Aim?! Direct or indirect?

[Grobi]

Hi punks,
i have a question regarding the aiming. Will it be direct (like in CS or ET) or indirect (like in BF[1942,2,2142])???

Hope it will be like CS/ET because i hated the lucky-aim in BF... remember guys running diagonally to you and you HOPED to hit their head or at least the body!

[dodgysod]

i would hope indirect (not like bf2), gotta lead the shot in at a moving target

[Eonfge]

i know what you mean...
I dont know, i got all D3 engine games so i guess its on the ET way ("real" shooting, if you aim the head, you hit it). But you never know. Seen by the 8800 Nvidia launch trailer, its oke

[Penn]

I'm sure the website says it's direct:

Fighting on foot is optimised further. With new anti-lag "what you shoot is what you hit".

[Zarkow]

The fact of the matter is that most leading on targets in games is due to compensating for lag, not for bullet-traveling. It would need a much larger distance than 50m for that to really be a factor, like it is in BF42/2/2142. (Non-withstanding BF2s failed anti-lag solution here that forces you to aim _behind_ the players if you are on a good ping.)

A proper anti-lag solution will make it virtually indistinctable between SP and MP-games in terms if aiming on a moving target. Note however that the target actually falling over and dying would still be slightly delayed since it would have to be sent from the server.

How ET:QW will be? I will see, I hope they have a proper solution in place and trust it will be better than the above listed games.

[Grobi]

I'm sure the website says it's direct:

where did you read it?

[Penn]

where did you read it?

Go to http://www.enemyterritory.com and enter the site. Then on the left hand side go to "04 Revolutionary Game Engine". Then on the right hand side menu with all the text, it has the anti-lag stuff right at the bottom so scroll down.

[NoControl]

A dev said in a interview that "your bullets will go there when you aim them to" or something similar, so i guess it's direct. Or then he was talking about anti-lag thing.

[fusen]

I only played the bf2 demo but I'm pretty sure I remember that shooting being fairly direct, maybe it's just the really sucky hitboxes that made it feel weird

[space]

I would highly doubt you'll see the majority of weapons in QW being hitscan. That would be.. oh..so..lame..

In the Quake games you do need to lead you shots with a lot of the weapons because, like an actual bullet (of nail or plasma round), there is travel time.

Hitscan weapons (if they hold true to the quake universe) will only be the lightning gun and railgun.

Now what those games do not have if the lame ass bf2142 system where.. when you shoot after your first bullet, all your bullets go any-****ing-where-they-please.

The skill in a Quake game is not like bf2 where you have to guess and hope to hell your bullets fly right, its the art of being able to slightly lead your opponent the proper amount depending on your weapon and distance.

It is a skill, but one you can develope, unlike the battlefield games where all your shots are entirly randomized.

Now that might sounds hard but its not - and it's way more fun.

You bullets going where you aim them and all the weapons being hitscan are two entierly different things.

[fusen]

shotgun and nailgun will be hitscan same with the default smg

[digibob]

Hitscan weapons (if they hold true to the quake universe) will only be the lightning gun and railgun.


The shotgun, machinegun, and gauntlet are all hitscan as well in Quake.

[Penn]

I would highly boudt you'll see the majority of weapons in QW being hitscan. That would be.. oh..so..lame..

In the Quake games you do need to lead you shots with a lot of the weapons because, like an actual bullet (of nail or plasma round), there is travel time.

Hitscan weapons (if they hold true to the quake universe) will only be the lightning gun and railgun.

This isn't based on quake games though is it. It's based on the RTCW/ET games where the majority of weapons are hitscan. Now take the quote from the official site saying "What you shoot is what you hit" and you have a pretty solid case to assume that Quake Wars will have the majority of weapons using "direct" fire.

[space]

This isn't based on quake games though is it. It's based on the RTCW/ET games where the majority of weapons are hitscan. Now take the quote from the official site saying "What you shoot is what you hit" and you have a pretty solid case to assume that Quake Wars will have the majority of weapons using "direct" fire.


I disagree, I'm sure SD didn't make an entierly hitscan game. They are skill-less. Even in W:ET the majority of weapons arn't hitscan, the sniper possibly being the only weapon without travel time.

I think we have a language confusion here. 'Hitscan' simply means your weapons shot has no travel time. In W:ET almost all weapons have travel time between shot and hitting the target although they are accurate.

There is a difference between something being hitscan and your shots going where you target cursor is. A weapon can still be pinpoint accurate and not be hitscan.

I agree that where you aim your cursor will be where you fire goes, but I disagree that the weapons will be all hitscan with no travel time. That's just absurd.

[GENETX]

The SD ppl already told that the gameplay (speed, aim etc) will feel like it is ET, so fast 1v1 battles :D

[digibob]

I disagree, I'm sure SD didn't make an entierly hitscan game. They are skill-less. Even in W:ET the majority of weapons arn't hitscan, the sniper possibly being the only weapon without travel time.


Most of the weapons in W:ET are hitscan.

[Penn]

I disagree, I'm sure SD didn't make an entierly hitscan game. They are skill-less. Even in W:ET the majority of weapons arn't hitscan, the sniper possibly being the only weapon without travel time.

I think we have a language confusion here. 'Hitscan' simply means your weapons shot has no travel time. In W:ET almost all weapons have travel time between shot and hitting the target although they are accurate.

There is a difference between something being hitscan and your shots going where you target cursor is. A weapon can still be pinpoint accurate and not be hitscan.

I agree that where you aim your cursor will be where you fire goes, but I disagree that the weapons will be all hitscan with no travel time. That's just absurd.

My interpretation of the what you shoot is what you hit is exactly that. If your crosshair is over someone's head and you press fire, your shot(s) will hit their head regardless of their movement.

