|
Post by Yogaphobe on Aug 18, 2015 8:12:14 GMT
I know there was already a thread about what everyone would want to see in a MechWarrior game. What I'm starting this thread for is something a bit more specific.
Suppose you were to make a single player focused MechWarrior game. What aspects would you take from the previous games? Which ones would you leave out? Basically I want to know what drew you all to your respective favorites within the franchise.
Personally, this is how I would do it:
From MechWarrior 2 I would take the immersive feeling of your Mechs computer giving you all the details of the missions planet. I would include being deployed from your drop ship and traveling to the mission objectives from it, and then to a dust off point afterwards. These are things which occasionally made appearances in later games, but it was rare and I think that's a shame.
From MechWarrior 3 I would take the animation quality, and the extremely detailed cockpits. In MechWarrior 3 I really feel like I am physically inside the cockpit, more so than in any of the other Battletech/MechWarrior games I've played. The lore is really brought to life by the visual and auditory presentation of the game. I would also bring in the various options for how to pilot your mechs, and the depth that was brought in by the electronics systems, Particularly C3 Systems and Targeting Computers.
And From MechWarrior 4 I would bring in the hard-point system which allowed the different mechs to really stand out from one another, but I would try to change it so you still had the complexity and depth of the MW3 Mechbay, without losing the accessibility and simplicity. I believe they actually tried this with MW:O but...everyone knows how that ended up.
In terms of controls and designs, I would look for a happy medium between MechWarrior 3 and 4. I love the feeling of 3's animations and pace, but felt like the knockback of auto-cannons and LRMs really messed up the balancing, whereas 4 has very good weapon balance (in my experience) but the movement is just a tad bit too fast on most mechs. I like how MechWarrior 3's aesthetic really brings Battletech to life, but the proportions end up leaving many of the mechs looking like they're going to fall over if so much as a breeze touches them. MechWarrior 4 has a very clean and effective military look, but ends up losing a lot of the late 80's/early 90's feeling and fails to deliver on the more exotic Clanner designs (with a few exceptions here and there).
So....yeah. What would you do if you were in charge of a MechWarrior title?
|
|
|
Post by AncientxFreako on Aug 18, 2015 17:11:03 GMT
Haha...are you kidding me? I could make a day-long project out of answering this one. No joke.
I agree with your points about what you would take from Mech2: but with much greater detail..literal drops from the ship to ground. And if a mech is in the wake of a dropship's thrusters it can be destroyed...so there need to be drop warnings and protocols. And before that maybe have war room briefings. Dustoffs with battles/dropship cover-fire and so forth depending on the situation...things like having to wait for other mechs to make the dust-off point..maybe having to go back and save a lancemate, hell you could have half a mission be about the dust-off. Maybe a lancemate ejected on his way in and now you have to have half your lance defend the dropship while you try and protect a rescue vehicle that goes out to recover your lancemate. And the immersive feel from computer info--absolutely: mission objectives; planetary conditions; topographical satellite maps like in mech3; drone info; Enemy mech config scans..i.e. what weapons they have loaded; I would combine mech3's missile warnings and mech4's "weapons fire" directional with the attacking enemy visually flashing on the radar; The hud would be like 'mech3 but better...even though the arms might not be able to go everywhere you look your hud should be omnidirectional...so that you could do fire and forget with missiles like they can do in an F-22 raptor...but it would only work with streak missiles and ATM's. OH...some 'mechs have weapons that are mounted on the back of a 'mech and meant to attack to the rear...let's have those too...along with their applicable targeting hud.
From 'Mech3 I would take most things: How the Mechs look but with better detail obviously; How they move, running and walking...how they jump-jet but I guess it would be canon to get rid of relaxed jump-jets. I would add ejection and try to fit it into still being able to continue the mission. 'Mech nuke I would keep and have it in multiplayer...but there would have to be a heavy penalty for allowing your mech to nuke in multiplayer because it could be used as a cheat...like, your screenname gone forever. It would have to be an arbitrary thing, because sometimes maybe it wouldn't be on purpose. Or maybe not, I don't know.
I would make all the weapons just like in 'Mech3, and just like I altered them in my mods...but for all forms of autocannons (except lbx's, RAC, and certain special munitions) I would add a "burst-fire/single-fire" toggle to the controls...and I would add special munitions to applicable AC's. Another thing I would add to all ballistic weapons is a shell eject animation, so basically any "hard point" on a mech that is supposed to fire some kind of ballistic weapon would have shell eject go with it...giving a good excuse/explanation for rejecting other weapons. (ammo feed/shell eject).
