80 replies to this topic

[Linkin]

El Bandito, on 08 June 2017 - 08:10 AM, said:

Anything to add immersion. Lock based accuracy is up in that valley. Same deal with progressive heat penalty, and knockbacks.

WTB more immersion, yes plz.

Deathlike, on 08 June 2017 - 09:32 AM, said:

This would simply be a massive buff to brawling, and would just invalidate the purpose of a lot of long range weaponry...

If you like your SRMs and Streaks, you're going to love it.

If you like your Gauss (charge), PPC, and PPCs (particularly IS), and ERLL you're going to hate yourself.

Or, maybe it would open the room for more of an actual scout/spotter role for the long range units?

Jiang Wei, on 08 June 2017 - 01:32 PM, said:

Lets just remove skill from the game entirely and let the casuals rule.

Maybe you meant this in a way I am not getting... but, wouldn't you say, needing to acquire a lock, hold it, and then take your shot, takes more skill than just clicking the mouse button as soon as you can and having all your weapons hit?

End quote response:

IIRC didn't MW3 require locks to fire on specific components or something like that? I would be all for target lock for perfect convergence, or reticle bloom like Mystere mentions (if IIRC again, that's from War Thunder). I mean, I know its a game, and it is based on a SciFi future, advanced tech and targeting and all that, but a multi-ton walking war machine with instant perfect convergence seems off.

[VanillaG]

Johnny Z, on 08 June 2017 - 04:13 PM, said:

Here is a video I put on this forum a couple times in response to these sorts of topics.

This video shows a semi automatic gun with recoil. Regular players have to deal with these mechanics while this bot does not. Other players in that video are running bots. That game is infested.

Mechwarrior online does have bots and legit players can do ok against them unless they are rage hacking and then they get perma banned quick. At least I hope they do. Although seen a guy get 9 kills just yesterday... who was hacking or cheating.

When I see this topic all I see is an aim botter asking for mechanics that will hinder legit players even more.

By the way MechWarrior Online has a serious problem with bot users. Like many other games that were destroyed by hackers its a serious problem.

Except the aimbot would affected by the reticle bloom/shake just like a normal player since this game is server authorative. Basically instead of sending up just where the mouse is pointing you are also sending up additional information that allows you to draw a circle around that point. Without a target lock, running full speed, and with high heat you would be lucky to hit another mech because of the size of the circle and the semi random nature of where the shot falls in that circle.

The new skill would be piloting your mech in a way that minimizes the size of the aiming circle not just snapping your mouse over to specific location and having all of your damage land on 1 pixel. The only thing an aimbot would do with these mechanics would be increase the chances of the damage hitting the mech but it would in no way guarantee a hit in a specific location, especially without a lock.

Edited by VanillaG, 08 June 2017 - 05:01 PM.

[Ted Wayz]

WrathOfDeadguy, on 08 June 2017 - 01:03 PM, said:

Zero convergence is all weapons firing directly forward (or convergence set for infinite range). If you have multiple weapons close together on a single component, then even if they do not converge at all then they will still be able to produce single component accuracy. That makes a group of six lasers in a 2x6 grid quite powerful, and able to deliver high-damage precision snap-shots that the same number of weapons spaced across multiple components would not be able to give you if there were a mechanic requiring target locks (with the delay that entails) for weapon convergence.

The only way around that is to introduce a mechanic where weapon fire can scatter beyond zero convergence, which makes about as much sense as PGI's magic teleporting smokebomb artillery spotting mechanic.

I think you miss my point. You say no convergence, blind fire, but I am saying the weapons could use a default range or last range if no lock is achieved. This would circumvent the issue you bring up. Capiche?

Edited by Ted Wayz, 08 June 2017 - 05:26 PM.

[SuomiWarder]

A different approach could be setting your converge distance in Mechlab, like the WWII fighters of old who would set their machine guns to cross a set distance in front of them. So you set the range where everything comes together pinpoint. Outside of that there is drift.

[Valhallan]

The system is actually already coded in to a degree, in 3PV moving induces reticle sway so just have that reticle sway be the standard instead of just in 3pv, of course this will significantly buff the already strong cerppc/cgauss meta So i dunno how i feel about that .

[Deathlike]

Linkin, on 08 June 2017 - 02:25 PM, said:

Or, maybe it would open the room for more of an actual scout/spotter role for the long range units?

It would not.

One of the problems with Lights when you're trying to scout is if/when you get "too close" (it doesn't necessarily mean brawl range... this includes mid-range), you can be damaged fast enough to not be able to spot. It's one of the biggest problems with LRM spotting via Lights (whether it is by TAG or NARC) and usually not worth making a Light less effective at fighting their own kind (let alone be totally dependent on the LRM boat to deal damage).