I believe this is also what an earlier poster was hoping for as in the Battlefield games, they try and use proper ballistics and it was sometimes impossible to hit someone running along the map as you had no idea where the server had the player placed in comparison to your screen.

[sponge]

Just because you see tracer rounds that travel in midair doesn't mean the tracer is the element causing the damage. That's the only feasible way I can see you saying that most W:ET weapons aren't hitscan, since that's blatantly false.

[space]

Just because you see tracer rounds that travel in midair doesn't mean the tracer is the element causing the damage. That's the only feasible way I can see you saying that most W:ET weapons aren't hitscan, since that's blatantly false.


Being as hitscan weapons are the least skilled weapons possible, I sincerly hope SD decided to add an element of skill to their game.

I have not played enough W:ET to really know which weapons are hitscan or not.. I never played it competitivley (so didn't really care to much for the details of the game) so you would know if they are over me =]

[sponge]

If hitscan = least skilled, then you have a very narrow definition of skill, and have not seen games like RtCW and ET at the highest levels of competition. This isn't an opinion, this is a fact observed over 5 years of combined competition.

[Penn]

Being as hitscan weapons are the least skilled weapons possible, I sincerly hope SD decided to add an element of skill to their game.

Strange.

How is tracking a moving target accurately enough for the bullets to hit them not skillful? Infact it's no different to not using hitscan as all you'll do is track the movement a certain distance ahead rather than right on it.

I actually think hitscan makes the game much more enjoyable as it lowers the frustration factor of online play by about 9000%.

[space]

If hitscan = least skilled, then you have a very narrow definition of skill, and have not seen games like RtCW and ET at the highest levels of competition. This isn't an opinion, this is a fact observed over 5 years of combined competition.

I have seen every match on GGL TV and clanbase. Of course hitscan weapons take skill everything takes skill, but to have to slightly lead to land shots takes much more skill. That is not really an argument.

I don't mind landing flick shots with hitscan weapons but I find it much more challenging and skilled to pull of shots that require leading and a real intimate knowledge of your weapon and movement in a game.

[Infiltrator]

I sure hope most of them are hitscan. I know that the nail gun might not be even though it's a counterpart to the shotgun - a hitscan weapon.

[Zarkow]

Space>> How much do you want to have to lead a target at 50m with an assualtrifle, to be happy with the 'skill' it induces into the game?

[KlosterKatten]

Probably will hit what you aim for, atleast i hope. Now im not one who likes to compare BF2 to ET:QW, but in BF2 its almost impossible to hit a running person aiming straight on him.

[fusen]

If hitscan = least skilled, then you have a very narrow definition of skill, and have not seen games like RtCW and ET at the highest levels of competition. This isn't an opinion, this is a fact observed over 5 years of combined competition.

didn't we get in an argument where you said the same thing this guy is, I was just talking about warsow instagib at the time though?

[digibob]

All damage is done based on the roll of a number of 21 sided dice. We thought that'd be fair.

[Richy]

All damage is done based on the roll of a number of 21 sided dice. We thought that'd be fair.
That does sound like an incredibly fair system :D

[no!se]

And when joining up in rank you get a +1damage throw modifier :D

[space]

I don't mind landing flick shots with hitscan weapons but I find it much more challenging and skilled to pull of shots that require leading and a real intimate knowledge of your weapon and movement in a game.

OK what I hope is there is hitscan weapons, and more powerful non-hitscan weaps so the skill gap pays off. Hitscan weapons deffinatley appeal to the grey mass, like you said making it more enjoyable for new players.

It is deffinalty a good idea to include both, with respective attack differences to make sure the game is easily picked up.. and still can take a long time to master for more advanced players.

Hitscan weapons just don't leave anything to master anymore =]] I like the challenge of learing new weapons =] then again I love the railgun.. but still a mid-air rocket is way more impressive.

[space]

All damage is done based on the roll of a number of 21 sided dice. We thought that'd be fair.

No not the bf2142 system

[Infiltrator]

I don't have anything against weapons in the lines of plasma guns, rockets, or .. nails.. to require leading - I in fact enjoy to use them, given the right circumstance, but make all weapons with high moving projectiles (bullets and strogg counterparts) hitscan please.

[fusen]

All damage is done based on the roll of a number of 21 sided dice. We thought that'd be fair.


http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/random_number.png

[Zarkow]

Space>>

With disclaimer for being drunk a friday night, here goes...

Assualtrifle: 870m/s
Target: 6m/s, 90degrees perpendicular to shooter
Distance to target: 50m

Time until targets position is reached: 50/870 [assuming no speed reduction in the bullet] = 0,057471264367816091954022988505747 sec

Distance target travels during this time: 0,34482758620689655172413793103448 m

So assuming we lead target until the sight is exactly 90 degrees perpendiculare to us, we would have to shoot when the target has ~0.345m to go (34.5cm) to gain a center-hit.

Also, note that since the bullet hits the target ~0,057 sec after firing, the impact will be virtual instant to your eyes.

a = 0,34482758620689655172413793103448
b = 50
c = 50,001189046503776865290214005584

A = sin( 0,0068963877216237493060659003431956 ) = 0,0001203646719458109445321362273745 degrees

The ~0,345cm above therefor says we have to aim ~0,00012 degrees ahead.

On a screen, assuming 90 degrees FOV, running a resolution of 1024x768, how many pixels is this? 0,0013694824896945600800100832938667 -> ~0,00137 pixels.

So when the target at 50m is ~0,00137 pixels before 90 degrees perpendiculare you will shoot and the shot will be visually instant.

Now tell me, why is scanhit bad?