Other things I've given thought to regarding weapons are different range types per weapon, which would be greater than the stated range. Basically, missiles and ballistics don't simply evaporate into thin air once they've reached their stated range without hitting. So, in my view you've got 3 ranges...Btech canon range, which is the range of most useful accuracy, then roughly double that or triple it for "lead range", or the distances within a range where you may have to lead your target, then drop-off range, where the projectile either runs out of propellant or momentum and slowly drops to earth, and during this particular distance the damage potential drops off gradually. This would effect their behavior and open up a lot of new things you could do with missiles and ballistics. Weapon behavior has a direct effect on defensive strategy and maneuvering in a battle.
Let's say a group of missiles misses its target and runs out of propellant on an upward course...they simply drop down to earth in a slight arc but still detonate once they impact the ground. You could also have them detonate in mid-air once propellant has been used up....which brings to mind another great effect that I haven't seen in a 'Mech game...impact force wave...the invisible air-wave of concussive force created by an explosion. I'd love to see that in a game.
An example for the AC10 could be at the stated btech range of 450 meters(or whatever it is) they are pretty much pin-point accurate and inflict the most damage, then between 450 and 650 the velocity starts to decline and damage potential gradually decreases and the necessity for "leading" the target increases, and say during another 200 meters the round begins to arc towards the ground and the damage is minimal.
A few things about 'Mech3 I would fix: Jump-jets as mentioned above, but also their weight to crits needs to be fixed, and certain mechs require 6, and only certain mechs can use them. AMS, I would bring their reaction time down a little because they shouldn't always get every single missile, and I would fix it so you can't load so many that they act like a force field...and certain mechs don't allow for AMS anyway. I would fix all the electronics packages so they work how they're supposed to. And I would add more of them.
I would do what amounts to a combination of the mech4 hardpoint system, mech3's free mechlab system, and AT:1's "mech model" system, and describe it as follows: What you can do with a mech is based on who you choose to be in the battletech universe; If you are in a military faction such as Iridani Light Horse, you get what you are assigned based on your rank. If you're a merc, well you know how that goes. If clanner, you get assigned, and so forth. As for the mechs they'd be canon. A timberwolf A has a small missile pod for its streak missiles, and you can only put missiles in it, and only certain criticals for that missile pod. For the leftover criticals for that torso I would allow for equipment and ammo. An Avatar B has missile pod arms...and so on..you get the idea. That's how it works, but like in 'Mech3 you get the same freedom as to what you do with those critical spaces. There can be heat sinks, equipment, etc. I would make it so you can have double heat sinks and single heat sinks in the same mech, if that's not against canon...I'm not sure.
I would not include the ability to have a standard internal mech suddenly become an endosteel mech. That's just absurd. I would fix the engine system too. The one in 'Mech3 is flawed, the engines do not reflect their proper mech speeds. I would make engines salvageable, and only certain engines can be used in certain mechs. You can't put a firefly engine in an Orion just because it's a 375xl engine. That's not really mentioned in canon as far as I know, but it's certainly something you can exercise some creative license with. Certain engines are made for certain mechs. So, maybe you're on tranquil with just your MFB mechanics and you have an Orion and you salvage an engine from a Madcat...well maybe they can adapt it for the Orion but it will take a few days..so you are forced to drive a different 'mech until they complete the task...stuff like that.
Another aspect about engines that would be a great way to create another "quirk" that gives 'Mechs part of their own characteristics would have to do with the aforementioned engine size to speed inaccuracy. Example: Many 'Mechs in Mech3 go 81 kph with the 375 xl engine, but in battletech their speed should be 86 kph...so, after fixing the proper speed to engine size, I would re-create the same "inaccuracy" factor for added armor. A Timberwolf Primary variant has an xl 375 with 12 tons of armor and top speed of 86 kph...well, you can subtract other items like double heatsinks, and add armor up to 14 tons or so..BUT..here's the 'Mech's quirk...the added armor taxes the engine, not because of its weight but because the structure of the mech is balanced to go 86 kph with a 375 xl engine, added armor changes the structure of the 'mech...and now it has a slower top speed, say 81 kph. Perhaps certain lighter 'mechs wouldn't have this issue. I guess I love subtle details like this.
