There's something wrong with that picture. Anyway, this game will not really advance until new mechs and technology get to perform like new mechs and technology. And most of these issues come from folks still trying to place turn based board game limitations, where everything is slow and based on your luck with the dice against one enemy at a time, to a real-time dynamic simulation where you face a whole team at once and have to be adept with you keyboard and mouse. That's enough for this rant. Good hunting and I'll see you on the battlefield.

[El Bandito]

Dakota1000, on 29 April 2017 - 08:18 AM, said:

Then I will recommend MW5 to you, instead of MWO. That game is set to be a slower paced and more immersive single player game experience rather than a multiplayer deathmatch vehicular combat arena.

I'm just saying that what we have here is a multiplayer combat game that relies on balance and skill based combat rather than being an immersive story line in which your god among men character goes around shooting down all that he comes across and is only hindered by gameplay mechanics such as bad aim when running hot. I'd rather not have the core fundamentals of the game change up after all these years.

1. MW5 is not here yet, but once it arrives, I will play it.

2. Being immersive is not antithetical to being skillful. That's the first thing you should learn. Skilled players will still be far better than the rest, even with delayed convergence mechanic, as aiming and positioning will still be important.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

El Bandito, on 29 April 2017 - 09:00 AM, said:

1. MW5 is not here yet, but once it arrives, I will play it.

2. Being immersive is not antithetical to being skillful. That's the first thing you should learn. Skilled players will still be far better than the rest, even with delayed convergence mechanic, as aiming and positioning will still be important.

I'd rather not let immersive things get in the way of skillful things. There are many other immersive features that don't just up and change the game at a fundamental level. Besides that, convergence is only immersive to some people, not all.

Many of us believe its absolutely stupid that a machine capable of walking and flying through the air with high levels of balance at speeds above 100kph would really suffer from something so basic as converging its lasers and other weapons. Honestly, half the guns have barrels big enough that they could just be setup to rotate and turn within their housings to some minor degree to converge perfectly. Not to mention you could find all the technology to keep a gun from bouncing around when moving inside of a school bus driver's seat.

Convergence times would be faster than arm movement speeds, which are already so fast they are nearly non existent, adding in actual convergence times in a realistic manner would be like adding nothing at all but more processing and the minor amounts that the weapons would be off by wouldn't be worth the addition.

[El Bandito]

Dakota1000, on 29 April 2017 - 09:35 AM, said:

I'd rather not let immersive things get in the way of skillful things. There are many other immersive features that don't just up and change the game at a fundamental level. Besides that, convergence is only immersive to some people, not all.

Many of us believe its absolutely stupid that a machine capable of walking and flying through the air with high levels of balance at speeds above 100kph would really suffer from something so basic as converging its lasers and other weapons. Honestly, half the guns have barrels big enough that they could just be setup to rotate and turn within their housings to some minor degree to converge perfectly. Not to mention you could find all the technology to keep a gun from bouncing around when moving inside of a school bus driver's seat.

Convergence times would be faster than arm movement speeds, which are already so fast they are nearly non existent, adding in actual convergence times in a realistic manner would be like adding nothing at all but more processing and the minor amounts that the weapons would be off by wouldn't be worth the addition.

And again, this is BT, with their own separate tech level than the real world--which helps it to set its own tone--just like WH40K. Heck, you yourself are not questioning 240 meter max range for a mech-grade machine gun.

Which is why stuff like instant convergence, or lack of heat penalty, are such a buzzkill, as it detracts from the BT experience.

I would definitely sacrifice immersive parts if it prevents game balance, but delayed convergence doesn't do that.

Edited by El Bandito, 29 April 2017 - 09:58 AM.

[Nesutizale]

Again argueing with "realworld". This isn't a realworld game, go play something like ARMA if you want that experiance.
Also to me its not about immersion but haveing a new game mechanic that gives heat more use other then limiting players builds as I rarely see anyone shutting down anymore. Most people have figured out builds that are nearly impossible to shut down or can be played that way.
We could basicly say drop heat alltogether and instead have a value that only applys in the mechbay for construction like weight.
Giveing heat a real meaning does add to the game, not only immersion wise but also for the gameplay.

