Leaning in Planetside.

[ArbitraryDemise]

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

Far enough to aim a gun around a corner? I don't think the human body could do that very well either.

I do this all the time in paintball :P

[Aesir]

Originally Posted by Poser

If they add a 3rd person view, I won't play this game. Being able to pan out is downright game breaking in a shooter.

PS1 had a instant third person switch, you could even shoot while doing so, but you had no crosshair and the camera was locked on the vertical axis. While still being a shooter.

Let's see it from a real perspective.

The idea behind the whole mechanic is to scout around cover, while reducing the danger to yourself, like a real soldier would do, my personal experience there was that you almost never go prone in an urban area, because it's to open and flanks switch to quickly to lose all the mobility from being in a crouching/standing position is considered bad, atleast in the Austrian military during my time there.

To lean around the corner, rifles are also somewhat in your way and there are 2 ways a real soldier does overcome it, either be further away from the cover he want's to peek around or to just peek with his head, while lowering the weapon. Also, the recoil kicks slightly harder if you shoot while leaning because you are in a less balanced stance.

Those are the real facts, in a universe were you just respawn after death, soldiers will probably don't even bother using cover to it's full potential, so leaning and 3rd person is actually useless if you consider those fact's, infantry will just rush around crying "For the Motherland!".

Now from the dev's point of view, they want to make it fast paced action, way faster than PS1 was, leaning, be it with the ability to shoot or not, may make it feel more realistic, but will slow down the pace. Now what can we add that does not slow down the pace, but still that scouting feature, why not give infiltrates with a certain skill set the ability to mark target's for your squad/platoon and don't add leaning/3rd person.

So, basically, I just made my own 3rd person concept useless

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

It's multiple choice. I read it as X number of people don't want an actual cover mechanic, these people are likely going to vote no for leaning in general as well. People that want lean, but vote for no mechanic are likely going to vote for either aim & shoot, or peek as well, so their vote is still being counted. People who vote for mechanic obviously want a lean feature and will vote for either aim & shoot or peek.

Are you serious? This is why I've been advocating for not using polls and letting people express what they want and then counting up the results. Think hard about this statement: "these people are likely going to vote no for leaning in general as well". Now look back at your poll. If the people voting no for a lock on cover mechanic would be voting no for lean you would see identical numbers for both stats, but you don't see that. Not to mention they are independent variables!

You included 2 polls in one with an opt-out option for both:

Aim and Shoot While Leaning (which includes look)
Just Look

Cover Mechanic
No Cover Mechanic

Absolutely No Leaning (opt-out)

The true expanded options of your poll are:

Aim and Shoot or Look While leaning and Cover Mechanic
Aim and Shoot or Look While leaning and No Cover Mechanic
Just Look and Cover Mechanic
Just Look and No Cover Mechanic
No Leaning (opt-out)

So why did you make it a checkbox system if there are so few choices? Because of your broken poll design these variables in the poll are completely independent variables (aim and shoot and look vs just look is independent of cover or no cover mechanic). We can do statistical analysis between people that chose one or the other, but the best we could find is a positive or negative correlation and nothing useful from the data can be determined except the independent stats. You cannot make any judgement about aim and shoot with a cover mechanism which makes this whole poll completely worthless.

[OnexBigxHebrew]

Have to say I'm against leaning. honestly, the character models in this game already look pretty goofy sometimes and I don't think the would help any, lol

[Blackwolf]

Originally Posted by Aesir

Let's see it from a real perspective.

The idea behind the whole mechanic is to scout around cover, while reducing the danger to yourself, like a real soldier would do, my personal experience there was that you almost never go prone in an urban area, because it's to open and flanks switch to quickly to lose all the mobility from being in a crouching/standing position is considered bad, atleast in the Austrian military during my time there.

To lean around the corner, rifles are also somewhat in your way and there are 2 ways a real soldier does overcome it, either be further away from the cover he want's to peek around or to just peek with his head, while lowering the weapon. Also, the recoil kicks slightly harder if you shoot while leaning because you are in a less balanced stance.

Those are the real facts, in a universe were you just respawn after death, soldiers will probably don't even bother using cover to it's full potential, so leaning and 3rd person is actually useless if you consider those fact's, infantry will just rush around crying "For the Motherland!".

Now from the dev's point of view, they want to make it fast paced action, way faster than PS1 was, leaning, be it with the ability to shoot or not, may make it feel more realistic, but will slow down the pace. Now what can we add that does not slow down the pace, but still that scouting feature, why not give infiltrates with a certain skill set the ability to mark target's for your squad/platoon and don't add leaning/3rd person.

So, basically, I just made my own 3rd person concept useless

OMG! I did not think I would say this (at least not in this thread) but Aesir you are awesome.

See I never had military training. Never been in war. I've paintballed once. But even I know that what Aesir here just said is exactly why I had problems with everything from 3rdPoV to prone and yes even leaning.

Using cover is vital, but using it while fighting back is incredibly difficult and awkward while pressed up against the wall. Mass Effect used a system where you pivoted into and out of cover, or stood up and ducked down.

And yet everything that he mentioned to the very letter can be done without special features like a whole lean mechanic. And were very doable in PS1 if you needed to do them.

Personally, I'd love to see a good solid cover system put in. But if people want a system that can be accomplished free form without an actual cover mechanic and all they really want is a lean, why bother? Especially if we are going to complicate said system with rules like "you can't move while leaning". Frankly we can just deci-pop around a corner and pop back if we need a peek, or crouch and scoot around to try and keep yourself protected from as much enemy fire as possible while clearing the area from side to side.