[Gamuray]

process, on 08 June 2017 - 08:18 AM, said:

I don't know why they can't just, by default, set the target-under-reticle range to something near infinite or maybe like 10,000 meters. Conceptually, all your guns would be parallel to one another. This convergence range would remain fixed until a target is locked, at which point the convergence range follows the target.

We already have this in practice -- see wide mechs shooting at close range.

I'm less fond of penalties to movement and heat, I feel like that just encourages camping, but I'm not opposed.

This sir. This is what I've suggested many a times... have your weapons shoot where they point. Guns can't shoot diagonal out of their barrel! This is realistic. This reduces pinpoint accuracy. The only thing I would say is that The only convergence one should get is with arm weapons. If you want pinpoint, you'll need to deal with lower hardpoints that fall off easier. Good tradeoff, difficult decision.

Anyways. Let the weapons shoot where they point! No convergence without a lock (or infinite convergence as you suggest)

[Mystere]

WrathOfDeadguy, on 08 June 2017 - 11:07 AM, said:

...um. The problem is that the 'Mech with the cluster always gets the first shot ...

WrathOfDeadguy, on 08 June 2017 - 01:03 PM, said:

Zero convergence is all weapons firing directly forward (or convergence set for infinite range). If you have multiple weapons close together on a single component, then even if they do not converge at all then they will still be able to produce single component accuracy. That makes a group of six lasers in a 2x6 grid quite powerful, and able to deliver high-damage precision snap-shots that the same number of weapons spaced across multiple components would not be able to give you if there were a mechanic requiring target locks (with the delay that entails) for weapon convergence.

The only way around that is to introduce a mechanic where weapon fire can scatter beyond zero convergence, which makes about as much sense as PGI's magic teleporting smokebomb artillery spotting mechanic.

Ah! But if you allow players to dial in their own default convergence distance, the smart ones will set them to something suitable to their play style.

Using your HBK-4P example, assuming it is using 6 MLs, those weapons can do nothing to a fully tricked out and high torso-mounted (C)ERPPC boat firing from 1000m. A good shot can take out the HBK's weapons before he can even come close to being a threat.

Edited by Mystere, 08 June 2017 - 07:05 PM.

[Kubernetes]

VanillaG, on 08 June 2017 - 07:39 AM, said:

I would be fine with pinpoint convergence if you had to have a target lock to get it, but being able to poke out of cover and blast an alpha with pinpoint accuracy has nothing to do with skill.

Once I read nonsense like this I know that only more nonsense follows.

[Kangarad]

I Disagree. this would make ecm stronger.

also
how else would you hit something with both KGC claws. the distance between the claws is wider than any other mech.


no Srsly, if Pinpoint accuracy aka accurate to the point of aim goes away then mechs like the kdk3 that have high mounted gun clusters will get another boost over mechs that arent...
like the warhawk, the KGC and quite alot of other mechs actualy...

Id like to keep that stuff for balance sake.

because this? this ***** up non perfect mechs even more.

[Brain Cancer]

Deathlike, on 08 June 2017 - 06:29 PM, said:

It would not.

One of the problems with Lights when you're trying to scout is if/when you get "too close" (it doesn't necessarily mean brawl range... this includes mid-range), you can be damaged fast enough to not be able to spot. It's one of the biggest problems with LRM spotting via Lights (whether it is by TAG or NARC) and usually not worth making a Light less effective at fighting their own kind (let alone be totally dependent on the LRM boat to deal damage).

Part of the reason NARCs are so fantastic for lights is you don't have to sit there. Zip by, pod something, GTFO.

But mediums or fast heavies can be excellent spotters as well. We had a Dragon of all things that got like three NARC kills on Forest using that otherwise ignored CT missile hardpoint along with some laser love.

[Brain Cancer]

Kubernetes, on 08 June 2017 - 07:06 PM, said:

Once I read nonsense like this I know that only more nonsense follows.

The only reason you can do it now is because convergence as it was screwed up the game. You could watch snap-shooters in beta literally cross the PPC streams about fifty meters in front of their nose because they stepped out, a Jenner had ran in front while they did, and the guns decided it was better to focus at the light's range instead of the actual target.

Dynamic convergence like that can't be done. We have perfect convergence now. Something in between like a binary convergence (lock vs no lock) would be nice.

[Helene de Montfort]

Pinpoint accuracy was the worst design in MWO from the start. I'm not expecting much from MW5, but if i see pinpoint accuracy there again, i'm certainly not going to buy that crap (well, to be honest, i don't intend to, maybe once it's under 10€).