[murka10]

holy crud, you gave this in a mathematical form. too bad i cant understand anything

[Ghost_Operative]

Space>>

With disclaimer for being drunk a friday night, here goes...

Assualtrifle: 870m/s
Target: 6m/s, 90degrees perpendicular to shooter
Distance to target: 50m

Time until targets position is reached: 50/870 [assuming no speed reduction in the bullet] = 0,057471264367816091954022988505747 sec

Distance target travels during this time: 0,34482758620689655172413793103448 m

So assuming we lead target until the sight is exactly 90 degrees perpendiculare to us, we would have to shoot when the target has ~0.345m to go (34.5cm) to gain a center-hit.

Also, note that since the bullet hits the target ~0,057 sec after firing, the impact will be virtual instant to your eyes.

a = 0,34482758620689655172413793103448
b = 50
c = 50,001189046503776865290214005584

A = sin( 0,0068963877216237493060659003431956 ) = 0,0001203646719458109445321362273745 degrees

The ~0,345cm above therefor says we have to aim ~0,00012 degrees ahead.

On a screen, assuming 90 degrees FOV, running a resolution of 1024x768, how many pixels is this? 0,0013694824896945600800100832938667 -> ~0,00137 pixels.

So when the target at 50m is ~0,00137 pixels before 90 degrees perpendiculare you will shoot and the shot will be visually instant.

Now tell me, why is scanhit bad?


.........dude seriously...get a life....this is a game

[Zarkow]

Yes, God forbid we would argue with facts...


And i'm a programmer. Per defintion I have no life.

[exoteror]

people might be right about hitscan weapons not requireing a major amount of skill, but surely the skill comes into play in the class area, someone that knows how to play their class well has skill.

someone landing a airstrike actually on an enemy rather than hitting friendlys( you all know what im talking about :P)

someone that resupplys you with ammo or heals you.

someone that can place defences in tatical positions.

someone that can drive and fly the vehicals with good skills.

hopefully all these areas is where the skill comes into play.

[Infiltrator]

.........dude seriously...get a life....this is a game

He is just proving a point, and he is right too. Also, why the 'get a life'? FYI that's a highschool-grade problem, at least where I come from.

[plodicus29of9]

As long as we haven't got the randomness of BF2 jobs a good un :P

If we have, there's a problem :(

[figvam]

Zarkow, excellent analysis! That sure places a fat dot in the discussion. For those who could understand...

[Ghost_Operative]

He is just proving a point, and he is right too. Also, why the 'get a life'? FYI that's a highschool-grade problem, at least where I come from.

you know why i say it so harshly? because he is trying to prove a point of REAL LIFE PHYSICS...this is a GAME...plasma weapons and stroggs arent real and if they want to make the weapon projectiles move at 5mph, then they will...its pointless to write an entire mathematical equation to prove a point that is irrelevant to begin with

[Skymaster]

The ET engine is pretty nice with AIM... I hope the QW will same.

[FankeNstein]

Cone of fire/random aim really is one of the most annoying things in the games that have it. I really hope it's not in ETQW, should feel like good old W:ET.
-my first post here :D

[JiggaJigga]

I'm sure the website says it's direct:

Sweet. Except if the guy is running across from you and you aim and shoot for his head will you hit it or will you have to aim 1-3mm infront of him?

[Zarkow]

you know why i say it so harshly? because he is trying to prove a point of REAL LIFE PHYSICS...this is a GAME...plasma weapons and stroggs arent real and if they want to make the weapon projectiles move at 5mph, then they will...its pointless to write an entire mathematical equation to prove a point that is irrelevant to begin with

You are confused.

There is several weapons ingame that use bullets. Infact, a lot of them.

Ignoring this and refering to plasma-weapons not only puts us off-topic, but it's not honest, since the topic isn't about slowmoving projectiles, it's about fast-moving projectiles.

No-one is saying that a slow-moving projectile will be hitscan, since, well...that would a contradiction in terms.

It's a post if there is any difference between using projectiles or hitscan-solutions for weapons with fast projectiles (all of the GDFs bullet-weapons for instance). And I think my point was that below a set threshold in distance there isn't a difference to talk about. The percived notion of 'lead in aim' is usually due to lag and non-existent or flawed anti-lag-solutions.

ET:QW will have neither of these problems.



Added: Oh, and the above has nothing to do with real life physics, but the opposite...

[fusen]

where you have to lead a hitscan weapon is more to do with lag/hitboxes than it being set up like that by the devs

[figvam]

you know why i say it so harshly? because he is trying to prove a point of REAL LIFE PHYSICS...this is a GAME...plasma weapons and stroggs arent real and if they want to make the weapon projectiles move at 5mph, then they will...its pointless to write an entire mathematical equation to prove a point that is irrelevant to begin withWhoa whoa, isn't the game still based on REAL LIFE physics? It's happening on Earth, it's not like it has 0.5g gravity or bullets travelling at 5km/h. The plasma weapons still has to conform to the physics model, and as you were taught in the school, you can't arbitrarily change some parameter in the equation without affecting other parameters. I.e. you can't just add a significant "lead on" angle without ruining the whole physics model of the game.

[KlosterKatten]

Sweet. Except if the guy is running across from you and you aim and shoot for his head will you hit it or will you have to aim 1-3mm infront of him?

Im not gonna try to sound smart cause im no math genius as mister posting-numbers-i-dont-know.

But if you aim at the forehead, shouldnt you hit the back of the head even if its a travel-distance? Problem solved ;)

[Ghost_Operative]

Look man, all I am saying is, this is a game and it is ridiculous to try to piece realistic physics into it. If you really wanted to do something like that then you would have to include wind speeds for snipers, velocity decrease of the projecticle and wind direction aswell as the angle at which the projectile is shot...you guys are over analyzing this:

WHERE YOU SHOOT, IT HITS, its that simple...

