Splash DamageBlogCommunity Question: Spread vs. Recoil

Splash Damage Blog

Community Question: Spread vs. Recoil

Guns! They're a big part of shooters and, one might argue, the main characters you interact with. But how does one differentiate similar weapons from one another to make every single one a meaningful addition to the arsenal? Beyond obvious things like rate of fire, the two main protagonists we're looking at here are spread (increasing/decreasing the cone of fire based on distance to target) and recoil (kickback exhibited by the weapon while firing it). This brings us to this week's community question:

What's your preferred way of differentiating weapons of the same type in a shooter?

Please cast your vote in this week's Community Question poll and do share any thoughts you have on the issue in the comments. We look forward to your replies! Pew.

211 Comments

ETQW did it best. Ok now for the serious answer. :) Vertical recoil + low spread, with various reset times. Things like rate of fire/dmg/firing mode/range would obviously determine the gun type itself, but ultimately is far more important that the recoil/spread values of two weapons of the exact type. I know thats not what youre looking for, just my opinion. Would rather have only 1 weapon per weapon type.... per faction :wink:
Posted on 15 August, 2012 - 17:23
Spread should be used in one joke gun that actually shoots dice and comes in DLC that gives you a Batman-esque villain's pink hat. Other than that: Recoil. Predicable, controllable vertical recoil. Light weapons: Good damage, good accuracy, smaller mags. Higher recoil, so burst firing is the way to go. Maybe project curved bullet trajectories so you can blend with damage falloff over distance to make them less effective long range weapons without the lottery. Heavy weapons: Good damage, good accuracy, larger mags. Lower recoil, so you can afford extended firing times without becoming useless, if you position yourself properly. Have straighter bullet trajectories and a slower damage falloff with distance so they can work as sniping weapons too. Everyone can move about quickly, and have their aim make a difference. Light weapons are lethal if you can get your headshots whilst managing the recoil and timing your bursts whilst dancing, but suck if you try to spray people down. Heavy weapons are lethal if you can position properly and time your pushes well with support, but suck if you try to rambo with them.
Posted on 15 August, 2012 - 17:34
Guess it depends on the game really. If it's an arcadey shootery type then I'd just prefer a small selection of different of guns with different attributes (RtCW and W:ET was fine for me). With the more simmy warry type I'd prefer several attributes. So a lighter gun means you can move faster with it and also keep some level accuracy while shooting on the move, smaller clip size, quicker fire rate but lower damage but quite accurate. Heavier weapons mean you move slower, larger clip size, more accurate when firing stood still and with longer bursts and also gives more damage. I'm not a fan of wild, random spray tbh. Tbh I'm probably not the best person on this subject. I like accurate hitscans of Quake 3/Live, I like decent pace and relatively low spread of RtCW/W:ET... but I also like to jump on slower paced games like CS:S and CoD, though the random spread while moving with those games can do my head in.
Posted on 15 August, 2012 - 18:17
ETQW style, but maybe with some more diverse options. Any form of upping the skill cap of mastering a weapon is fairly rewarded with something like increased damage or accuracy. The GPMG was one of my favorite weapons to use!
Posted on 15 August, 2012 - 19:04
"your preferred way of differentiating weapons of the same type"....uhm, by looks? Same type, does that mean equal power? So how I prefer variations (?) between weapons of equal ammount of power? High spread makes close quarters weapons (hrof), high recoil makes long range weapons (lrof), me would think. Tricky questions. I need to contemplate on the answer.... In the meantime, how about a test for the community were we could try the possibilities out? :)
Posted on 15 August, 2012 - 19:32
"your preferred way of differentiating weapons of the same type"....uhm, by looks?
Read the poll options? Pretty much what shirosae said for me, too tired to think up my own arguments.
Posted on 15 August, 2012 - 19:35
Guns should have a nice feeling, so recoil is needed. A little spread is nice too, but need to be able to fire accurately while running. I think ETQW( for the balance) and Rage(for the feeling) did it quite nice.
Posted on 15 August, 2012 - 19:36
Yeah zero spread and small controllable recoil. Shirosae said things pretty well.
Posted on 15 August, 2012 - 20:50
Spread simulates the attention you're able to devote to your weapon and recoil is a property innate to the gun holding a lot of sway (no pun intended) in it's character. You'll need both.
Posted on 15 August, 2012 - 22:51
differentiating weapons of the same type: - hand guns - by clip size vs damage; - light weapons - by spread vs clip size - medium weapons - by attachments vs recoil/spread - heavy weapons - by recoil/spread vs reload time vs splash damage - long range weapons - by reload time vs damage, some weapons with pinpoint accuracy and low recoil as long as you can predict the wind speed and distance, "Sniper Elite Style :D" with higher damage per shot. It will be nice if you implement a spotter job for another teammate: if a teammate is in a vicinity of the sniper and use the binocular (spot->tag target) on a enemy, the accuracy of the sniper will increase on that specific target (=small adjustments on your scope for wind /distance). PS Also make the muzzle attachments from Brink have a real impact on countering the lateral recoil while moving or counter the vertical recoil by gaining spread or give me the weapons from W:ET and let me play with those :D
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 00:05
spread.there is a simply reason too.many players of taktik shooters like ET or CS, quakebased shooter (Ql.......) prefer lowsens.recoil can be so anoying with lowsens.but dont put the weaponspread up to like brink,i dont want to reload after 1kill.well i prefer for sure the way ET was going.the gunplay was near to perfect.(it felt fast and rly was based on skill)
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 04:48
"A cominbation of spread and recoil" Perhaps recoil while using scope/sights, spread while not? idk and don't really have a preference.