A simple way to deal with accuracy would be to have a convergence distance set for each weapon group in mechlab, same as you have for WW2 planes in combat sims.

The best would have been CoF, but it seem that PGI is incapable of doing it.

[Cyrilis]

TL DR...

in case nobody brought this up, here is my idea, in case anybody posted already, sorry for the killsteal:

Stage 1: if you are firing two weapons e.g. in your arms and you aim far high into the air, you should have two parallel beam or parallel traveling projectiles.
Stage 2: if you put your crosshairs on a target without R'ing it, it takes the mechs targeting device [insert abritrary number here] seconds to reach pinpoint acc. Thus, if you fire prematurely, pinpoint is behind the target -> you hit two components (just the same way when you lead a shot now, you don't have pinpint... mechanics are already coded, I think)
Stage 3: if you R'ing the target it takes a bit less time to reach pinpoint acc.
Stage 4: R'ing + BAP
Stage 5: R'ing + BAP + TC I
...
...
...
Endgame pinpoint: R'ing + BAP + TC VI -> Instant pinpoint as we have it now.

[mike29tw]

Oops, replied to the wrong thread. Don't mind me

Edited by mike29tw, 08 June 2017 - 11:26 PM.

[Tarogato]

VanillaG, on 08 June 2017 - 07:39 AM, said:

Almost every FPS has three different types of weapons spreads; running is largest, walking is in the middle, and zoomed in/sighted is the smallest. All MWO has is free zoomed in pinpoint aiming while running which is somewhat broken. You should have to work/build to get that pinpoint convergence, not just assume that get it for free. I don't think that PGI can implement delayed convergence for technical reasons so I would be fine with reticle shake like when a mech jumps.

Even the best players in the game can't consistently CT a moving mech while moving. So yeah... we may have perpetual pinpoint perfect convergence, but that doesn't mean we always hit what we're shooting, even being so blessed.

If everybody could insta-core moving mechs while moving nearly 100% of the time, then your argument would hold water.

Edited by Tarogato, 09 June 2017 - 12:31 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Dakota1000, on 08 June 2017 - 10:05 AM, said:

With frontloaded damage weapons being forced into chain fire what reason is there to even bring them compared to the much more damage to weight efficient lasers? Even now they aren't as commonly seen as lasers, just mostly used by the meta and comp crowds.

Of course there will be. They are still frontloaded pinpoint damage. Lasers will need more face time and more steady aim, too.

And in theory, different weight and sizes should be balancing by different heat levels and damage levels and rate of fire. If they aren't, as usual, some of the values gotta be tweaked.

[Kubernetes]

What exactly is the problem again? TTK? Or that direct fire is significantly stronger than indirect fire? And your solution to that (assuming we need one in the first place) is to gimp direct-fire? No thanks.

Edited by Kubernetes, 09 June 2017 - 02:02 AM.

[Almond Brown]

Greyhart, on 08 June 2017 - 07:53 AM, said:

snip

But no one will be able to provide another game that does pin point accuracy and perfect convergence.

more snip

And it is also true that very few, if any other games, allow one player to FIRE as many as 12 weapons all at the same time. So what is your point again?

P.S. Just for giggles, Here is a Blog about how one guy tried to write a Algorithm for a Bullet/Projectile fired in a video game. Interesting if you like deep Maths... Now multiply and solution by as many as 12 units and with 23 other Players, also all capable of the same.

P.S. And we wish every Hit or Miss verified every time.

Edited by Almond Brown, 09 June 2017 - 06:19 AM.

[VanillaG]

Kubernetes, on 09 June 2017 - 01:58 AM, said:

What exactly is the problem again? TTK? Or that direct fire is significantly stronger than indirect fire? And your solution to that (assuming we need one in the first place) is to gimp direct-fire? No thanks.

The problem is that weapons that require a lock to use are inferior to the weapons that do not. With ballistics and lasers you can play the entire game without hitting the R key and get maximum weapon performance, up to your skill level at putting the crosshairs on a target. At the same time weapons that require locks are at a disadvantage because there is no incentive to hit the R key so that other players on your team share the lock to hit the target.

So my solution is to require target lock for ballistic and lasers to get the equivalent performance that they can get right now with just putting the crosshairs on the target without a lock. I am under no illusions that this will somehow make LRMs and Streaks comparable to direct fire weapons. They will always be inferior because they spread damage, but by requiring the lock it brings the two different types of weapons closer together. It also has the benefit of making this more of sim than the FPS shooter it currently is. The new measure of skill would be piloting your mech in manner to minimize your reticle size, thus being able to put more precise fire onto a target.