[Zarkow]

Look man, all I am saying is, this is a game and it is ridiculous to try to piece realistic physics into it. If you really wanted to do something like that then you would have to include wind speeds for snipers, velocity decrease of the projecticle and wind direction aswell as the angle at which the projectile is shot...you guys are over analyzing this:

WHERE YOU SHOOT, IT HITS, its that simple...

I think you missed the point of the post. I urge you to go back and read space's posts, that my reply was a direct reply to.

That should clear it up.

[Vash!]

anything but spray and pray like bf and im happy =)

[Infiltrator]

The bottom line Zarkow was trying to prove - games that you think have non-hitscan bullets either:

a) emulate the bullet fly-time way slower then it would occur in real life (even if the game is based around realism, like BF)

OR

b) you are lagging and have to aim ahead anyway, thus getting the feeling there is no hitscan.

[b0rsuk]

you know why i say it so harshly? because he is trying to prove a point of REAL LIFE PHYSICS...this is a GAME...plasma weapons and stroggs arent real and if they want to make the weapon projectiles move at 5mph, then they will...its pointless to write an entire mathematical equation to prove a point that is irrelevant to begin with

I see what you mean. It's perfectly ok for sniper rifle in ET:QW to shoot green elephants instead of bullets. After all, this is a GAME, it is NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE REAL PHYSICS. I like the way you think and hope the green elephants make it to the game. For the sake of skill and gameplay.

[Zarkow]

Now you are just being silly. Everyone knows that elephants in the QW-universe are pink.

[Ghost_Operative]

I agree with space in the fact that it takes alot more skill to lead a weapon than fire directly at an enemy. that is my opinion after playing FPS games for over 7 years. you are trying to prove that "in real life" weapons dont need to be led infront of moving targets by much to make a difference. correct?

but it is a point you cannot argue because like i said, alot can affect this, in real life, marksman shooters need to adjust distance, moving speed, and even wind velocities to make ONE accurate shot. How would hitscan work for a sniper? How would it play out when trying to snipe a guy 150~ yards out? sniping is hard enough as it is, making it so everyone is just as accurate would make it harder

i say this because I am a sniper fanatic and i hated how sniping in ET:W was a complete joke. It was a weak semi automatic rifle with insane recoil and a crappy scope. The sniper rifle was essentially the most unaccurate gun in the game. By the time you aligned 3 shots on a guy running around jumping while shooting at you with a thompson, you were half past dead. The thompson was an automatic sniper rifle with weaker damage and no scope....

[Skymaster]

I agree with space in the fact that it takes alot more skill to lead a weapon than fire directly at an enemy. that is my opinion after playing FPS games for over 7 years. you are trying to prove that "in real life" weapons dont need to be led infront of moving targets by much to make a difference. correct?

but it is a point you cannot argue because like i said, alot can affect this, in real life, marksman shooters need to adjust distance, moving speed, and even wind velocities to make ONE accurate shot. How would hitscan work for a sniper? How would it play out when trying to snipe a guy 150~ yards out? sniping is hard enough as it is, making it so everyone is just as accurate would make it harder

i say this because I am a sniper fanatic and i hated how sniping in ET:W was a complete joke. It was a weak semi automatic rifle with insane recoil and a crappy scope. The sniper rifle was essentially the most unaccurate gun in the game. By the time you aligned 3 shots on a guy running around jumping while shooting at you with a thompson, you were half past dead. The thompson was an automatic sniper rifle with weaker damage and no scope....

I hope it will be good with snipers rifle...
Laser bullets with the speed of light :rolleyes: j/k
Yea, it will be nice

[marki]

I agree with space in the fact that it takes alot more skill to lead a weapon than fire directly at an enemy. that is my opinion after playing FPS games for over 7 years. you are trying to prove that "in real life" weapons dont need to be led infront of moving targets by much to make a difference. correct?

but it is a point you cannot argue because like i said, alot can affect this, in real life, marksman shooters need to adjust distance, moving speed, and even wind velocities to make ONE accurate shot. How would hitscan work for a sniper? How would it play out when trying to snipe a guy 150~ yards out? sniping is hard enough as it is, making it so everyone is just as accurate would make it harder

i say this because I am a sniper fanatic and i hated how sniping in ET:W was a complete joke. It was a weak semi automatic rifle with insane recoil and a crappy scope. The sniper rifle was essentially the most unaccurate gun in the game. By the time you aligned 3 shots on a guy running around jumping while shooting at you with a thompson, you were half past dead. The thompson was an automatic sniper rifle with weaker damage and no scope....
still it is easy to kill with the sniper in et, because the enemy is just running in one direction and constant speed (or gettin slower after some strafejumps). all you have to do is to point not exactly on them and shoot.. 1 hs + 1 shot anywhere = dead. thats it. so its not overpowered but still a nice longrange weapon!

[Zarkow]

I agree with space in the fact that it takes alot more skill to lead a weapon than fire directly at an enemy. that is my opinion after playing FPS games for over 7 years. you are trying to prove that "in real life" weapons dont need to be led infront of moving targets by much to make a difference. correct?


Incorrect.

I proved that leading a target as a skill is virtual and based on your flawed perception on how games work.

Let me break it down like this:
- If a game has projectiles and proper anti-lag-solution you don't need to lead at 50m.
- If a game has projectiles and no anti-lag-solution you have to lead to counter your current ping (the delay your client has against the servers authoritan world).
- If a game has hitscan projectiles and proper anti-lag-solution you don't have to lead at 50m.
- If a game has hitscan projectiles and no anti-lag-solution you have to lead to counter your current ping.

Clearer now?