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 08:32
Heavy weapons: Good damage, good accuracy, larger mags. Lower recoil, so you can afford extended firing times without becoming useless, if you position yourself properly. Have straighter bullet trajectories and a slower damage falloff with distance so they can work as sniping weapons too.
Lower recoil than AR, or do you mean low in general? I know in ETQW GPMG had double the recoil of the Assault Rile in standing/crouch positions. And the Hyper had exactly the same recoil as the Lacerator, except in prone position. Which brings up a cool point for the thread discussion - standing / crouching / prone and attributing different values to each :) edit: link
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 08:45
Lower recoil than AR, or do you mean low in general? I know in ETQW GPMG had double the recoil of the Assault Rile in standing/crouch positions. And the Hyper had exactly the same recoil as the Lacerator, except in prone position. Which brings up a cool point for the thread discussion - standing / crouching / prone :)
I mean that in general, as weapons get 'heavier' they get less recoil, across the board. My thinking is that stance should affect recoil, so it doesn't make as much difference with a heavy weapon cause they're already good with it, but light weapons gain a reduction in recoil if you're willing to give up your mobility and crouch/prone. You can then use weapons kinda like the weight class above by sighting/crouching, so an SMG can function a lot like an AR with a smaller mag, and an AR like an LMG with a smaller mag, but if you do this you lose the mobility required to dance away incoming fire. Lighter guns then act as more variable guns with a larger range of uses, IYSWIM, but heavier guns always have an extended range and stamina for pewpewing. You then have your 'light' players continually skipping in, taking shots and skipping back out to reload, and you have 'heavy' players trying to bulldoze through, and you manage it without adding lottery spread or screwing with HP values or making movement too slow. EDIT: And yeah, similar kind of movement speed reduction as with ETQW: SMGs don't impede movement speed at all, HMG bring you down to 85% (or whatever). Just enough speed impairment to balance the hindrance that aiming for headshots with a recoiling gun under fire presents.
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 08:58
The GPMG in ETQW had a vertical recoil. Which was easy to compensate for. The Maximus in Brink also had an additional random recoil which was impossible to compensate. Extremely frustrating. @Shirosae: What's curious to me is how you say stance should affect recoil (it indeed should) but the game shouldn't have any spread. IE people will be running around with 100% accurate guns on the first shot no matter what they do. Surely if you accept that your stance influences the control you have over your weapon then that should also apply to all the shots?
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 09:21
Surely if you accept that your stance influences the control you have over your weapon then that should also apply to all the shots?
Nope. I'm trying to make a game, not a simulation. Also, I didn't say the game shouldn't have spread. This thread is about distinguishing weapons from each other. I don't think spread should be used to distinguish between weapons. I'd happily accept a very small amount of spread and/or variation in muzzle velocity to act as a random seed. The first shot should be 100% accurate, though.
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 09:42
I'm not talking realism here. Why should a runner or jumper have the same accuracy as someone standing still or crouching? That's just not fair. Spread is ideal to distinguish weapons from each other. Not every weapon is as easy to handle on the move. Adding spread into the mix gives far more fidelity and diversity between the weapons.
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 09:56
At the end of the day I'd probably rather have an arcadey shooter than sim. The draw back in an arcade shooter of moving and shooting is the fact that you're moving while shooting, seems that some people think moving and aiming accurately is just as easy as standing still and aiming accurately.
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 10:23
But but, you need to think when you should stand still to aim accurately! You don't need to think about anything when moving!
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 10:31
I voted "Other" 'cos it's about spread, recoil, and damage. Please keep spread to a minimum.
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 13:00
I'd happily accept a very small amount of spread and/or variation in muzzle velocity to act as a random seed. The first shot should be 100% accurate, though.
And the spread reset time should be pretty quick. ;)
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 14:15
Brink had very fast spread increase and slow decay. Controlling your gun required too much effort and had insufficient pay-off. There wasn't enough advantage to standing or scoping. This relatively high prevalence of spread levelled the skill difference between players, which was a bad thing. Though I would enjoy even higher fidelity (very accurate scoped, very wide spread while moving and anything in between) like in Rainbow 6, I'm pretty happy with how ETQW's guns feel. In ETQW putting some thought into it gives you an edge but it doesn't require so much attention that it distracts from the action.
But but, you need to think when to stand still and aim accurately! You don't need to think about anything when moving!
Fixed that for you.
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 14:45
*Prepares for the hijack* Oh so apparently if you have equal accuracy, knowing when to stand and move doesn't need to exist either.
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 16:25
What's your preferred way of differentiating weapons of the same type in a shooter?
