Tighten spread, reduce damage

[tokamak]

Indeed, this doesn’t mean that running around while shooting is never an option, it only means that it’s dependant on the situation and how you plan to aproach it. Without the difference in spread there’s only one viable way to aproach any situation, and that is running in and straving as much as you can.

Apart from that I have no qualms with ETQWpro, the rest are merely adjustments for a lower player number which is reasonable.

Ironically this is the case as well as with Brink, the differences in spread is very low, the lowest reachable spread is still way too much. This is why I argue that just the discussion about low vs high spread isn’t sufficient. The upper and lower limits are important as well.

[NIDCLXVI]

it would seem tokamak prefers the slower tactical games where there’s an additional volley happening between movement vs accuracy. Do you move more to become more difficult target to hit but incur more spread on your shooting, or slow down for accuracy but become an easier target… which technically is the whole point of movement spread and ironsight. Reducing the spread to that equal of being crouched or ironsight removes that volley and the mind-game all together, and in effect does remove a tactical equation… as well as making croucing/ironsight pointless except to gain the FOV advantage over distance…

I played several dozen etqwpro sessions and it was more “boring”, it DID purely reward glitch style shooting and reduce choices, which at the time for me meant I was rocking with headshots. But it really dumbed down the variety of tactics, and instead of movement to cover and exchanging volleys it was a case of camp best on defense with eyeline to headshot height and wait to click “right mouse button”… zzzz

just the suffix “-pro” in itself annoyed me! Egocentric buggers! :o

So I agree with Tokamak.

[Apples]

[QUOTE=tokamak;347380]Indeed, this doesn’t mean that running around while shooting is never an option, it only means that it’s dependant on the situation and how you plan to aproach it. Without the difference in spread there’s only one viable way to aproach any situation, and that is running in and straving as much as you can.

Apart from that I have no qualms with ETQWpro, the rest are merely adjustments for a lower player number which is reasonable.

Ironically this is the case as well as with Brink, the differences in spread is very low, the lowest reachable spread is still way too much. This is why I argue that just the discussion about low vs high spread isn’t sufficient. The upper and lower limits are important as well.[/QUOTE]

As you still think that Q3 has no level of organisation and tactics whatsoever, I think I can bury this dicussion for ever, the fact that you never admit another’s opinion can be a pretty good factor too

No harsh, I just can’t discuss with you about this peculiar subject without the feel of wasting my time.

Peace

[tokamak]

As you still think that Q3 has no level of organisation and tactics whatsoever

I don’t say that but as you bring it up, tactics revolving around holding powerups and making rocket jumps in the right places have nothing on the strategies possible in ETQW. I’m also not making any value judgements regarding this. Short therm tactics are important in Q3, but ETQW suits a more complex aproach.

It’s a shame one can’t just set up a new game project with ease as my ideal shooter pits the superhuman Q3 type players against cohesive tactical squads of ETQW players. It would be super-assymetrical, a bitch to balance but I’m sure it can work.

[DarkangelUK]

[QUOTE=NIDCLXVI;347382]I played several dozen etqwpro sessions and it was more “boring”, it DID purely reward glitch style shooting and reduce choices, which at the time for me meant I was rocking with headshots. But it really dumbed down the variety of tactics, and instead of movement to cover and exchanging volleys it was a case of camp best on defense with eyeline to headshot height and wait to click “right mouse button”… zzzz

just the suffix “-pro” in itself annoyed me! Egocentric buggers! :o

So I agree with Tokamak. :)[/QUOTE]

I wasn’t agreeing or disagreeing, merely clarifying tok’s point for those that weren’t quite grasping what he meant

[Apoc]

I think its a personaly prefferance in playing style we are debating here, so everyone is valid.

The reason spread was reduced for etqwpro was to raise the aiming skill ceiling, as on vanilla it was high compared to some other games yet could still be mastered to a degree where 2 very good players would fight and the outcome be decided by spread, however in pro, the better aimer won, 95% of the time.