Its also possible to argue why there is a shake when jumping around, shouldn't they have figured it out by 3xxx how that works?
Why does the cockpit shake? They could have figured it out!
Its gamemechanics that make sense and they can't be influanced by your skills as a player. You can't shake the mouse perfectly in the oposite direction of the screenshake to keep your aim, can you?
So by your logic that also would have to go and it was something that was added later on IIRC because JJ Sniping was a thing till it got changed.

Adding a new mechanic like the one discribed could actualy add to the game instead of limiting it. What it only realy limits is the amount of people who want to adapt. People who fear the change that brings to their "I am used to".

Same with the skilltree. Sure its not perfect but its a better idea then the old one. This one has at least a little bit of a risk/reward in it. Again not perfect but its a step in the right direction...would still go with a more liniar structure and higher costs the further down you go...but thats another story.

[Mystere]

Shifty McSwift, on 29 April 2017 - 04:32 AM, said:

The only modifier I think I would agree to is some kind of crosshair shake/shudder when near and or overheating or when losing a side torso. STD engines could be buffed to not get shake until they lose both STs mebbe, IDK, that's about the only place I would vote for applying it.

I don't get this fascination with reticle shake/shudder. It's visually annoying.

On the other hand, Reticle bloom is much more visually appealing and elegant while representing the same thing. People seem to forget that the reticle is part of the HUD and not a physical, mechanical crosshair.

[Satan n stuff]

El Bandito, on 29 April 2017 - 09:00 AM, said:

1. MW5 is not here yet, but once it arrives, I will play it.

If it arrives, I will wait for reviews and then maybe play it.

[Mystere]

Dakota1000, on 29 April 2017 - 03:54 AM, said:

I dislike dumbing things down in such a way and enjoy skill ceilings for people to work towards.

But is it really dumbing things down? Or is it just a technique used by people to put down other who disagree with them?

Ultimately, a player's actions determine how (in)accurate the shot would be.

Having said that, my preference is a convergence-based solution.

Edited by Mystere, 29 April 2017 - 12:54 PM.

[Mystere]

Alexander of Macedon, on 29 April 2017 - 05:35 AM, said:

Yeah, perfect convergence should not be the default. If you really want it, it should be an option akin to Artemis which you can select, increasing the cost and tonnage/crit slots of your weapons in order to add gimballed mounts. Like Art, it's a big enough advantage to be worth buying on some 'mechs, but would have others that don't want/can't use it.

The simplest solution is to require a lock for pinpoint convergence.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Mystere, on 29 April 2017 - 12:53 PM, said:

But is it really dumbing things down? Or is it just a technique used by people to put down other who disagree with them?

Ultimately, a player's actions determine how (in)accurate the shot would be.

Having said that, my preference is a convergence-based solution.

The reason I believe it dumbs it down is that it removes the possibility to have certain situations, such as in my running while overheating with one shot left scenarios. It replaces a high tension fight with requiring the players to stand still, cool down, likely just get back into cover to do those two things, then peek out again, stop, then fire accurately on the opponent.

People already complain quite a bit about brawling being dead and sniping with high alphas being the meta, well I see having a convergence system of this type as putting the nail in the coffin.

[Mystere]

Dakota1000, on 29 April 2017 - 08:18 AM, said:

Then I will recommend MW5 to you, instead of MWO. That game is set to be a slower paced and more immersive single player game experience rather than a multiplayer deathmatch vehicular combat arena.

I want a purely PVP game, which MW5 is not.

Also, immersion and skill are not mutually exclusive. I am really bewildered why people think they are.

Edited by Mystere, 29 April 2017 - 01:05 PM.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Mystere, on 29 April 2017 - 01:03 PM, said:

I want a purely PVP game, which MW5 is not.

Well, as they say: can't have your cake and eat it too.