It depends on the game. However I prefer a game that adds pro's and con's to weapons as opposed to messing strictly with recoil/spread. Most of the times when its only recoil/spread that differentiates a set of guns, most people just use the one that gives the best balance and the rest are left behind (Brink anyone?). Space Marine for example has the best balancing of weapons I've seen in a game as no weapon is useless and that's the underpinning reason, each weapon comes with pro's and con's. For example a plasma cannon is insanely powerful heavy weapon which can kill an entire group in one charged shot. However its slow to fire, is inaccurate at range and in close combat is extremely dangerous to shoot with lest it kill the owner. On the flip side you have something like the Bolt pistol which is your most basic hand gun, yet even though it has a slow fire rate, medium damage and low mag size it is still a viable gun at long to close range because it is steady and a shot to the head kills. Now leaving my Space Marine fan boyizm out of it for a second lets look at three weapons that we could be talking about in a new game by SD. A pistol, an SMG and a Rifle. Both the pistol and the SMG do the same damage per shot, the Rifle does greater damage (perhaps twice as much). The pro's for the pistol - It is steady, it is accurate at all but extreme ranges, good for close combat. The con's for the pistol - It has a slow rate of fire, it has a small mag size. The pro's for the SMG - It has a fast rate of fire, it has a large mag size, good for close combat. The con's for the SMG - It is inaccurate at long to extreme ranges, it has a big kick to it causing spread on prolonged fire. The pro's for the Rifle - It is steady, it is accurate at all ranges. The con's for the Rifle - It has a very slow rate of fire, it has a small mag size, bad for close combat. Each weapon above is as good as each other in that they just have different pro's and con's to allow players to determine how they want to play, rather than lets all go for SMG because no matter what it kills 99% of the time (herpa derpa, herpa derpa Brink) compared to other guns. Another example if weapons of the same type: 9mm Pistol, Magnum 38, Desert Eagle. The 9mm pro's - Large ammo capacity, accurate, fast reload The 9mm con's - medium damage compared to other pistols The 38 pro's - accurate, nearly 1.5 x the damage of 9mm The 38 con's - small ammo capacity, slow reload, medium rate of fire The DE pro's - Twice the damage of 9mm, medium sized ammo capacity The DE con's - inaccurate when fired continuously, slow reload To me there is more to it than just recoil and spread and to be perfectly honest I would like all the guns to shoot straight and none of this random bullet lottery nonsense we had in Brink.
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 18:20
different handling, how fast it can be used, melee combat, different ironsights maybe, cool down times, clip size, precision, maybe amror piercing bullets, ... the hole range of options. But it should make sense somehow, I don't like the situation where I can choose between tons of guns, without knowing what there difference is - so I would have to play with each gun...
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 19:01
And the spread reset time should be pretty quick. ;)
Yep, or even just be a static thing. I don't think we should get into a situation where jumping over a box turns your AR into a shotgun. I think even the heavy weapon movement impairment should be inertia rather than top speed. I have a freaky idea I'm not totally sure about that moves the head at the same speed for everyone instantaneously as they hit the movement keys, but which IK's the centre of mass so it's affected by inertia and moves slower for heavier weapons, so people will tend to score extra bodyshots against you over time, but it doesn't make you useless.
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 19:12
Keep it as in ET or ETQW.
Posted on 16 August, 2012 - 21:49
Yep, or even just be a static thing. I don't think we should get into a situation where jumping over a box turns your AR into a shotgun.
What reset time is... its the speed in which recoil and spread returns to a minimum on the weapon, once you stop shooting.So when you tap fire, your bullets are going mostly straight with a quick reset time, as the game reads each bullet as the "first bullet". Im sure you know that, just explaining the term :)
so people will tend to score extra bodyshots against you over time, but it doesn't make you useless.
As for movement speed on heavies, again ETQW did it perfectly for me. I had a 7kpm with the hyper and 5.5 with gpmg so I never felt that heavies were useless at all. Only in promod, was the hyper useless due to its spin up vs low spread of AR.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 06:40
Its almost perfect in W:ET and ET:QW just do the same with new game and people will <3 you all
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 07:23
What reset time is... its the speed in which recoil and spread returns to a minimum on the weapon, once you stop shooting.So when you tap fire, your bullets are going mostly straight with a quick reset time, as the game reads each bullet as the "first bullet". Im sure you know that, just explaining the term :)
Ah, sorry. I mean that the spread cone just doesn't enlarge, but instead stays as a small random seed and you use recoil as your movement sensitive aim impairment. If there must be a dynamic cone of fire, make the reset time instantaneous. If I'm crouching in position I can't think of a good reason for my aim to be punished because I jumped over a box three seconds ago.
As for movement speed on heavies, again ETQW did it perfectly for me. I had a 7kpm with the hyper and 5.5 with gpmg so I never felt that heavies were useless at all. Only in promod, was the hyper useless due to its spin up vs low spread of AR.
I could take either or. Inertia thing is an idea that's been rolling around for a couple of years and thought I'd cough it up, because you can blend it with movement speed to give you a few options, ie it lets you further impair heavy weapons if needs be without making them so slow they're useless. Subtleties! Agreed with everything, though. I think my biggest beef with the GPMG was the jerky way the sights behaved under fire. I'd prefer recoil much more like Day of Defeat beta 0.31, where the recoil is a smooth continual motion. Just because it hurts my eyes less when I have a migraine.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 09:51
If there must be a dynamic cone of fire, make the reset time instantaneous. If I'm crouching in position I can't think of a good reason for my aim to be punished because I jumped over a box three seconds ago.
I suggest you'll try it once. You'll see.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 12:44
I suggest you'll try it once. You'll see.