[Viperkhan]

Random deviation is evil.

[KlosterKatten]

Incorrect.

I proved that leading a target as a skill is virtual and based on your flawed perception on how games work.

Let me break it down like this:
- If a game has projectiles and proper anti-lag-solution you don't need to lead at 50m.
- If a game has projectiles and no anti-lag-solution you have to lead to counter your current ping (the delay your client has against the servers authoritan world).
- If a game has hitscan projectiles and proper anti-lag-solution you don't have to lead at 50m.
- If a game has hitscan projectiles and no anti-lag-solution you have to lead to counter your current ping.

Clearer now?

Easy to understand and well written.

Im going to assume Battlefield games dont have an anti-lag-solution, no?
Anyways, games which ping influences the game (talking bout under 100ms and under, not 500ms) is annoying to play online.

[murka10]

only one thing, where did the elephants come from?
i tought QW was all about tapir farming.

[Zarkow]

Easy to understand and well written.

Im going to assume Battlefield games dont have an anti-lag-solution, no?
Anyways, games which ping influences the game (talking bout under 100ms and under, not 500ms) is annoying to play online.

BF42 had none afaik.
BF2 has one and it's terribly flawed. It's what forces people below 100 in ping to aim BEHIND their targets. (It's a forced setting in a cfg-file, instead of being autoadjusting to the players current ping.)
BF2142 - never played it, gave up on the series, so I wouldn't know. It's virtually BF2+content however, so...


murka10>> Exactly, anyone knows the sniper-rifles shoots tapirs.

[Evil]

I dont know about all this debate, especially the mathematical mumbo jumbo, sad that considering my job, should know it I guess.

Anyways, my view is pretty simple..

ET - if you had the ability to hold a cross hair on a moving target, hopefully the head, you got rewarded with quick kills, specially once he got hit sounds, ting ting is a lovely thing. you could drop someone with a few rounds if you could hold the aim at a head. it was a very fair way to play, nobody complained about it.


BF2 - in this game even if you held the crosshair on someones head you could unload a clip and they would still be alive, hell in some cases you would unload a clip and they would turn around, dolphine dive, bunny hop, all sorts of crap and nail you with 2 shots.


As said, I dont know about this or that, all I do know is based on the above opinions of ET and BF2, I hope ETQW is nothing like BF2 and everything like ET

[Ghost_Operative]

Incorrect.

I proved that leading a target as a skill is virtual and based on your flawed perception on how games work.

Let me break it down like this:
- If a game has projectiles and proper anti-lag-solution you don't need to lead at 50m.
- If a game has projectiles and no anti-lag-solution you have to lead to counter your current ping (the delay your client has against the servers authoritan world).
- If a game has hitscan projectiles and proper anti-lag-solution you don't have to lead at 50m.
- If a game has hitscan projectiles and no anti-lag-solution you have to lead to counter your current ping.

Clearer now?

thats all nice and dandy but its obviously harder to lead targets by predicting their movement paths rather than shoot directly at them :-) like i said, your overanalyzing bro...im not saying your theory isnt realistic, because it is, and i am all for hitscans...but my 2 points are the following: "leading targets is harder than hitting them right on" and "realistic ballistics shouldnt be REQUIRED in a game"

[dzjepp]

I hope they are hitscan like in quake or enemy territory

[Zarkow]

thats all nice and dandy but its obviously harder to lead targets by predicting their movement paths rather than shoot directly at them :-) like i said, your overanalyzing bro...im not saying your theory isnt realistic, because it is, and i am all for hitscans...but my 2 points are the following: "leading targets is harder than hitting them right on" and "realistic ballistics shouldnt be REQUIRED in a game"

I cannot grasp why you fail to read what I post, but you still respond to it.

I will ask you a question so you might get it:
- In what games do you have to lead a target and why?

We are still talking 50m and below, the most common distance-range for firefights in games.

Oh, so you don't miss it. Hitscans isn't about realism, since it's the opposite. It's about reducing the amount of calculations that is needed.

[Horkathane]

What about Rocket Jump?:cool:

[Ghost_Operative]

I cannot grasp why you fail to read what I post, but you still respond to it.

I will ask you a question so you might get it:
- In what games do you have to lead a target and why?

We are still talking 50m and below, the most common distance-range for firefights in games.

Oh, so you don't miss it. Hitscans isn't about realism, since it's the opposite. It's about reducing the amount of calculations that is needed.



Here (http://secure.hop.com/index.cfm?AFID=10&redirCampID=27) this might help you understand what I am saying...

[Underoath1233]

haha hopefully the hit boxes arnt ghetto and bullets actually register when you fire it at their friggen head =P

[Ghost_Operative]

haha hopefully the hit boxes arnt ghetto and bullets actually register when you fire it at their friggen head =P


you shoot them in the leg and some guy jumps on your screen and says "DAMN SON! you blew that cats head off fa sho....lemme hold 5 dollas"

[Zarkow]

Here (http://secure.hop.com/index.cfm?AFID=10&redirCampID=27) this might help you understand what I am saying...

Atleast you always show your level of maturity.

[Ghost_Operative]

maturity has nothing to do with your reading level...you just need to practice....sound it out....prac-tis...pr-pr-prac-tis...

i tried being mature with you but you are not arguing any of my points, you are just repeating the same crap over and over

I will ask you a question so you might get it:
- In what games do you have to lead a target and why?

Oh, so you don't miss it. Hitscans isn't about realism, since it's the opposite. It's about reducing the amount of calculations that is needed.