The playing style it provoked, was favoured by many, but also disliked by many, you cant please everyone and ETQW promod wasnt trying to, it got rid of some tactics used in vanilla and many of the things Tok described, but also added many tactics that were only effective in pro mod. In the end it had the same tactical depth but evoked the use of different tactics, thus being neither better or worse, just different, a type of difference that benefited competitive play in my opinion.

[suho]

I have never really played the pro-mod either but I can see why clans might be interested in it because you have to be more careful of what you are doing, what routes you are taking thus making coordination more important.

[tokamak]

Like you said, it didn’t just raise the skill ceiling, it also favoured one playstyle.

A different aproach would be to amplify the influence movement has on the spread. IE, croucing and ironsighting (and standing still to a less extend) could give you a mucher better accuracy (lower spread lower recoil) compared to moving and running. If you do that you can then also opt to lower the spread ceiling for movement

That way you raisse the skill ceiling but you don’t favour one particular playstyle. And that’s not just a subjective thing to say. If it was my own playstyle being favoured then I’d still be discontent that the variety has been taken out of the game.

I have never really played the pro-mod either but I can see why clans might be interested in it because you have to be more careful of what you are doing, what routes you are taking thus making coordination more important.

Again, this is utter nonsense. Simpifying the shooting doesn’t mean you have to be more careful or that coordination becomes more important. If anything it becomes less important because you can rely on everyone taking the same aproach to everything.

[NIDCLXVI]

I have never really played the pro-mod either but I can see why clans might be interested in it because you have to be more careful of what you are doing, what routes you are taking thus making coordination more important.

No, it rewarded accuracy and when accuracy alone was not enough, it also reduced their need to over come “spamming” such as limiting snipers to 1 when a certain map with more than 1 actually made the most tactical sense, or no more than 1 turret or 1 artillery. They simplified it to allow them to focus on their one core skill, using a mouse… :rolleyes:

so they could play it like an older, simpler FPS, with less variables, more prediction and less care…

It was to their discredit, in my opinion.

[suho]

[QUOTE=NIDCLXVI;347400]No, it rewarded accuracy and when accuracy alone was not enough, it also reduced their need to over come “spamming” such as limiting snipers to 1 when a certain map with more than 1 actually made the most tactical sense, or no more than 1 turret or 1 artillery. They simplified it to allow them to focus on their one core skill, using a mouse… :rolleyes:

so they could play it like an older, simpler FPS, with less variables, more prediction and less care…

It was to their discredit, in my opinion. :([/QUOTE]

Can’t give a qualified comment since I never played it. I was just assuming that you could die a lot faster when the accuracy is dead on thus forcing you to be a bit more careful but maybe that isn’t true. Anyway I don’t like games where I need to be extremely careful like CS
I just want my in your-face 1v1 strafe-shooting.

[DarkangelUK]

Well I personally believe a big part of it came from the fact that quite a few of the ETQW comp players came over from ET, and preferred the faster style of play ET gave rather than the slower type of game a larger hipfire spread gives combined with the necessity of ironsights (to a point).

[suho]

Well I personally believe a big part of it came from the fact that quite a few of the ETQW comp players came over from ET, and preferred the faster style of play ET gave rather than the slower type of game a larger hipfire spread gives combined with the necessity of ironsights (to a point).

Maybe. Personally I did not have a problem using ironsights for longer ranges. Using it short-range was pretty much a death sentence.

[shirosae]

I wasn’t agreeing or disagreeing, merely clarifying tok’s point for those that weren’t quite grasping what he meant

The problem isn’t that people don’t understand his argument. It’s that his argument is based on something that isn’t true.

ETQWpro has three spread settings:

The default: which is ETQW’s default vanilla.
Optional: Which is ETQW’s rank3 aim upgrade, basically unlocked from the start.
Optional: Another spread which is a bit tighter than rank3.

None of them set all stances/ironsight spreads to the same value. His argument is based on something that exists only in the fantasy realm in his head.

Back on topic: For anyone who still doesn’t understand why tight spread != easy headshots:

This player is a good shot:

This player is not so good a shot:

Who wins? The person with better aim.