In real life it's difficult to steady your aim after you jump over a box, so in a video game your gun should shoot bullets sideways for a set number of seconds after you do it because a video game should invent some other mechanism that isn't really the same as trying to point a gun straight but instead ask you to roll a d20 or something because I said so. Answer: Or, you could add some recoil to your gun on landing based on impact velocity so it's not lol randomness but something you actually need to actively learn to compensate for. Game, not simulation. Game, not simulation. Game, not simulation.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 13:02
Even if its simulation, spread doesnt exist in real life right? I mean spread is adding a random layer of "where my bullets will land" while recoil is just "If I keep firing this AK in full auto I'll soon shoot the moon down", even when a weapon doesnt shot right where you aim at it, it shot ALLWAYS with the same bias, thats why, to me, spread should be non existant and you should add a bigger recoil (controlable one by firing in burst) for weapon with high rate of fire, less "handling" (I dont know the word but well, its easier to control a carabin than a uzi for exemple) and less weight --> Recoil should differentiate weapons The only thing where I can see spread coming in is when you are moving, add a tad when you run, a little when you walk, and not at all when you are standing still -> Spread should differentiate situational awareness (and even for this point you can go no spread in every situation, but make the use of walk important with less loud steps, a non infinite stamina, etc... This way people wotn be running all the time, but I can even live with that!) Crouching and proning should be used only to get in more covered position or the show less of your hitboxes, so no spread while standing still, crouching still or proning should be applyed IMO. Spread is random, adding any random variable in an aiming process is dumbing down things for the sale of dumbing them down. Peace
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 13:19
In real life it's difficult to steady your aim after you jump over a box, so in a video game your gun should shoot bullets sideways for a set number of seconds after you do it because a video game should invent some other mechanism that isn't really the same as trying to point a gun straight but instead ask you to roll a d20 or something because I said so. Answer: Or, you could add some recoil to your gun on landing based on impact velocity so it's not lol randomness but something you actually need to actively learn to compensate for. Game, not simulation. Game, not simulation. Game, not simulation.
It's not the recoil that is hard to control after a jump. It's the time it takes to steady your aim. I don't really get this sudden obsession with recoil in the first place. Recoil is- and should- only be marginally influenced by your stance. In this context, the whole focus on recoil just reeks of a red herring. The point is, you got to jump over a box. That is you finding a more favourable position. That choice needs a trade off so that it doesn't become a no-brainer. People need to be able to decide whether or not they prefer that favourable position over a steadier aim. If that trade-off doesn't exist then getting to a favourable position is always the best choice as you get to keep all your shooting advantage.
Even if its simulation, spread doesnt exist in real life right?
From the nozzle onwards the spread is marginal, but when taken from the grip there's definitely such a thing as spread (please don't take this out of context). In real life you don't have an optical mouse and a custom coloured dot showing exactly where the bullets will land with absolute certainty. And it's not complete randomness. It's randomness that players can control. It's randomness that increases over distance, it's randomness that can be tempered by taking the right measurements and sacrificing other perks (like high mobility), it's randomness that can penalise you for getting hit. This is what makes a game tactical, provided players have a high level of control of this randomness. It rewards situational awareness, forward thinking and improvisation. Without this factored in it's simply mouse dexterity that determines the brunt of the combat outcomes, that's just boring. In Brink however, it felt like players didn't really get to control their spread. It was just went up at anything you did which means a high amount of average spread. That's something I'm against. That's the kind of randomness that turn shooters in a RISK mechanic where you stack probabilities against each other until an outcome is determined.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 14:49
Even if its simulation, spread doesnt exist in real life right? I mean spread is adding a random layer of "where my bullets will land" while recoil is just "If I keep firing this AK in full auto I'll soon shoot the moon down", even when a weapon doesnt shot right where you aim at it, it shot ALLWAYS with the same bias, thats why, to me, spread should be non existant and you should add a bigger recoil (controlable one by firing in burst) for weapon with high rate of fire, less "handling" (I dont know the word but well, its easier to control a carabin than a uzi for exemple) and less weight --> Recoil should differentiate weapons The only thing where I can see spread coming in is when you are moving, add a tad when you run, a little when you walk, and not at all when you are standing still -> Spread should differentiate situational awareness (and even for this point you can go no spread in every situation, but make the use of walk important with less loud steps, a non infinite stamina, etc... This way people wotn be running all the time, but I can even live with that!) Crouching and proning should be used only to get in more covered position or the show less of your hitboxes, so no spread while standing still, crouching still or proning should be applyed IMO. Spread is random, adding any random variable in an aiming process is dumbing down things for the sale of dumbing them down. Peace
Agreed. any spread is down to the person holding a gun not the gun. Body movement should differentiate levels of spread. Holding breath (cntrl b)>breathing normally>breathing heavily after running Laying down(cntrl p)> crouching (cntrl c)> standing> walking(arrows) running (shift) This would add new levels to skills in a fair way.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 14:55
The point is, you got to jump over a box. That is you finding a more favourable position. That choice needs a trade off so that it doesn't become a no-brainer.
There is, you're having to concentrate on moving and looking where you're going with no gun pointing at the enemy while he's pummeling bullets into you... just in case that wasn't obvious. If the player is moving and shooting at the same time and getting decent aim vaulting a box at the same time and gets the kill, well kudos to him, he's a skilled player and deserves the kill. But you don't like people having an earned advantage over someone else who cant be bothered to take the time to practice and hone their play style "it's not fair!" lol. So ok, you want everything to be Rainbox 6, apparenly accurate weapons take no skill, moving and shooting at the same time takes no skill, everyone forgets to know when to stop with accurate weapons, tactics don't exist with accurate weapons, no one knows how to think with accurate weapons... we get it, we get it, we get it, we get it, we get it, we get it, we get it, we get it *bump* sorry, the record must be broken.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 16:27
This only demonstrates that you aren't familiar with R6. That game has the most intense, visceral as well as tactical shoot outs, they can take nerve-wrecking minutes or be decided with in a fraction of a second. The weapons in Raven Shield are highly accurate if you know how to control your spread. Players often stick with one favourite gun for very long times just because they're familiarised with it's behaviour, it takes time getting to know each weapon so you end up building a rather intimate relationship with it.
