244 replies to this topic

[Amarus Cameron]

Hmmmm, wanted to put a vote in both pilot skill and probabilistic, I think skill should be involved but also I think as you get hit your mech should rock and throw off your aim as your gyro compensates for the impact.

[Obso1337]

I think the description for the poll was a bit misleading, I would have voted for probabilistic. Your aiming reticule should expand or contract based on movement, if your mech is standing with both feet level or if you are climbing, etc. If it is too randomized, then good players will get frustrated when they miss 15 Gauss Cannon shots at 800m and get blasted by a lucky AC at 1000m.....

Also, having pilot skill would add sort of an RPG element, but might discourage new players. Should remain player skill.

Edited by Obso1337, 03 November 2011 - 03:51 AM.

[Infine]

tyrant, on 03 November 2011 - 03:39 AM, said:

I would suggest people play WoT at Tier 8 to 10 and try and hit something on a tank at 300m, you will be happy if you can get a ricochet let alone a penetrating hit, most of the time a complete wiff and rage at the IS7 for having OP hit boxes and the inability to hit its weak points specifically due to the randomized aiming.

As a WoT player having a T30 with its arty gun, I vote for probablistic. Generally considering the WoT example to be sort of relevant here.

[Varador]

Even though i voted for Probabilistic i think that the three choices are limited by the fact that different weapons would work better under one of each of the choices. Lasers, ACs and Missles, respectively. Although i am sure with which ever the developers go for they would have no real complaint from the community as we can all adapt to each of the three.

I play WoT as well under a different name and its generally a good model for how shooting works, but i also agree with what someone said earlier, if they have the tech to make a giant walking death machine, they can make something that can shoot straighter than a 40s tank, regardless of situation.

[Asmudius Heng]

I think the the guns should not be locked to hit center screen but have some drift (cone of fire, reticle sway or something)

This is slightly random - but the skill of the shooter is still there as it is combined with piloting as well.

Other shooters do this all the time. Any infnatry shooter makes your gun inaccuracte when you are running and jumping like a rabid frog, but when you crouch and look down the crosshairs you get your pinpoint accuracy ... but you are a sitting suck if someone else draws a bead on you.

Mechs need time to start and slow and so forth so the pinpoint accuracy would take a lot longer to get to but this is all a part of gunnery and piloting skill.

So in the end what hits will end up being a little more random than you might think - but if you could see exact wheer the shot will hit but that reticle is swaying over the place then you have the randomness but a skilled player can still control it - or even snap shot if the reticle sways correclty and he takes advantage of a quick trigger pull.

Mechwarrior 'skill' is more than just aiming though so your aim will not be the only factor in your success which i like

[Hagan]

Probabilistic is the better option I think. Mech shake from movement, weather, humidity, arm and leg actuators adjusting to range and battlefield conditions and incoming fire, all would have an effect on hit rates. Its more realistic and makes ranged warfare that much more of a player skill, which I think is good for this type of game and genre.

[Infine]

Varador, on 03 November 2011 - 04:04 AM, said:

I play WoT as well under a different name and its generally a good model for how shooting works, but i also agree with what someone said earlier, if they have the tech to make a giant walking death machine, they can make something that can shoot straighter than a 40s tank, regardless of situation.

The problem is 4km engagement ranges don't really work in entertaining games. It's hard to make dynamic combat when you need 5 minutes to close in on the enemy.

[John Clavell]

It seems like a pro-ballistics approach might be on the table, or a system in between skill placed shots and pro-ballistic. The FAQ might give some general hints beyond the description of LRM Targeting;



Q. Will LRMs in MechWarrior® Online™ be guided or unguided?

A. LRMs will be semi-guided. What the heck does that mean? You will be able to lock on to your target but it doesn't mean the actual missiles will home directly to the target. The chance of missing will still be part of LRM gameplay. Use of the Artemis IV system and subsequent munitions, will narrow the area of damage by focusing the flight paths of the missiles. We're finding that this is a good balance between gameplay and staying true to the BattleTech canon.



From this I get the impression that pilot stats or skills which we know will be upgradeable will play a role with this. Also they talk about Mech systems and munitions playing a further role. Expect to see stuff like Targeting Computers and such other technologies as they become available within the timeline, and within your C-Bill budget.

Edited by John Clavell, 03 November 2011 - 04:18 AM.

[Havoc2]

John Clavell, on 03 November 2011 - 04:15 AM, said:

It seems like a pro-ballistics approach might be on the table, or a system in between skill placed shots and pro-ballistic. The FAQ might give some general hints beyond the description of LRM Targeting;



Q. Will LRMs in MechWarrior® Online™ be guided or unguided?

A. LRMs will be semi-guided. What the heck does that mean? You will be able to lock on to your target but it doesn't mean the actual missiles will home directly to the target. The chance of missing will still be part of LRM gameplay. Use of the Artemis IV system and subsequent munitions, will narrow the area of damage by focusing the flight paths of the missiles. We're finding that this is a good balance between gameplay and staying true to the BattleTech canon.