I always liked the damage paradigm they had in mech4. 'Mechs take more damage than in 'Mech3. I would do something like that and have CASE work correctly like in Pirate's Moon. So, I guess each mech design would have its own unique set of hit points, and I guess you'd layer it like on an actual machine, for example the large "shield" sections on an Awesome and a Mauler: An arm with armor shields like these should last longer than on a normal 'mech...let's say your shot hits the very top section of the shield, so some of the top portion is destroyed...and unless you actually miss the shield and hit the arm itself the arm takes no damage until that shield is gone and no longer blocking shots. First the armor goes, then certain internal aspects, then the weapon takes a certain amount of damage before it's non-functional. And just because an arm gets ripped off doesn't mean that torso and all its contents get destroyed. Speaking of that, I would have it so Heavy Gauss actually rips a mech's arm off if you load it in the arm...but after 2 or 3 shots. And it knocks over certain sized mechs that it gets loaded on. There may actually be a limit I'm not sure, like maybe only 60 tons and above.
I would keep the knock-down effect from 'Mech3. Let's face it, even with 31st century technology, a 'Mech is still a big unstable machine walking on 2 legs and a gyro can only take so much. But, yes it has to be adjusted somehow. Perhaps only certain powerful weapons and only under certain topographical and mechanically compromising conditions. Like, say your mech has chicken-leg style and you're running fast on an inclined slope and you get hit by 2 LRM 20's in mid stride and your mech is only 50 tons...yeah, you're goin down buddy. It's physics. On second thought, it's probably not unreasonable to imagine that the faster a mech runs the less stable it is and can be knocked over more easily...which would give another way to make certain 'mechs have their own unique characterisics, and also create a reason to go at so-called "walking" speed.
So armor gets destroyed, then internals, then weapons and equipment and so forth. I would add more detail to what gets destroyed in your 'mech during a battle. There are arm actuators, leg actuators, heat sinks, electronic equipment, maybe you could lose radar and targeting or missile lock capabilities, maybe you can lose portions of torso twist or have it completely disabled, maybe cockpit cracks cause you to lose oxygen and you have to quickly put on a mask during the battle. And what other internals could there be in a battlemech? How about the criticals themselves? ...you go to the mfb between battles and the computer tells you 2 tons of ammo for your LB10X AC can't be reloaded because the criticals took too much damage. There are ammo feeds, hydraulics, myomer circuitry and structures...you could take a hit to your arm and lose arm swing but have the weapon in that arm still be functional. Maybe some 'mechs are better than others at how they take damage, like the "venerable" Orion. Think of the way we talk about older cars vs newer cars in an accident. An old "tank" like an oldsmobile would destroy a newer car in an accident. Maybe Orions have their armor more evenly distributed and their internals are better protected even after the armor goes and so they last longer in a fight than say a Timberwolf...even though the clan ferro-fibrous armor is far superior to standard armor. Am I going to far?
And I don't care what it took but I would make every single thing on a map that should be destroyable...destroyable. I love craters from missiles in 'Mech3, and would add that to ballistic weapons like I did in my mods. Even machine guns make little craters. Scorched earth policy. Trees in abundance and all destroyable and obstacles. Some trees couldn't be moved even by an Atlas. Some trees can get bent over by a firefly. Maybe if you're in a Shadowcat and accidentally run into a large enough tree a limb goes right through your cockpit and kills you. Bye-bye screen name.
Reality check. Certain 'Mechs can't climb certain steep hills. Reality dictates that natural landscapes are littered with nature. As for urban settings, if you're in a building and it comes down on your mech you might be dead. If you do battle in a forest you run the risk of starting a forest fire and literally making everyone's mech into a fire-trap coffin or even overheating to MECH NUKE. Imagine winning a battle because half your enemy was in a forest-fire started by you..and they all explode when their mech overheats! That would take up some computer processing lol.
Recently I've watched more gameplay vids of MWO...and I can think of things I think they did wrong and how I would correct them. IMO they still don't have mech footfalls on terrain right...it's as if the details in the terrain are holograms sometimes, like the trees. Of course, I've said enough about the trees in more forums than I can count. I really don't think their 'mechs move right. I think their sound effects leave a lot to be desired. Some are decent, but most are lousy. I still don't get the whole radar thing in MWO.