you're having to concentrate on moving and looking where you're going with no gun pointing at the enemy while he's pummeling bullets into you
Oh please...:rolleyes:
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 16:38
I did play Rainbox 6, it was who could make it to choke points fastest gets the standy bottleneck kills... it really wasn't very difficult or tactically challenging at all. Oh please explain your oh please please, this demonstrates that you aren't familiar with having to concentrate on several things at once. You want to stand still and shoot and punish those that don't because you can't do it yourself. I told you, we get it! You don't like having to practice more than standy shooty, we know we know! So everyone is wrong because you don't agree with their preferred play style, its pretty shallow really.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 16:54
I'm glad we agree on how incredibly important strategic area control was in R6. That's what I believe tactical shooters should be about. Giving a players a bit more life allows for more flexibility and action and stops one player from completely dominating certain locations (which was great in R6 team survival, but not in an assault based ET game). The rest of your remarks deserve no further comment.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 17:15
Some thoughts. Any single round weapon should be accurate to where you point it, lets leave the skill in actually using the mouse and movement to get a shot rather than instituting fake hurdles or just randomness. Multishot weapons such as shotguns should have a fixed spread pattern that widens over distance. This way it's predictable but not unrealistic. If you must have spread then implement it via the crosshair. Move the actual crosshair and make the player compensate with finer aim. Ultimately though, just let the player's aim and movement decide the outcome. A questions back to SD. What benefit do you feel it brings the actual game to have 1000 weapons available short of commercial appeal?
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 17:28
A moving crosshair (essentially recoil) means there's a new random seed implemented as well as no restabilisation after the shot. This means that the inaccuracy of a weapon rapidly escalates plus you end up with your weapon pointing somewhere you never planned for in the first place. Spread allows the player to keep pointing the exact same direction and just apply a field of damage precisely where he wants, the only thing that changes is the cone of fire. In essence this is the difference between the Maximus (recoil) and the Chinzor (spread). A hyperblaster on the other hand, has bit of both. The high general inaccuracy of both weapons definitely didn't compensate for playing a heavy in general but I think there's definitely place for all these weapons. Getting both variables only means more possible diversity.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 17:45
Oh yeah, ET had no need for area control at all, neither does Q3 or the likes. Only tactical shooters require control, map timing, choke point domination, strategic player positioning, all other games the players just run around at random while spamming accurate weapon... are you honestly serious with that comment? Do you expect to get taken serious with that comment? You constantly want the game to make up for your failings rather than you having to work on them, I'm still laughing at the "it's not fair" comment lol.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 18:07
In those games players are much less capable of controlling areas yeah. You'll agree that's a good thing because you just dismissed R6 for it's emphasis on holding chokepoints yourself. If you're going to argue with me then please be sure to have a singular point. You'll end up contradicting yourself less that way.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 18:16
A moving crosshair (essentially recoil) means there's a new random seed implemented as well as no restabilisation after the shot. This means that the inaccuracy of a weapon rapidly escalates plus you end up with your weapon pointing somewhere you never planned for in the first place. Spread allows the player to keep pointing the exact same direction and just apply a field of damage precisely where he wants, the only thing that changes is the cone of fire. In essence this is the difference between the Maximus (recoil) and the Chinzor (spread). A hyperblaster on the other hand, has bit of both. The high general inaccuracy of both weapons definitely didn't compensate for playing a heavy in general but I think there's definitely place for all these weapons. Getting both variables only means more possible diversity.
I was making a point about the representation of spread. So rather than having a visual representation of aiming inaccuracy in a form that a player can then compensate for, you'd rather imposed a hidden version that shoots where the cross hair is NOT pointing resulting in largely random outcomes. Given the option I'd rather a game didn't feel the need to add more crutches just to feign "choice" and "skill". Again this is trying to put in place a complicated, inaccurate simulation of reality rather than relying on the simpler solution that is a player's ability to interact with the gameworld though their input method.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 18:23
CS is there if you want complex weapon spread/recoil mechanics, but that's at the cost of losing "pure aim" and fast paced game play. ARMA is there if you want realistic tactical weapon mechanics, again at the same costs. ET is there when you want to run and gun at high speed with "hit or miss" weapon mechanics. ETQW already showed how recoil and spread could be implemented into the system, so let's keep going with what was working best. Recoil on heavy weapons, spread bloom at appropriate distances per weapon type, etc etc. Makes perfect sense to me- end of discussion.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 18:43
In those games players are much less capable of controlling areas yeah. You'll agree that's a good thing because you just dismissed R6 for it's emphasis on holding chokepoints yourself. If you're going to argue with me then please be sure to have a singular point. You'll end up contradicting yourself less that way.
Did I dismiss them? I'm assuming due to your lack of knowledge of Q3 you're probably limited the games area control because of item picksups, did you know there are other game types? Clan Arena is the most popular Quake Live game type, all weapons, no pickups, limited ammo... heavy emphasis on teamwork and area control and restricting choke points. No idea what capability has to do with it, it's still required regardless... oh look, no contradiction. I like how you're preaching tactics yet buckle at the thought of having to use some. Ok so some guy is vaulting a box with an accurate weapon, you can either take advantage of the situation and get the key 1st hits in while he's in motion because all you're having to do is aim and shoot, reposition to counter the advantage he's trying to give himself, or just deal with it when he reaches the position dispersing any advantage he tried to gain.... or you could cry "its not fair!", stand still like a sitting duck and get hit then complain to the devs that he should be punished for out-thinking, out-manoeuvring and out-aiming you.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 18:45
I was making a point about the representation of spread. So rather than having a visual representation of aiming inaccuracy in a form that a player can then compensate for, you'd rather imposed a hidden version that shoots where the cross hair is NOT pointing resulting in largely random outcomes.