From this I get the impression that pilot stats or skills which we know will be upgradeable will play a role with this. Also they talk about Mech systems and munitions playing a further role. Expect to see stuff like Targeting Computers and such other technologies as they become available within the timeline, and within your C-Bill budget.

I think this is a good move.

The devs have already stated that electronics will be a part of this game. Even though MW4 (and MW3 IIRC) had targeting upgrades and ECM etc, none of it really worked well enough to give advantages (except maybe AMS).
Upgrading your electronics skill (or however the progression is determined) could do things like open up upgraded electronics to improve gyros, allow missile lock faster, prevent target reticle from bouncing around as much, make missile locks against you take longer etc.

Something I'd like to see (and would aid in creating a niche for recon specific 'Mechs/players) would be to allow recon oriented 'Mechs to detect loadouts on enemy 'Mechs, maybe jam targeting computers preventing/lengthening missile lock times and causing direct fire weapons to be less accurate. It would be awesome if these were active abilities so that recon or ECMMs (Electronic Counter Measure 'Mechs) were able to help their teammates by jamming enemies and not just protecting themselves.

[Stahlseele]

Look at my Sig and despair!

[SilverWings]

Pilot skill. Even the gunner of an M1A2 Abrams can hit his mark easily while the tank is on the move. The only thing that should affect your shot, beside ballistics and weather of course is whether or not you get hit hard enough to rock your mech.

[gilliam]

I think there should be some skill in properly lining up the target, but you shouldn't have every single weapon hit exactly where an unmoving reticule is pointed. There should either be some deviation from the reticule, or the reticule should move around a bit to represent your weapons shifting off your aim point by being jostled from running or being hit by something.

infinite xÆr0, on 02 November 2011 - 06:24 PM, said:

All of those options are applicable to different weapons, but none of those options alone would be good for ALL the weapons. For example. Lasers and PPC's should be point and shoot. AC's should have some probabilistic deviation, especially at range, and LRM's are more or less guided by a targeting computer.

The1WithTheGun, on 02 November 2011 - 06:26 PM, said:

Yeah but then everyone will load up on lasers and PPCs and that's it. The Ostroc and Ostol will be two of the most popular heavies in the game!

It will be interesting to see how the devs deal with this issue.

Lasers should hit exactly where they are aimed (baring minor refraction due to atmospheric conditions), but it doesn't have to mean players should have the ability to precisely place the shots every time when running at full speed. THe mech is moving up an down, and the torso and arms would be moving to maintain balance, and that would interfere with getting a clear firing solution for all of your weaponry.

Aim should be part of good gunnery, but knowing how to manage the conditions that futz with your aim and knowing the exact moment when to pull which trigger should also be very important.

[Barantor]

Kazimir Kerensky, on 03 November 2011 - 07:31 AM, said:

Pilot skill. Even the gunner of an M1A2 Abrams can hit his mark easily while the tank is on the move. The only thing that should affect your shot, beside ballistics and weather of course is whether or not you get hit hard enough to rock your mech.

The thing is though is that the Battletech universe doesn't work like pure modern day tech. There have been dark ages and renaissances of technology, so much so that some of the tech in the mechs themselves aren't even fully understood. Add to that fact that a lot of these mechs are antiques and are handed down generations and you end up with computer systems and wiring nightmares.

Think of it like an old 1940s car that was owned by grandad and hotrodded back then. Then your dad owned it, then you.. but imagine that without any communication between the generations and large gaps where it may not have been maintained properly...

Mechs =! Modern Battletanks

[DMG Downslide]

Barantor, on 03 November 2011 - 08:05 AM, said:

The thing is though is that the Battletech universe doesn't work like pure modern day tech. There have been dark ages and renaissances of technology, so much so that some of the tech in the mechs themselves aren't even fully understood. Add to that fact that a lot of these mechs are antiques and are handed down generations and you end up with computer systems and wiring nightmares.

Think of it like an old 1940s car that was owned by grandad and hotrodded back then. Then your dad owned it, then you.. but imagine that without any communication between the generations and large gaps where it may not have been maintained properly...

Mechs =! Modern Battletanks

Instead of an old 1940's car, think of it as a Sherman tank, or a Hellcat or a Mustang. Point and shoot. It was ALL in the skill back then.

I'm excited to see what they do to develop the ins and outs of combat. I agree that a hybrid of Proballistic and Pilot's skillset should be considered. I also think that environmental effects, such as terrain, weather conditions, movement, and atmosphere should be considered. Electronic warfare cannot be forgotten either. ECM, and stealth technologies, Electromagnetic disturbances, all of it will affect how your 'mech's targeting systems and sensors relay data to the pilot who takes the shot.