Now let’s try the same thing again with massive spread:

This player is a good shot:

This player is not so good a shot:

Who wins? Whoever the diceroll favours.

Lastly, I’m fine with the idea of a small amount of centre-weighted spread on guns where it makes some sense (like an SMG, if you relate it to the weight and shape of the weapon).

The idea that you turn the focus from lottery-spread into control of (vertical) recoil, and have ironsights enhance recoil control is genius. I much preferred this recoil in the early DoD betas to CS’s odd pseudo-recoil thing. As a way of distinguishing weapon classes without turning everything into a lottery, I’d love to see how it plays in an ET gametype.

It might not suit everyone, but as an optional gunplay type I’d love to see that. Which is precisely the thing that ETQWpro offered, by the way. That’s why propub servers were amazing; the game could be tweaked to suit the players playing at the time.

[tokamak]

None of them set all stances/ironsight spreads to the same value. His argument is based on something that exists only in the fantasy realm in his head.

The favoured setting was type 3 which was far more than a ‘bit’ more tight than type 2. Type 3 effectively made the influence your stance had on the spread nil because there was hardly any less to differ between which stripped the game from any nuance so the cavemen players could stand a chance over those who were actually able to think.

[NIDCLXVI]

Well I personally believe a big part of it came from the fact that quite a few of the ETQW comp players came over from ET, and preferred the faster style of play ET gave rather than the slower type of game a larger hipfire spread gives combined with the necessity of ironsights (to a point).

Yes, probably. Good point. I never played ET, just All the Unreals, Quakes and Battlefields.

[tokamak]

W:ET would’ve greatly benefited from ETQW’s mechanics.

[Apoc]

[quote=shirosae;347418]The problem isn’t that people don’t understand his argument. It’s that his argument is based on something that isn’t true.

ETQWpro has three spread settings:

The default: which is ETQW’s default vanilla.
Optional: Which is ETQW’s rank3 aim upgrade, basically unlocked from the start.
Optional: Another spread which is a bit tighter than rank3.

None of them set all stances/ironsight spreads to the same value. His argument is based on something that exists only in the fantasy realm in his head.

Back on topic: For anyone who still doesn’t understand why tight spread != easy headshots:

This player is a good shot:

This player is not so good a shot:

Who wins? The person with better aim.

Now let’s try the same thing again with massive spread:

This player is a good shot:

This player is not so good a shot:

Who wins? Whoever the diceroll favours.

Lastly, I’m fine with the idea of a small amount of centre-weighted spread on guns where it makes some sense (like an SMG, if you relate it to the weight and shape of the weapon).

The idea that you turn the focus from lottery-spread into control of (vertical) recoil, and have ironsights enhance recoil control is genius. I much preferred this recoil in the early DoD betas to CS’s odd pseudo-recoil thing. As a way of distinguishing weapon classes without turning everything into a lottery, I’d love to see how it plays in an ET gametype.

It might not suit everyone, but as an optional gunplay type I’d love to see that as an option. Which is precisely the thing that ETQWpro offered, by the way. That’s why propud servers were amazing; the game could be tweaked to suit the players playing at the time.[/quote]

Those pics are ridiculously good at illustrating the point in hand, mind if i borrow them and update the OP with them?

[shirosae]

Those pics are ridiculously good at illustrating the point in hand, mind if i borrow them and update the OP with them?

Not at all

[TONSCHUH]

… maybe they should only make your team mates / team bots a little bit smarter … especially when you have to rely on your bot mates in the campaign (on hard), you are lost … if you’re not able to improve your skills anymore, then you’re stuck in the game … would be good if the AI would analyse your actual performance when you play to adapt the skills of your team mate bots … so if you have a good day, the bots can play more brainless, but if you have a really bad day or your just not able to crack a level, the bots in your team should act with improved skills … it’s pretty much frustrating sometimes, that we have this pretty much brain-death team mates (bots), but the enemy bots are head-shot machines … it would be also a good idea, if we could spawn into the game at the last / closest command post we captured (in relation to your next objective) … always to run back over half the map is pretty much uncool …

:stroggtapir:

[RaKeD]

I have to agree.Those pictures make it really easy to understand.Great work shirosae!