BF2 because the anti-lag there is crap like you mentioned, i dont disagree...and hitscans, i realize they are techinically "unrealistic" but like you mentioned, it be very close to realistic...

however, these fact do not argue my 2 points....leading targets requires more skill than shooting right at them and the fact that "hitscans" shouldnt be forced into a game. many games benefit more from leading the shots...a.k.a Americas Army, though not as much leading is required, as in BF2, it is enough to make sniping very fun and gun fights very intense and putting more emphasis on suppresive fire and other common gunfire tactics.

[BlackJack]

I hope the aim will be ET like not BF2like.

[auts]

For what I've red there will be both kind of aims. Smg with hitscan and rockets&riflegrenades with indirect hitting. I'd like to see some pictures about hitboxes, especially for the troops but vehicles too.

[Viperkhan]

How many shots center mass would it take to kill someone in this game using a machine gun?

[murphIV]

I would say that you wouldn't have to lead a target much or worry about bullet drop until at lease 300m. It's rare in gaming for snipers to take shots that long much less assault class.

[Ghost_Operative]

I would say that you wouldn't have to lead a target much or worry about bullet drop until at lease 300m. It's rare in gaming for snipers to take shots that long much less assault class.

that reminds me, in AA...this one time a guy was behind cover and wouldnt peek cause i was sniping, so when he reloaded, i shot him in the hand to finish him off (he was hurt and his hand peeked out of cover when he reloaded) it was from pretty far off too...it was on that map radio tower, id say 150-200m~

[ShaZe]

All damage is done based on the roll of a number of 21 sided dice. We thought that'd be fair.

I hope that was sarcasm, otherwise you just lost sum1 I thinks :(

[reyalp]

I hope that was sarcasm, otherwise you just lost sum1 I thinks :(
I heard 2d13 from someone who should know.

[Lanz]

The only thing leading your weapon will remind me about is how crappy connection I had back in '97. Then you had to aim infront of your target to compensate for the lag. Was that more fun? Was it really that much different than aiming straight for the head nowdays?

No not really. Annoying would be a better word.

[Flesh]

leading targets requires more skill than shooting right at them

Agree. But I also think that wanting to have this as a feature in a game is masohistic. Whoever thinks this is what is needed for his skill to develop in a team game should quit that game and start playing quake or UT. Else he can shut up.

Assaultrifle = 870m/s
If a game has projectiles and proper anti-lag-solution you don't need to lead at 50m

How do you know the game bullet speed is 870 m/s?

[invveritas]

Hmmm... Please let the aim be like it is in Wolf:ET... Don't do a shit like it is in CSS (this is not direct aim i think...)

I'm a subscriber of the sentence: what you shoot is what you hit... because of this i don't like css... =)

[Zarkow]

maturity has nothing to do with your reading level...you just need to practice....sound it out....prac-tis...pr-pr-prac-tis...

Ok, you aren't imature, you are a jackass, fine.


i tried being mature with you but you are not arguing any of my points, you are just repeating the same crap over and over

BF2 because the anti-lag there is crap like you mentioned, i dont disagree...and hitscans, i realize they are techinically "unrealistic" but like you mentioned, it be very close to realistic...

however, these fact do not argue my 2 points....leading targets requires more skill than shooting right at them and the fact that "hitscans" shouldnt be forced into a game. many games benefit more from leading the shots...a.k.a Americas Army, though not as much leading is required, as in BF2, it is enough to make sniping very fun and gun fights very intense and putting more emphasis on suppresive fire and other common gunfire tactics.
You are still missing the big picture. In normal firefights, using normal bullet-weapons - as the ones in BF2, Americas Army and ET:QW (GDF) - if there is a proper antilagg-solution implemented you cannot tell if they are using hitscan or not.

Your objection against hitscan-solutions either fully focus on extreme ranges (sniping) or the skewed perception of what 'reality' is and how much you need to lead in a high-ping enviroment. That ofcourse is completely different how much (if any) you have to lead in a really low-ping or LAN-enviroment. Not counting flawed implementations in the game that would virtually add more delay ofcourse.

If you would like to argue that hitscan projectiles remove the skill for sniper-weaons, do that, but don't try to dispute that you cannot tell the difference at normal firefight distances, which is what my post was about.

As I said, read what I post.

[Zarkow]

How do you know the game bullet speed is 870 m/s?
It's an arbitrarly selected projectile-speed based on what one kind of real assaultrifles's bullets do at V0, but most are in the same region. Meaning, it doesn't matter if you want to use M249, M16A2, M4 with M187-ammo or any other rifle as basis for the calculation, the main point is the same.

[Ghost_Operative]

Your objection against hit scan-solutions either fully focus on

...what objection? I'm all for hitscans...are you kidding me? READ WHAT I POST....i believe where you shoot is where you hit is the best way to play but however that doesn't change the fact that a player with lag who has to lead, or a player who knows how to lead shots is generally more skilled at shooting. That is the ONLY thing i have argued.

This argument arouse simply because i was bothered by your post of a mathematical equation too long to be significant. There is NO WAY of exactly explaining a gaming scenario through mathematical equations, i found that absurdly irritating.

[Zarkow]

This argument arouse simply because i was bothered by your post of a mathematical equation too long to be significant. There is NO WAY of exactly explaining a gaming scenario through mathematical equations, i found that absurdly irritating.

The math wasn't long, and only written out to allow anyone to follow it. If I would just have written "you have to aim ~0,00012 degrees ahead" or "~0,00137 pixels on a 1024x768-setup", there would have been several posts of protests how I reached those numbers.

If you didn't want to read the calculations, fine, but your objections posted above is flawed. The calculations is not meant to explain a gaming scenario, it's a proven case that one cannot tell the difference between hitscan and projectile-based solutions, assuming both have anti-lag implemented or is in a 0-ping enviroment. That is all.

And what you found irritating isn't really of interest. If you want to argue the point it was leading up to, do that instead.