I get that. Recoil is much more representative than spread because your bullets keep landing exactly on your crosshair. It's just that I think what you're proposing right now may not be what you're after if I look at the rest of what you said.
CS is there if you want complex weapon spread/recoil mechanics, but that's at the cost of losing "pure aim" and fast paced game play.
CS has incredibly tight weapons. It's what I think of when I see what you, DAUK and Shirosae are arguing for. If that's not the case then I'll retract that but I'll be confused at what it is you really want.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 18:52
CS has incredibly tight weapons. It's what I think of when I see what you, DAUK and Shirosae are arguing for. If that's not the case then I'll retract that but I'll be confused at what it is you really want.
Have you played CS?? It's a "stand still shooter" and the weapon interactions chew away at the game pace. I like it sure as its own thing, but I like ET more for all said reasons.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 19:10
It's pure run and gun with an icing of quickscope.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 19:12
So no then, you've not played it.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 19:14
I get that. Recoil is much more representative than spread because your bullets keep landing exactly on your crosshair. It's just that I think what you're proposing right now may not be what you're after if I look at the rest of what you said.
I was giving multiple ideas under the topic, they were not intended to be a single cohesive idea. As such, I said instead of drawing a large circle and saying, "bullets will land somewhere here, enjoy the randoms". You instead draw a point within that circle under which the bullet will land. This is no different than someone actually exerting themselves and then trying to aim. Such a system allows a small degree of control over the spread and as such is no longer a totally random crap shoot. In fact as I type this I realise where I got the idea from. ARMA/DayZ does exactly this after you've been sprinting. Of course I'll repeat myself and say I think it's unnecessary in the sort of games SD makes. I just wouldn't want to see that fact ignored and them multiplied by sticking to some randomised circle.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 19:17
I don't see much issue with such an indicator actually. In a way it will help enhance the feeling of how much spread a player is dealing with. My only fear is that it might be distracting but as long as it's optional then sure, it may or may not be an advantage depending on how you few it.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 19:20
CS has incredibly tight weapons. It's what I think of when I see what you, DAUK and Shirosae are arguing for. If that's not the case then I'll retract that but I'll be confused at what it is you really want.
CS is not even slightly run and gun. I played it for a few months around 2001/2002 and got bored, moving on to DoD, which balanced lotto spread with recoil that skill could compensate for. If this confuses you, perhaps you should stop posting for a while and just read the conversation that happens when you're not derailing it?
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 19:22
It's really simple. If you don't move in CS then you're dead. Constant movement is integral to it's gameplay. Same goes for Brink. The spread is high anyway so you might as well keep moving.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 19:25
Yup, definitely hasn't played it.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 19:27
Keep an eye on the crosshair. Movement just doesn't influence it. And even burst-fire hardly has does a thing to the spread. At 1:05 he even jumps and it doesn't matter at all. [video=youtube;FsPsvuQ13vo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsPsvuQ13vo[/video] It's that I'm so used to being right otherwise this would be awkward.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 19:34
Hey look, I managed to get a kill from ten feet away by spraying a full mag across some dude's chest and like six feet of wall with a gun that can kill with two headshots. EDIT: Actually, you know what? I'm not playing the Tokamak game anymore. I genuinely want a discussion about balancing between spread and recoil with sane people.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 19:38
^thats not nice :(
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 19:44
Oh and this by no means slagging off Counterstrike. It clearly has the emphasis on the dexterity of players in favour of tactical awareness. That's what the game choses to be and it can be enjoyable for that. I'd just hate to see an SD game go that way as the frantic yet absolute nature of these fights leaves very little room for ideas and creativity.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 19:49
^thats not nice :(
Man, I'm tired of every discussion that happens devolving into the same circular silliness. Can we not just have one thread where we talk to each other instead? Please?
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 19:51
Because you can't apply ideas and creativity, doesn't mean it's not there to be done... that's the part you're missing here. Again we're back to your failings as a gamer. But yeah toka-hijack over.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 19:52
Yeah let's just pretend the last page didn't happen.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 19:55
Um, I hope your basing your opinions off of actually playing and not just watching videos. Movement is incredibly impacting on the weapons because if you move the spread increases... that's why you strafe-stop-shoot-strafe-stop-shoot. If you want perfect accuracy, all movement comes before and after you take your shot, not during the process of shooting. If you are moving and shooting, your probably spraying or bursting and hoping that one of your bullets hits- which I don't consider true aiming. When you are spraying, your usually aiming at the feet and moving your cross hair from side to side to increase your chances of getting hits based on the spread/recoil pattern. One of my favorite moments in CS was when a guy jumped off a wall and single shot a guy in the foot at full spread, which resulted in a headshot. Now you can go play the game and find out for yourself. An example of what direct aim looks like.... [video=youtube;iCsFJBS-LjY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCsFJBS-LjY[/video]
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 20:06
Um, I hope your basing your opinions off of actually playing and not just watching videos.
I guess that would be because personal experience is completely subjective and in no way verifiable while there's no way around that undynamic crosshair in the video. Let's just stop digging this hole. I did play it. Granted, 93 minutes was enough to decide that CS is not for me. But that was exactly due to the lack of dynamic spread. I got 87 hours on Steam's Raven Shield and easily a tenfold of that for the non-steam version simply because my brain actually gets to do something during the game.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 20:11
Also, you can watch Incorporated 2, some scenes in it show spray aiming and aiming at the feet (or lower) to get headies.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 20:13
You're basing spread off how the crosshair moved?