So anyway, that's my short answer. and I'm still working on it.
|
|
|
Post by Yogaphobe on Aug 19, 2015 20:51:24 GMT
Haha...are you kidding me? I could make a day-long project out of answering this one. No joke. I agree with your points about what you would take from Mech2: but with much greater detail..literal drops from the ship to ground. And before that maybe have war room briefings. Dustoffs with battles/dropship cover-fire and so forth depending on the situation...things like having to wait for other mechs to make the dust-off point..maybe having to go back and save a lancemate, hell you could have half a mission be about the dust-off. Maybe a lancemate ejected on his way in and now you have to have half your lance defend the dropship while you try and protect a rescue vehicle that goes out to recover your lancemate. And the immersive feel from computer info--absolutely: mission objectives; planetary conditions; topographical satellite maps like in mech3; drone info; Enemy mech config scans..i.e. what weapons they have loaded; I would combine mech3's missile warnings and mech4's "weapons fire" directional with the attacking enemy visually flashing on the radar; From 'Mech3 I would take most things: How the Mechs look but with better detail obviously; How they move, running and walking...how they jump-jet but I guess it would be canon to get rid of relaxed jump-jets. I would add ejection and try to fit it into still being able to continue the mission. 'Mech nuke I would keep and have it in multiplayer...but there would have to be a heavy penalty for allowing your mech to nuke in multiplayer because it could be used as a cheat...like, your screenname gone forever. It would have to be an arbitrary thing, because sometimes maybe it wouldn't be on purpose. Or maybe not, I don't know. I would make all the weapons just like in 'Mech3, and just like I altered them in my mods...but for all forms of autocannons (except lbx's, RAC, and certain special munitions) I would add a "burst-fire/single-fire" toggle to the controls...and I would add special munitions to applicable AC's. A few things about 'Mech3 I would fix: Jump-jets as mentioned above, but also their weight to crits needs to be fixed, and certain mechs require 6, and only certain mechs can use them. AMS, I would bring their reaction time down a little because they shouldn't always get every single missile, and I would fix it so you can't load so many that they act like a force field...and certain mechs don't allow for AMS anyway. I would fix all the electronics packages so they work how they're supposed to. And I would add more of them. I would do what amounts to a combination of the mech4 hardpoint system, mech3's free mechlab system, and AT:1's "mech model" system, and describe it as follows: What you can do with a mech is based on who your choose to be in the battletech universe; If you are in a military faction such as Iridani Light Horse, you get what you are assigned based on your rank. If you're a merc, well you know how that goes. If clanner, you get assigned, and so forth. As for the mechs they'd be canon. A timberwolf A has a small missile pod for its streak missiles, and you can only put missiles in it, and only certain criticals for that missile pod. An Avatar B has missile pod arms...and so on..you get the idea. That's how it works, but like in 'Mech3 you get the same freedom as to what you do with those critical spaces. There can be heat sinks, equipment, etc. I would make it so you can have double heat sinks and single heat sinks in the same mech, if that's not against canon...I'm not sure. I would not include the ability to have a standard internal mech suddenly become an endosteel mech. That's just absurd. I would fix the engine system too. The one in 'Mech3 is flawed, the engines do not reflect their proper mech speeds. I would make engines salvageable, and only certain engines can be used in certain mechs. You can't put a firefly engine in an Orion just because it's a 375xl engine. That's not really mentioned in canon as far as I know, but it's certainly something you can exercise some creative license with. Certain engines are made for certain mechs. So, maybe you're on tranquil with just your MFB mechanics and you have an Orion and you salvage an engine from a Madcat...well maybe they can adapt it for the Orion but it will take a few days..so you are forced to drive a different 'mech until they complete the task...stuff like that. I always liked the damage paradigm they had in mech4. 