I’ve updated the feedback on weapon tweaks in the other post concerining this issue but the thread is closed now so i decided to post here.It it is an updated summary of the last 2 posts.

Here we go:

In my opinion the aim is to find shooting mechanics that are predictable and comprehenisble for the player.When taking the control out of the players hands people get angry.No control or a lot of random factors is a huge factor why so many threads were made.

In my opinion a solution would be to increase recoil instead of max spread and make SMG’S and other weapons that aren’t supposed to be good on distance less effective on distance with the “range” value.

So it doesn’t matter if a SMG has almost no spread and is very accurate for long distance shooting as it doesn’t deal as much damage on longer distances.

By making SMG’S still very accurate on distance (almost no spread) but reduce their damage via the “range” value, = less damage on distance, and making it harder to hold down fire because of an increased recoil we would have an even better result in my opinion.

To make it really perfectt this can be further tweaked so using hip firing has more recoil and using AS reduces recoil so AS still has it s place in the game and is useful for long distance shooting.

Reducing spread and using recoil and the “range value” instead could even help to make shotguns more predictable and comprehensible for the player and even add a difference between body and headshots to shotguns.If you didn’t knew, shotguns don’t have headshots at the moment.

If you reduce the spread heavily of shotguns so all bullets are very close to the center of the crosshair/AS it is actually skill to do headshots.By reducing damage on distance via the “range value” you don’t have to use a crazy bullet spread anymore.

This would result in more comprehensible shotgun behavior,would make shotguns effective and skillfull to use at close range because headshots are still skill to pull off, make more predictable damage and they would still be weak on long range because of the “range” value reducing it s damage on distance.

The more recoil while using hip firing suggestion would work with shotguns aswell.It is somewhat logical and not completely out of this world that a gun or a shotgun has more kick (recoil) when not shouldered/not using AS.

This is a PC patch which i give SD mad respect for as this shows they understood that a PC shooter and a console shooter needs different shooting mechanics to be really satisfying for both crowds,something not many developers have understood.

Here is a summary:

[ul]
[li]Instead of increasing max spread - Increase recoil.[/li][/ul]

If a gun has stronger recoil the longer you shoot it, max spread becomes almost unneccesary and can be very low as an value.

[ul]
[li]Instead of increasing spread - use the “range value”[/li][/ul]

By this SMG’s/guns that aren’t supposed to be that effective at long range are still accurate and predictable to shoot(skill) but just don’t deal as much damage.

[ul]
[li]Instead of giving guns artifical buillet spread on distance so AS get s used -[/li][/ul]
[I]
give guns a stronger recoil while hip firing that needs to be compensated and reduce recoil when a gun is shouldered/using AS.So AS are used for long distance shooting in order to have reduced recoil as the gun is shouldered so one can stay on a smaller target with the AS a lot easier.By this guns would have a simular spread and max spread while hip firing and AS but the recoil value changes.

In my opinion this is more believable and makes more sense gameplay wise as a gun isn’t magically chaning it’s bullet spread becoming a completely different gun because using Ironsights, it s just that it is better to control, resulting in a better pattern.[/I]

[ul]
[li]If the SMG/weapon is still too powerful ,instead of increasing spread - reduce damage output[/li][/ul]

More recoil means again more skill is needed to handle the gun under sustained fire and it is actually skill if you can handle the gun with heavier recoil.

lnstead of a max spread value which forces you to stop shooting because bullets are magically going all over the placee.

I think it adds to the often quoted skill ceiling and is simply more understandable for the players.If he hasn’t compensated for the recoil and is aiming over the head, he won’t score a headshot,instead of a random bullet spread pattern he can’t influence.

Brink can be a fantastic opportunity for SD to really nail down shooting mechanics on the different platforms and have this important gameplay knowledge flow into their new projects, profiting immensly if done correctly.