The only thing you did was to post an attack on my person that I should 'get a life'.

[Mr_Meow]

I'm kinda hoping the Aiming system isnt like W:ET i found it very difficult to adjust such an aiming system after playing games such as Day of defeat/Source.

Recoil FTW (:

[Zarkow]

I too prefer recoil-based spread, as devblogged about here: http://devblogs.digitalsoftware.se/avsb/2007/03/weapon-design-that-rewards-practise.php - but we will have to see how ET:QW is. A lot of players are used to partial or extreme cases of growing (BF2) or displaced (CS) cones of spread and it's hard to please everyone...

[Mr_Meow]

Very true, But to add some recoil would add some challenge with the weapons themselves, The gameplay i've seen so far has proven to be quite challenging already but adding Recoil would easily give Players there own personal little challenges to master each weapon.

[Ghost_Operative]

Ok then Zarkow, why don't you tell me what it is we are arguing about? Are you just pissed off cause I told you that you have no life for posting an entire mathematical equation about the travel of a virtual bullet in a game that is already completed and you likely have no idea how it plays?

Don't post on the forums if you don't like critiscism.

[Str0gg]

I prefer projectile rifles since they require more skill, but they are hell for newbies (this is the reason why I hated Bf2 at the beginning)

Hitscan means ultra-teh-pwnage for snipers(campers).

br

[Moncealyo]

oh head shots? Yes oh yes I like.

[Mr.Cripples]

I hope indirect, cause its harder

[Kendle]

I'm kinda hoping the Aiming system isnt like W:ET i found it very difficult to adjust such an aiming system after playing games such as Day of defeat/Source.

Recoil FTW (:

Heh Mr Meow, nice to see a DOD:S player here!

As someone who used to play ET and currently plays DOD:S I hope the aiming system in ET:QW is nothing like DOD:S!

In W:ET most weapons are hitscan and use an expanding cone (1st bullet dead on, subsequent bullets deviating from the crosshair by an increasing factor as long as you continue firing (for autos that is)). In DOD:S all weapons use a random cone that means ANY bullet can go ANYWHERE (within a circular pattern). With some weapons it's possible to miss by 3ft at a range of 30ft and still hit the target. That's not skill, it's luck.

I don't mind if targets have to be led, or if there's distance drop off or any other nod to realism, as long as it's consistent, i.e. with practise and skill can be completely compensated for. ET is a game of skill because weapons are accurate (meaning poor aim is only rewarded with missed shots) and things like spread can be compensated for by burst firing. DOD:S is not a game of skill because the spread is always random and cannot be compensated for.

As long as you can consistently hit what you aim at in ET:QW *IF* you're good enough, I'll be happy. Not because I'm good enough, but because I can strive to be and I'll have confidence the game will let me.

[Mr_Meow]

Of course when i say DODS Aiming system i mean the Recoil ;)

I'd never recommend its COF it's horrible ;D

[Kendle]

Indeed, recoil is fine because it's consistent and controllable.

[Zarkow]

Don't post on the forums if you don't like critiscism.

Anyone with a thougt-pattern of a snake can type in a forum. It takes a little bit more to be able to formulate critisism that has any value.

You attack wasn't critisism on the subject at hand or the point brought forward.

[vcs2600]

Zarkow described it already, buy everyone is discussing different issues.

+ Hitscan versus Projectile
+ If there is a firing cone and how big it is
+ How the anti-lag works.

If I understand correctly, "You shoot what you see" describes the anti-lag. If you have the crosshairs on someone's head, you will always hit them in the head, even if they have moved while you are waiting for the server update.

This can have some strange side-effects where you run behind a corner to hide and then suddenly die. The reason for this is the enemy shot you during the lag period when he could still see you. Sometimes people new to Wolf:ET would grief about this thinking the other guy was cheating and somehow shooting through the wall.

Also, I thought Wolf:ET had no firing cone, but instead simulated recoil (the gun shakes).

If I'm wrong about any of this, flame away.

[space]

I love how the same people will harp for realism, then turn around and say all weapons should be hitscan. Um. . o.O

[Zaknifar]

+ If there is a firing cone and how big it is

Also, I thought Wolf:ET had no firing cone, but instead simulated recoil (the gun shakes).

If I'm wrong about any of this, flame away.

No flamethrowers on QW :) But back to the topic (well, one of them):

ET had "simulated recoil" yeah, but pretty much only with the CO sniper rifle which anyone wouldnt use anyways. Basic submachine guns didnt have any at all.. you could easily shoot your whole clip to head sized target from 100 meters range with fully automatic weapon..

In QW instead they seem to have a crosshair that enlarges depending what weapon you're using and if you're moving / turning / looking around and ofc when shooting. Probably changes when changing stances (going to prone etc) too, but can't confirm that since none of the videos seem to show that.

From the videos it seems that the basic rifle has a pretty little cone, which makes it nice and accurate weapon, didnt seem to grow much when moving, so it should be easy to shoot it while running.

Pistol had a bit bigger cone, looked like it would be easy to aim (to the head..) in close combat situations but I wouldn't try to snipe people from further away with it. Didnt seem to grow that much larger while running either.

Sniper rifle instead had a small crosshair when looking straight forward while standing still. But when you moved your mouse (while standing still) it grew so large that you wont hit almost anything with it as long as you kept moving the mouse. While running the crosshair ofc grew so big that you couldn't hit the ground even if you'd aim straight down.. and while sprinting it disappeared (no shooting while sprinting with a 13kg sniper rifle.. I wonder why :P)

[space]

BTW.. I am not referring to people firing like 50m from you..obviously it would be at a distance shhots would need to be lead.. but like I said I'm not referring to machine gun type weapons at all (like someone said they are in q4 in fact hitscan.. although it's rarely used unless your desperate or the enemy low)..