'Mechs take more damage than in 'Mech3. I would do something like that and have CASE work correctly like in Pirate's Moon. So, I guess each mech design would have its own unique set of hit points, and I guess you'd layer it like on an actual machine...first the armor goes, then certain internal aspects, then the weapon takes a certain amount of damage before it's non-functional. And just because an arm gets ripped off doesn't mean that torso and all its contents get destroyed. Speaking of that, I would have it so Heavy Gauss actually rips a mech's arm off if you load it in the arm...but after 2 or 3 shots. And it knocks over certain sized mechs that it gets loaded on. There may actually be a limit I'm not sure, like maybe only 60 tons and above. I would keep the knock-down effect from 'Mech3. Let's face it, even with 31st century technology, a 'Mech is still a big unstable machine walking on 2 legs and a gyro can only take so much. But, yes it has to be adjusted somehow. Perhaps only certain powerful weapons and only under certain topographical and mechanically compromising conditions. Like, say your mech has chicken-leg style and you're running fast on an inclined slope and you get hit by 2 LRM 20's in mid stride and your mech is only 50 tons...yeah, you're goin down buddy. It's physics. And I don't care what it took but I would make every single thing on a map that should be destroyable...destroyable. I love craters from missiles in 'Mech3, and would add that to ballistic weapons like I did in my mods. Even machine guns make little craters. Scorched earth policy. Trees in abundance and all destroyable and obstacles. Some trees couldn't be moved even by an Atlas. Some trees can get bent over by a firefly. Maybe if you're in a Shadowcat and accidentally run into a large enough tree a limb goes right through your cockpit and kills you. Bye-bye screenname. Reality check. Certain 'Mechs can't climb certain steep hills. Some landscapes are littered with nature. If you're in a building and it comes down on your mech you might be dead. If you do battle in a forest you run the risk of starting a forest fire and literally making everyone's mech into a fire-trap coffin or even overheating to MECH NUKE. Or, if you see the enemy first and they're in a forest maybe you can do that to them! So anyway, that's my short answer. and it only took me an hour to write it. haha. Not bad, those all sound pretty good! When it comes to how the weapons themselves function, I would add in one more thing: The option to change firing modes for LRM's. I would allow the pilot to decide not only whether they wanted a single swarm of LRMs (MW3 and Inner Sphere MW:O) or more of a stream (MW2, Clanner MW:O) Or something in between (like MW4), but also let them choose to have their missiles go directly towards their target, or arch overhead for a downwards barrage. Oh, and of course when it comes to physics there is one very major thing which has been left out of every MechWarrior title so far: Melee. I think that melee attacks would have to be severely limited. Like say, a Hunchback could perform a melee attack, but not a Cicada. An Atlas could do one, but not a Stalker, and so on. Also I would have the mech take damage from its own melee attack if it is not done correctly; and even more so if it's against a larger opponent. Certain mechs would have better bonuses to melee strikes such as the Hatchet/Axeman mechs, and others could potentially resist said attacks more effectively if the pilot is skilled enough to block them, like in a Centurion. And for the love of god, no ripping the viewpoint out of first person view for any reason whatsoever unless the player specifically chooses third person (and even then, I'd prefer the game to just not have a third person option in most cases, as it just never really worked very well). Jump jets for me are....weird. I never liked using them as they felt clumsy and unwieldy...but then again this is Battletech so I guess that makes sense. I've always been cautious about the idea of jump jets being made too good or not good enough, because I don't want them to be a waste of time, but at the same time I don't want them to become over-powered and make the game feel more like an anime-mod of a MechWarrior game than an actual Battletech simulator. That stuff about dropping from ships and having combat scenario dustoffs and such? Hell yes. All of it. Make missions more dynamic. You don't have to be overly harsh, but don't be nice to the player about it either. Bring back MW2: Mercs feature of continuing a mission line even after a failed mission. If the player fails to keep Peter Steiner-Davion alive during the battle of Tharkad, don't end the mission. Have a no-win scenario for either side of the FedCom war where both Peter and Katrina are defeated. Allow the player to pick their faction as well, but have the same major plot events taking place. Let the player take part in Clan Jade Falcons attempted invasion of The Lyran Alliance, or challenge their way up the ranks of Clan Ghost Bear and lead them back onto the path of being a Crusader Clan. If a game like this was released and delivered on everything properly....I doubt I'd ever buy another mech game again afterwards.
|
|
|
Post by AncientxFreako on Aug 20, 2015 1:57:43 GMT
The LRM's...I think they came up with the "Rocket launcher" for the reasons you mentioned...so you can have them come out in a stream I guess, I don't know. But maybe it's a good idea..
Melee...is that the same as an alpha strike? I'm not sure what it means exactly since I've never really played table top.