[Mystere]

Dakota1000, on 29 April 2017 - 01:00 PM, said:

The reason I believe it dumbs it down is that it removes the possibility to have certain situations, such as in my running while overheating with one shot left scenarios. It replaces a high tension fight with requiring the players to stand still, cool down, likely just get back into cover to do those two things, then peek out again, stop, then fire accurately on the opponent.

People already complain quite a bit about brawling being dead and sniping with high alphas being the meta, well I see having a convergence system of this type as putting the nail in the coffin.

Why so? At close range, the size of the reticle bloom (if using CoF) or convergence distance (if using a convergence-based system) is not as significant to a brawler when compared to being in long range for a sniper.

Dakota1000, on 29 April 2017 - 01:04 PM, said:

Well, as they say: can't have your cake and eat it too.

Ah! But I can. I just need to beat PGI into submission.

[Nesutizale]

Dakota1000, on 29 April 2017 - 01:00 PM, said:

The reason I believe it dumbs it down is that it removes the possibility to have certain situations, such as in my running while overheating with one shot left scenarios. It replaces a high tension fight with requiring the players to stand still, cool down, likely just get back into cover to do those two things, then peek out again, stop, then fire accurately on the opponent.

People already complain quite a bit about brawling being dead and sniping with high alphas being the meta, well I see having a convergence system of this type as putting the nail in the coffin.

So you also think that has something to be done about the sniping. So a system where you have to stay on target to just increase your aim would work in that direction, wouldn't it?
The Sniper has to take more of a risk by exposing himself, still give him the option to make a quickshot.

You also seam to agree that alphas are a problem. So what can one do about it? Energydraw was PGIs try but it failed and I am kinda happy about it. It was to abstract to me.
So why not take something that is allready there? Heat can be used and allready is but only as an on/off switch. Since people have figured out how to build/play mechs to shot and cover while riding the red line without penalties it has become kinda of a joke.
Haveing a heatscale that slowly introduceses drawbacks in less mobility might be a good startingpoint.
I don't say that we should cripple a mech completly, that would, as you said, take out a lot of the action. Just make it so that you loose a little percentage of mobility...maybe 5% max? (Just throwing in a value to show what I mean by little)
Let the mech move, twist and move the arms slower overall. It dosn't prevent you from fighting in a brawl but be more causious over it because retreating isn't that much of an option.

Sure the idea needs some more work in detail but it should add a bit of a risk/reward to both sniping and brawling and it needs a skilled player.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Nesutizale, on 29 April 2017 - 01:14 PM, said:

So you also think that has something to be done about the sniping. So a system where you have to stay on target to just increase your aim would work in that direction, wouldn't it?
The Sniper has to take more of a risk by exposing himself, still give him the option to make a quickshot.

You also seam to agree that alphas are a problem. So what can one do about it? Energydraw was PGIs try but it failed and I am kinda happy about it. It was to abstract to me.
So why not take something that is allready there? Heat can be used and allready is but only as an on/off switch. Since people have figured out how to build/play mechs to shot and cover while riding the red line without penalties it has become kinda of a joke.
Haveing a heatscale that slowly introduceses drawbacks in less mobility might be a good startingpoint.
I don't say that we should cripple a mech completly, that would, as you said, take out a lot of the action. Just make it so that you loose a little percentage of mobility...maybe 5% max? (Just throwing in a value to show what I mean by little)
Let the mech move, twist and move the arms slower overall. It dosn't prevent you from fighting in a brawl but be more causious over it because retreating isn't that much of an option.

Sure the idea needs some more work in detail but it should add a bit of a risk/reward to both sniping and brawling and it needs a skilled player.

I see neither sniping nor high alphas as a problem honestly. I just feel that people should be able to pick their mech after they see the map so that brawlers don't get put into maps where they aren't useful. I say just slap some more armor on things and decrease cooldowns a bit and PPFLD ends up less impactful just for not having enough damage per minute to get by as it does now. Though this is irrelevant to the topic at hand.

I see no problem in making the mech a bit slower when overheating before shutting down and having some sensor scrambling, but I just want to keep the concept of your damage going directly where you aimed it.