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 20:13
Yes I did. What are you basing it on? The video quality is terrible here but in this dude's video the impacts clearly aren't landing outside his crosshair
Also, you can watch Incorporated 2, some scenes in it show spray aiming and aiming at the feet (or lower) to get headies.
You can also just watch Brink videos for that ;)
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 20:15
Aiming in Brink is far different from CS. Cba to get into a super-massive-50-page-discussion so I'll just say this. From experience Brink has a small and predictable spread whereas CS can have a massively varied spread and not as predictable.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 20:19
Out of interest, does anyone find the camera jerking from recoil uncomfortable? I remember avoiding the GPMG often because the combined camera jerk and ironsight jerk would give me a headache. DoD I found nice in that it was a smooth recoil motion from the camera, but whilst that works for firing recoil I'm not sure about all circumstances. If you were to add a recoil impulse from landing from a height, would it be a sudden camera jerk? Or would you move the weapon and sight/dot so that it stayed true but still required compensation without the jerk from your field of view?
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 20:19
My subjective actual playing experience, I'm wacky and zany that way.
This only demonstrates that you aren't familiar with R6.
Kinda working that way with yourself and CS. Guess watching a 3min frag vid should teach everyone anything they need to know, screw actual experience!
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 20:23
Yeah I would say screw actual experience, nothing can be verified through that. Videos don't lie.
Out of interest, does anyone find the camera jerking from recoil uncomfortable? I remember avoiding the GPMG often because the combined camera jerk and ironsight jerk would give me a headache.
At least the GPMG had a predominantly vertical recoil. The Maximus had a recoil in all directions which made it impossible to compensate for.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 20:27
Your opinion on the crosshair activity is subjective though and no way verifiable :D
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 20:34
An example of what direct aim looks like.... [video=youtube;iCsFJBS-LjY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCsFJBS-LjY[/video]
Cheers, but it doesn't show spread on the move. I used to play the original on LANs during primary school but I remember being way too excited to give anything about about mechanics.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 20:37
Your opinion on the crosshair activity is subjective though and no way verifiable :D
You guys could just look at the bullet impact decals on/around the crosshair as these players fire. It's clear enough to see on dust.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 20:38
He added a 2nd video later on that I just noticed. Wasn't he talking about spread while moving? Links a guy standing still.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 20:46
Yes I did. What are you basing it on?
Gee idk I played the game with a partial understanding of what was going on around me?? Instead of getting one of my ESEA Invite CS friends to post here and call you names... I'll just slap you with the ignorance glove instead. You should really realize that by now 99% of the fights you pick make you look really dumb. [video=youtube;LG-KfS33tP4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LG-KfS33tP4[/video]
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 20:46
Awesome, much better video. Still highly tight weapons and little effect on the spread. Really, try the same thing in ET.
He added a 2nd video later on that I just noticed. Wasn't he talking about spread while moving? Links a guy standing still.
Woooosh
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 20:54
You are full of purposeful, subtle contradictions that you try and hide to favour your argument... it rarely works. Any way you should enjoy Infernos vid, the stop strafing part that explains how to increase accuracy while shooting on the move is very entertaining :wink: Videos don't lie!
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 20:57
I didn't deny that. It's just marginal. Safe for arcade shooters there isn't a game with less spread than that.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 21:26
The first video shows how you would see most "good" people attacking a target in CS, and the second video clears up the confusion that players are actually moving while shooting- which they clearly are not. Sometimes I just assume everyone has some logic/experience behind what they are talking about, but maybe I should be spending more time on the SD forums where the below-average gamer knows best. Le sigh.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 21:31
Okay I admit that the spread reduction is more substantial than I first suspected. Still marginal, but that video did change the way I view CS. Still, the point remains that CS is the most tight shooter on offer. I guess the only true challenger is promod. If you know any games that have 'pure aim', as you call it, then let me know.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 21:34
If you know any games that have 'pure aim', as you call it, then let me know.
Pure aim as I define it involves pointing a crosshair at a target and having your bullets follow a near direct path. The base rifle in ET games is a perfect example of this, and all other weapons function under the same general concept but with other factors for balance. You aim, you shoot, you hit or miss. In my book the most aim-skill measuring weapons are those that punish you for poor aim. There's plenty of games that have weapons that function like this, but I find ET to be the most consistent in the overall weapon design. The fact that the base ET rifle has low spread and recoil allows it to be used in constant motion allowing for fast paced game play by default. Obviously you have played the games, so I won't go into detail.
Posted on 17 August, 2012 - 23:37
I only watched a little of the video tokamak posted (because it was laughable to me, he picked like the worst player ever); does the video ever say if he has dynamic crosshair turned off? It did look static, but I play with dynamic crosshair off and it looks a lot like that, but you can still see the bullets fly all over the place. Heck, you can see how bad spread can get in CS:GO if you just hold down m1, because of the tracers that everyone hates. I just find it funny that he acts as if CS boils down to all aim & run and gun and not tactics, strategy, or planning; I remember watching that old TV show on G4TechTV called The Arena or something between teams like compLexity, Carolina Core, Venom, Optx (anyone remember any of them besides coL? Good times!) and the way they played completely contradicts the way he talks about CS. Heck, the way I play CS completely contradicts the way he talks about it and I'm no where near their level. Just because a YouTube video shows someone walking towards someone and getting kills doesn't mean that's how it's played. I still find myself every now and then being stupid, walking towards someone with their back turned and just holding mouse1 and watching as my bullets fly around their little head. You should download GO, I think it's in open beta now (or it's supposed to be soon, if I'm thinking right. I got a key for the closed beta so I never kept up with it) and actually play some and try running towards people holding mouse1 or AWPing and not standing still.