Viewpoint..haha..yeah I agree wholeheartedly. 3rd person is nothing but a way to cheat and it has nothing to do with a cockpit simulation...unless you have a viewscreen inside the cockpit from which to view something a drone sees.
|
|
|
Post by Yogaphobe on Aug 20, 2015 9:32:20 GMT
Not exactly. The Rocket Launchers don't lock on at all and are extremely inaccurate. What I mean is something along the lines of how LRMs fire in MechWarrior 2, MechWarrior: Living Legends, and Clanner LRMs in MechWarrior: Online when it comes to a "stream". With the Rocket Launchers in the mekpak mod of 4 you fire one at a time (or in the case of the heavy rocket launcher, a group) and they do more damage, but are pretty difficult to hit with.
Melee and alpha strike are two different things. An alpha strike is when the mech fires all it's weapons at once. For an Atlas AS7-D an alpha strike would be firing 4 Medium Lasers, an LRM 20, an AC 20, and an SRM 6 all at once. They're usually not preferable unless you're running a mech setup that can use it well, like a Nova Cat with nothing but PPCs or your typical Awesome or Supernova.
|
|
|
Post by AncientxFreako on Aug 20, 2015 10:21:14 GMT
So explain to me exactly what a melee is..
|
|
|
Post by Yogaphobe on Aug 20, 2015 10:30:34 GMT
Melee is hand to hand combat/sword-fighting/etc. Close quarters with physical contact. An Atlas punching something, a Centurion stabbing the protrusions of it's shield into another mechs cockpit. Stuff like that.
|
|
|
Post by AncientxFreako on Aug 20, 2015 12:04:42 GMT
Ahh, yes I used to know that lol. I'm getting old. I agree, that would be a great thing to have in a game too. But yeah, you'd have to take some creative license because you'd take damage as well as give it.
|
|
|
Post by Yogaphobe on Aug 21, 2015 1:20:59 GMT
Another idea about viewpoint though when you brought up drones: Have a solid free-look system for looking around the cockpit, so you can look at an extra screen and look through your BAP or something.
Think of the scenario for it: You have a BAP, which already increases your radar range, so why bother looking at the screen right? That's were enemy ECM comes in. There's a mech with Guardian ECM somewhere out in the distance. You could potentially "pilot" your BAP drone using this extra screen and look around for the mechs using visuals alone. And of course there would also be certain ECMs made for knocking out BAP drones and all that.
|
|
|
Post by AncientxFreako on Aug 24, 2015 7:29:30 GMT
Now you got me thinking about doing a modern battletech mod...
|
|
|
Post by AncientxFreako on Aug 24, 2015 9:40:03 GMT
I edited my big post above.
|
|
|
Post by subject9x on Aug 27, 2015 2:49:39 GMT
From its core, my hypothetical mechwarrior game would try to balance realistic weapon accuracy and fun factor. One reason why MW devolves into a shite-show is because Mechs always have perfect accuracy. No matter the range, weather conditions, current damage to said mech, ECM, etc...
|
|
|
Post by johnhvt on Aug 27, 2015 3:34:30 GMT
But they dont. The only weapon that perfectly accurate is laser.
|
|
|
Post by AncientxFreako on Aug 27, 2015 10:54:04 GMT
From its core, my hypothetical mechwarrior game would try to balance realistic weapon accuracy and fun factor. One reason why MW devolves into a shite-show is because Mechs always have perfect accuracy. No matter the range, weather conditions, current damage to said mech, ECM, etc... I totally agree, except of course with 'Mech 3...PPC's, gauss, and Autocannons are all very tricky to learn because they are quirky and not at all pin-point accurate, even after increasing their velocities in my mod. Even missiles have their quirks, and they are true to battletech, especially LRM's and SRM's...actually even as accurate as Streak missiles are in 'mech3, they are still quirky and have their weaknesses but you'd have to be a long-time veteran of multiplayer games in order to truly appreciate those weaknesses.
|
|
|
Post by subject9x on Aug 27, 2015 13:03:43 GMT
But they dont. The only weapon that perfectly accurate is laser. in what context? in the real world, you are correct but in the MW video games they do have pinpoint accuracy. In MW2, MW4, and MWO; every ballistic/missile round you fire goes exactly towards where your crosshair is pointed. For MW4 and MWO this resulted in 'poptarts' and high-alpha shots that would 'core' anything in one salvo. In the tabletop game; even if you hit a target, you do not get to choose where the damage actually falls. The sad thing is, modern FPS games today handle more 'realistic' accuracy than any mech games, games that used to be called 'sims.' @freako: that is interesting, I did notice when playing MW3 that A\C's tended to throw out a bunch of rounds in a small shot-grouping but I didn't know that missiles also had accuracy quirks too.
|
|