I was just hoping that SD would include the weapons like the nailgun, the plasma rifle/hyperblaster that are not hitscan weapons in the game but are primarily anti-infantry.

You probably won't ever see me running around with a machinegun anyways, tho I do agree it is better to have them hitscan for the sake of making the game more accessable to new people and less hardcore players, in turn making sure the community is very healthy - or if not hitscan very close to zarkov's model.. hit it basically being hitscan except from a long range (which actually sounds really awesome and would sway me towards using a machingun =P)


I just want my non-newb weapons!!!

[reyalp]

Basic submachine guns didnt have any at all.. you could easily shoot your whole clip to head sized target from 100 meters range with fully automatic weapon..

This is not true. ET automatic weapons have a cone that expands every time you shoot, and also if you turn, jump or do certain other things. The maximum size of the cone is quite large (except the sten, which overheats instead), but the initial shots are very accurate.

See
http://www.collectivecomputing.com/~reed/et/etss/et-has-no-spread.jpg
on the left, single shots, on the right, full auto. You can't see the origin of the shots, but it's across a small room, i.e. close combat.

In ET, the pistols, scoped rifles, and MG42 have recoil. Unscoped rifles have a fairly large initial cone.

ET also features damage falloff. At long ranges, SMGs and pistols do far less damage than other weapons, even on headshots.

[Zaknifar]

This is not true. ET automatic weapons have a cone that expands every time you shoot, and also if you turn, jump or do certain other things. The maximum size of the cone is quite large (except the sten, which overheats instead), but the initial shots are very accurate.

See
http://www.collectivecomputing.com/~reed/et/etss/et-has-no-spread.jpg
on the left, single shots, on the right, full auto. You can't see the origin of the shots, but it's across a small room, i.e. close combat.

In ET, the pistols, scoped rifles, and MG42 have recoil. Unscoped rifles have a fairly large initial cone.

ET also features damage falloff. At long ranges, SMGs and pistols do far less damage than other weapons, even on headshots.

ah, ok. Didnt really have any facts to go with that myself, just the experience of playing ET and being able to point the cursor at a person over 100 meters away, pressing down the button and listening to the "cling cling cling" sound from Jaymod, following with the nice little message that tells me who was the one I just killed.

Hmm, could you do a test (if that's your own screenshot) about how big the scatter will be if you shoot from.. let's say: Goldrush - from the first corner where you escort the tank all the way down to the place where stairs near Axis spawn point end? :) Just out of interest.

[vcs2600]

Thanks for the clarification on the WET cone.

[demetri]

At this point it could be a whole lot damn easier if we could just punch out some experiences about the QW's aim system from a dev/beta tester - huh ?

I'd played BF42 competitive in a couple of years.. and roughly said I think hard training, seriously hard traning which make ur fat fingers/hands go crazy (http://www.indyrad.iupui.edu/public/ddaven/Arthritis_Images/set2/case1/small_hands_pa.jpg-) will make you aim whether anti-lag/hitscan is featured or not.

With that said I hope for a hitscan solution though. Because (with out making too many contradictions) missing hitscan/anti-lag could perhaps result in a quite mess of randomness.

but hey, some dev-guy said that we will be hitting what we aim and shoot at so lets stop, take a breathe and back up SD for their great work on our beloved QW =)

[conan]

I'd be more than happy to see a similar aim system as used in ET. It's just perfect for fast paced action and still requires skill (tracking the opponent - 1 hs or 3 bodyshots =/= opponent killed).

But this discussion is based on speculations and thus not very useful. Hopefully, a responsible developer will comment on this topic to give more details and facts to the real aim system.

[space]

I'd be more than happy to see a similar aim system as used in ET. It's just perfect for fast paced action and still requires skill (tracking the opponent - 1 hs or 3 bodyshots =/= opponent killed).

But this discussion is based on speculations and thus not very useful. Hopefully, a responsible developer will comment on this topic to give more details and facts to the real aim system.

There has been a few dev comments in the first page.. nothing revealing tho.. we're still waiting on them to slip up :D

[alvin]

Ok then Zarkow, why don't you tell me what it is we are arguing about?

Not to be rude, but what are YOU talking about. Except for the sniper issue, Zarkow's point (if math is correct) ended this thread 3 pages ago but i've had to read through tangent arguments and self-contradictions. Maybe i don't get your point, sorry.

btw, since the Thompson has spread, i wouldn't call it an automatic sniper rifle.

[Dark Matter]

After five pages, have we determined whether they are direct or not?

[space]

No, the devs will not comment.. although from the sounds of it it will be a mixture of both, with round damage decreasing over travel time.. based on the previous titles the game is based on.

[Phobos]

i dont think it will be like W:ET

the hixboxes werent very good imo

[tactics]

You probably won't ever see me running around with a machinegun anyways, tho I do agree it is better to have them hitscan for the sake of making the game more accessable to new people and less hardcore players, in turn making sure the community is very healthy - or if not hitscan very close to zarkov's model.. hit it basically being hitscan except from a long range (which actually sounds really awesome and would sway me towards using a machingun =P)

I just want my non-newb weapons!!!
Non-newb weapons? You seem to think that any weapon which you don't have to lead or trail requires very little skill. Have you played W:ET against "high skilled" competition players before? Or tried to beat a good Quake 3 player with the railgun? I'm sure you would get demolished, so don't act like you're above and beyond people who use and/or prefer those hitscan weapons you seem to think are for newbs.

i dont think it will be like W:ET
the hixboxes werent very good imo
Have you tried ETPro in the past, say, year? Hitboxes and hit detection have been improved quite a bit over the years.