Mystere, on 29 April 2017 - 01:12 PM, said:

Why so? At close range, the size of the reticle bloom (if using CoF) or convergence distance (if using a convergence-based system) is not as significant to a brawler when compared to being in long range for a sniper.

Ah! But I can. I just need to beat PGI into submission.

I would assume a sniper would rarely have much if any reticle bloom, as they are further back and firing gauss and ERPPCs and taking cover. As for brawlers, I just think of worst case scenarios when people ask for cone of fire without solid numbers. I don't know if being at 80% heat makes your shots go 80 degrees off target or if moving makes your reticle bounce side to side in stride.

Fear of the unknown man.

[invernomuto]

SteelBruiser, on 29 April 2017 - 07:03 AM, said:

Yup, realism. With today's technology our tanks can hit moving targets while moving at high rates of speed, our missiles can take town other missiles before they hit their target, and we have aircraft that can destroy tanks, buildings and other structures on the ground from thousands of feet in the air while nearly out of sight of the enemy and we have targeting systems that will allow a fighter jet to simultaneously target, track and launch fire and forget missiles at multiple targets with a respectable hit rate. However, far into the future these guys would never have been able to correct a simple convergence issue? Folks keep trying to devolve the possible technology in these things, as if they could never have improved past the 80286 microprocessor.

Very true, but we're discussing about a *game* that is based on a completely unrealistic concepts, like the existence of Battlemechs or some fancy armor penetration mechanics.
The idea that a weapon can "strip off" armor from a vehicle is a silly one. WH40K, a very simple sci-fi miniature game, has more "realistic" rules for armor vehicles penetration.
There's no "realism" on BT. There is only "coherence" of MWO with BT universe: mostrly with BT TT rules, but also with BT lore and novels. Of course, PGI have to put some limits and exceptions in order to have MWO playable by the majority of players.
In my opinion, TTK need to go up, expecially for assaults. In MWO we do not have the random damage spread that we have in TT rules. I second any idea that helps to randomize the damage a little bit, in order to increase TTK. In that sense, elimination of pinpoint convergence or adding aiming penalities in some circumstances is something that is at least is worth to discuss.
Another solution (but will take us away from BT rules) is to have more "hit locations" respect to the TT game. The real problem here is that we're basing a real time computer game on a very simplified TT rules: It's like basing something like World of Tank on Risiko! rules... You cannot ask for realism if you're tied to 3d6 dices to determine the results of the battles.

Edited by invernomuto, 29 April 2017 - 01:57 PM.

[MauttyKoray]

I dislike the idea of a CoF, however I do believe there should be some sort of factor to base around realism.

Something along the lines of Weapon Sway which affects your aim dependent upon the movement of your mech. If you're moving fact enough to full out run, or in the case of the slowest mech, bouncing heavily, it should affect your weapons aim with a degree of sway. This would factor into having 'skill' for the pilot being able to determine when to increase/restrict movement and having a difference between fire/forget weapons such as ballistics/missiles/PPCs in comparison to DoT weapons such as lasers, UACs, RACs, etc.

Another could be a mechanic suggested many times which includes a combination of changing the torso weapons to simulate that they are actually spaced apart and not on a 'turret' like the arm weapons are which would cause them to not all be aimed at the pinpoint crosshair and be affected by distance. As well as the mechanic that would actually add 'Convergence' into the game and affect arm mounted weapons to 'adjust' to distance of a target. It would differ in time depending on how far the distance you're adjusting to is, being that a change of 100m could be nothing while changing focus from 300m to 700m could be take possibly up to nearly a full second.

The second suggestion is the less preferred in adding an additional layer of 'pilot skill' to the game affecting combat as its more dependent upon the computer's system and not your actual skill as a player making decisions on how to be effective in a given situation. The first is my preferred method, as it would add both flavor and a more sim-like mechanic to the game which also reflects a lore-friendly aspect of the Battletech Universe. From reading the books and tabletop rules, it should be harder to hit a target while you are moving faster, thus I believe this mechanic would reflect it fairly well.