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 00:32
both, but small enough spread that skill matters. But a bit of spread so that closing distance is a strategy. ETQW and BFBC2 did it well.
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 09:12
This is a response to the post by Humate that used to be here on this page, but now isn't? I guess the question, since most people who posted seem to favour recoil, is to see how people want recoil to work. Is having the recoil/kickback work like ETQW did it a dealbreaker for you? I'd much rather a system where each gun has a moment of inertia, and each shot imparts a pulsed torque upwards. That way the recoil doesn't have that square wave jerking like ETQW did. It's selfish, but the sudden jerks in ETQW burn my eyes.
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 10:42
Yes I accidentally deleted the post sorry mate. I had to load up the game vs the comp and test it out against the wall, because its been a while since ive played the game. :) The way they camera shifts with the GPMG didnt really bother me to be honest. I would say the machine pistol was more annoying, but not enough to be pissed.
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 11:12
Sorry, what I mean to ask is: Is it important for you that the recoil in this new game works the way it does in ETQW? I'd be quite interested in theorycrafting some recoil mechanisms here, but I'm wondering if it's a non-starter or not.
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 12:13
I would be pretty pleased if recoil worked precisely like etqw in SD's new game. Important to me? Not really.
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 12:33
Same. But then again, I would be pretty pleased if pretty much anything works precisely like ETQW in SD's new game.
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 12:52
Same. But then again, I would be pretty pleased if pretty much anything works precisely like ETQW in SD's new game.
Sign. Who doesn't, who doesn't :(
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 13:53
majorly off-topic: movement speed & strafe jumping knife switch to gain speed asymmetrically balanced teams opened up areas b/w 1st and 2nd objective class models weapon tied to class outdoor objectives like sewer - open kill log with weapon names, instead of icons fireteams with health/gib status of team-mates damage model 3hs = kill temp unlocks first person spec when in spawn queue FACTION specific FOOTSTEP SOUNDS Walk mechanic ;) The stuff that might need a bit of work: hit rego / netcode less spam radar : / edit: some ideas for your new community threads badman
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 13:57
majorly off-topic: movement speed & strafe jumping weapon switch to gain speed asymmetrically balanced teams opened up areas b/w 1st and 2nd objective class models weapon tied to class outdoor objectives like sewer - open kill log with weapon names, instead of icons fireteams with health/gib status of team-mates damage model 3hs = kill temp unlocks first person spec when in spawn queue FACTION specific FOOTSTEP SOUNDS Walk mechanic ;) The stuff that might need a bit of work: hit rego / netcode less spam radar : / edit: some ideas for your new community threads badman
I know you're describing etqw, but I think you should re-work weapon switch to gain speed to switch to a lighter weapon to gain speed. Yours makes it sound like if you continuously switch weapon you will travel at warp speed. :D And, yeh I'd love it if it played like etqw, (except with better netcode which doesn't make you invincible with 100+ ping)
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 14:35
Yep im talking about switching to knife...... or spikes :) Thanks for correcting it though.
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 14:41
I may of course be saying something really stupid right now but with that unreal engine I'm not worried about the netcode.
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 15:04
Well. With network code you can go two ways. Either you try to give everyone a reasonably accurate approximation of what is actually happening, or you try to give a simulation of lagless play. In the past Unreal has leaned towards the former while Quake/Source have embraced the latter with lag compensation. I prefer playing with lag compensation even though you have to put up with idiots crying about how they totally just got killed around a corner and that thats bull**** and then they start moaning about how high ping/poor connection is actually an advantage. Don't know what recent Unreal has done. Everything moves so slow these days though that combined with universal broadband connections, lag kind of isn't a big deal anymore.
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 18:38
One of the other things that needs to be kept in mind is fall-off distance on weapons. That was a great means of distinguishing between many of the weapons in ETQW. I'm not talking about bullet drop, but there is a fixed range for each weapon. ETQW promod was awesome, but one of the bigger faults was that the range of the default rifles was so good the scoped rifles had no real use. Adding in more guns should really follow the ETQW model though, as I felt it really did the best job at maintaining a solid balance between all of the weapon types (just no rockets or hypers ploz).
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 18:43
Scope assault and acc lac are pretty good in promod... best kill stealing weapons in the game *cough*
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 19:30
I prefer playing with lag compensation even though you have to put up with idiots crying about how they totally just got killed around a corner and that thats bull**** and then they start moaning about how high ping/poor connection is actually an advantage.
YES, it's time to disable those ridiculous prediction restrictions.
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 20:00
One of the other things that needs to be kept in mind is fall-off distance on weapons. That was a great means of distinguishing between many of the weapons in ETQW. I'm not talking about bullet drop, but there is a fixed range for each weapon. ETQW promod was awesome, but one of the bigger faults was that the range of the default rifles was so good the scoped rifles had no real use. Adding in more guns should really follow the ETQW model though, as I felt it really did the best job at maintaining a solid balance between all of the weapon types (just no rockets or hypers ploz).
Definitely! And although I'm a fan of complexity, I really like the weapons to remain hitscan rather than projectile. Hitscan just adds that little complication to fights that takes a lot of the fun out. The damage-fall off over distance also compensate for ridiculous long range shenanigans and makes projectile ballistics unnecessary in balancing the gameplay.
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 20:25
Since we ended up leaning onto lag and netcode/hit reg etc, a weird/awesome for me moment has happened on promod during a match. Here it is from both perspectives. My POV (and external)
Posted on 18 August, 2012 - 20:55