One of the things I REALLY hope they include for the teamwork side of Lance mates is Indirect Fire, and data relay between scouts and heavies. I want to see the Archer behind the hill, looking at his sensor readouts, and see on the map the highlighted target baddie that's being 'painted' by the Raven out there scampering for its life. Or being in that Raven and watching 40 LRMs arc over the hill and pound into said baddie.

[TheRulesLawyer]

Probabilistic. Pinpoint aim has caused nothing but problems in the MW series. Get rid of it. Pretty much any FPS in the last 10 years uses probabilistic and it works.

[Mchawkeye]

Seems to me that this is entirely the sort of aspect that should be simulated; the TT solution to this doesn't seem appropriate when, as the pilot in the mech, you will have to deal with recoil, impact hits, terrain and movement ******** your aim up. Perhaps it needs to be worked on to improve it from the likes of mech4, but I think you should hit where you aim, so to speak.
I get annoyed enough playing normal FPS when aberrations occur thanks to some accuracy statistic or bug, even when your up point blank range and yet somehow you miss.

[GhostHack]

What about..... a hybrid?

Low "level" (rookie?) mechs utilize probabilistic mechanisms to augment the pilots abilities.. However, as you progress, those mechanics on new mechs come either less frequently, or with greater draw backs....
...basically, the difference between a vet and a rook (apart from load out) is how much hands-on control their willing to have.


if managed well, you could even set it up so that the Probability drives are advantageous, and in some ways balance out first teir mechs (making it possible for rookies to have value in a bigger fight), but as you get better and better mechs, those advantages go away, requiring you to step up your game and get better...



...basically, "leveling" in the game is teaching you to be a better pilot in a real sense, rather than arbitrary XP and better gear.

[Tarteso]

Pure skill. Random/probabilistic is good for the tabletop game, but in a computer game YOU can aim. I know why most of you want a more or less random model: boating and monster alpha strikes. But these issues can be solved by other ways, thought.

I agree with Devs about LRMs: a swarm of missiles can't have pinpoint accuracy, far less if the target is moving or trying to dodge them. A better guidance system (Artemis) = better and more hits.
But there are also weapons travelling at light speed or very close: lasers and PPCs. They should hit where you put the reticle. A different story is where the reticle is while your mech is jumping and running.
And ballistics are ballistics. You (or your targeting computer) need to know where is going to be the target a few seconds after you fire.

How all these weapon can work together in a mech? The MW4 approach is good enough IMO. If you fire 3 LL and a gauss to the target, running away laterally at 700m you know the lasers are going to hit, but the gauss will miss because the target has move away from that location. If you lag shoot thinking in the gauss, the lasers will miss because they don't have virtually any travel time. So, you have to aim separately each one.

[Zack Falcon]

I'm going with Probabilistic.

Each part of the 'mech acts differently. You can still, generally, point, shoot, and expect the weapon to deliver something close to that. But the real 'skill' required wouldn't be simply point and shoot. You have to know your 'mech. You have to know which weapon will deliver maximum damage when you want it. You have to know if the range of your radar is limiting the usefulness of your Long Range Missiles. You have to know where a Light Gauss rifle would hit where an AC would fail, perhaps due to range, or other factors. You have to know if a certain weapon is less effective when your 'mech is running hot. You have to know the location of your components, where this weapon is mounted as such, so while at a certain range your PPCs converge and become a deadly, two-in-one punch, at close range they fire too wide to hit anything short of an Atlas. And of course the accuracy will be different. Rotary AC? You can forget about hitting something if you just aim, fire, and hold (whereas in MW4: Mercenaries, if you carry enough of this, enough ammo, and aim for the right parts, you have yourself a death ray). Controlled bursts are more likely to succeed. And a component that takes a hit will have entirely new statistics to master.

Something to think about, though; will the pilots be able to manually aim / correct each of the weapons? I'm assuming you can slightly tilt the Gauss Rifle mounted on the arm for better accuracy at a certain range, but what about torso mounted weapons?

[SteelSpectre]

I'm getting behind the hybrid option. Hitting whatever is exactly in the middle of the reticule turns this into a FPS for twitch-gamers, which is simply not in the spirit of MW. It also cuts down on the variety of encounter dynamics. While it may be realistic for them to create super-accurate targeting assist technology, the problem is that if you just hit exactly wherever you were aiming, everything would quickly devolve into grabbing any mech with a PPC or Gauss Rifle and run around shooting everyone else in the head. There would be very little variety in the battles, and very little variety in the mechs themselves. Things like LRMs would become useless. It would just be a slow FPS.

On the other hand, it makes no goddamm sense at all (and is terribly frustrating) to put your crosshairs right on their left arm or their head and hit them in the right leg.

Having a sort of "probability density" or distribution allows for trainable skills to play a role, stays closer to the BTech rules, and keeps the engagements strategic and varied, without throwing actual player piloting skill out the window.

Edited by SteelSpectre, 03 November 2011 - 12:54 PM.