[Blackwolf]

Originally Posted by Sirisian

So why did you make it a checkbox system if there are so few choices? Because of your broken poll design these variables in the poll are completely independent variables (aim and shoot and look vs just look is independent of cover or no cover mechanic). We can do statistical analysis between people that chose one or the other, but the best we could find is a positive or negative correlation and nothing useful from the data can be determined except the independent stats. You cannot make any judgement about aim and shoot with a cover mechanism which makes this whole poll completely worthless.

Do you know why democracy fails? Because everyone only gets one vote. It fails because it inevitably leads to a two party system, oh look at that, it's democrats vs republics... again...

My poll gives a set of options. What would you like to see in it. And let's face it, the way I interpret it is very biased and heavily favors some kind of mechanic over none at all (3 options that can and probably are doubled up over 2?). And yet what I see is exactly the opposite. What the majority of the >FAVORED< options are, and that we don't need a special system for them.

I'm pretty sure if you just asked for a lean system (with or without shooting) with a yes or no, the no's would have it, majority might vote for peeking without shooting. I'm positive if you had a poll asking for a cover system, the no's would have it. And I'm pretty sure that only you would be obsessive enough to read through every post and give a bare minimum summary that leaves others dissatisfied with how you viewed their thoughts on the matter.

Again, I'm not trying for a yes or no. I'm more interested in seeing if a mechanic is needed to represent the favored desires of the 70+ people that voted so far (thank you btw), not if it's wanted.

May I ask what you voted for Siri?

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by Aesir

Let's see it from a real perspective.

The idea behind the whole mechanic is to scout around cover, while reducing the danger to yourself, like a real soldier would do, my personal experience there was that you almost never go prone in an urban area, because it's to open and flanks switch to quickly to lose all the mobility from being in a crouching/standing position is considered bad, atleast in the Austrian military during my time there.

Exactly! If the game can correctly simulate these transitions and these benefits then it'll make a world of difference. Even subtle delays changes when certain choices are viable than others. I used to play airsoft outside and that really captures when you want to lean or go prone. Standing behind a tree you don't want to put yourself in danger. You just want to lean out with your rifle while taking shots. If you're crouched behind a piece of wood you just want to lean out from the side. You end with very simple constraints from the real world. The first one which I already said is you can't move while leaning left or right and must transition back from leaning before you can stand up or crouch or begin moving again. I can't remember having to lean when running to the next piece of cover. Planetside 2 can easily simulate these state transitions. You also mention that getting flanked is a huge difference. In the previous treads I along with others kept mentioning delays for transitions. These delays are what make leaning and crouching a tactical choice. If you can just crouch instantly or prone instantly for that matter (aka dolphin diving) it is no longer a difficult choice in situations.

This idea of delays was also brought up in a very old thread when someone mentioned slowing your rotation speed when crouched. That means if you're guarding two doors you are more vulnerable when crouched. The same was suggested numerous times for lowering the mobility for prone. Maybe these are difficult to imagine in people's heads if they haven't played airsoft or paintball or done military excersizes I guess. It seems obvious to me at this point.

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

Again you are attempting to compromise with me. This is why I honestly don't like discussions with you Siri. I don't decide whether or not this gets into the game, or how it's implemented. The DEVs will make the final decision. If people wanted this system, they would share their ideas on how it can be put in. If a majority wants it in then the DEVs will decide how they want to put it in. Right now all you are trying to do is sway my personal opinion and it's very irritating to me.

I know what you mean. Having played all the games that everyone else has I can easily jump on the bandwagon and just list off all the worst possible implementations from other games. Or I could list off a balanced solution that I personally would prefer. I'd be lying if I wasn't trying to persuade you, but it's more just to see the complexities of a possible implementation.

It's important to realize that translating the mechanics from one game into an MMOFPS might require changes or gameplay constraints to make sure they work well. You listed off how it worked in other games but at no point said how you'd expect it to function in Planetside 2. These are the kind of things I think about. When would I personally use it or when would other classes find it useful. Is there any significant drawbacks to an ideal implementation that would make the gameplay mechanic impossible to implement? You can't just go "nah can't have it since in Gears of War it was annoying". It makes a direct assumption on the implementation. I'm glad not too many people are doing it in this thread. The prone thread was fill with those types of arguments instead of merely using them as spring boards toward a "so what I'd prefer is".

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

And let's face it, the way I interpret it is very biased

I'm saying you can't interpret independent variables like the ones you included. You can't make any claim that because one person voted for the first part of the poll that they voted such a way for the other part. You need to take a basic statistics class or something if the concept isn't clear.

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

May I ask what you voted for Siri?

I don't vote in polls usually, but for this one I made fun of it by voting just for "Aim & Shoot while leaning" to show that the way you designed your poll allowed me to not vote for the second set of options.

[Craftyatom]

I'm not the best to debate on the "leaning" topic, but in terms of cover, imo, there's already a cover mechanic in the game, you know, the one where you take cover behind something.

[Baneblade]

Originally Posted by Craftyatom

I'm not the best to debate on the "leaning" topic, but in terms of cover, imo, there's already a cover mechanic in the game, you know, the one where you take cover behind something.

You must be joking! Telling me I have to run behind something and manually crouch?!

Next you will be telling me I have to reload my own gun myself...

[Blackwolf]

Originally Posted by Sirisian

I know what you mean. Having played all the games that everyone else has I can easily jump on the bandwagon and just list off all the worst possible implementations from other games. Or I could list off a balanced solution that I personally would prefer. I'd be lying if I wasn't trying to persuade you, but it's more just to see the complexities of a possible implementation.

It's important to realize that translating the mechanics from one game into an MMOFPS might require changes or gameplay constraints to make sure they work well. You listed off how it worked in other games but at no point said how you'd expect it to function in Planetside 2. These are the kind of things I think about. When would I personally use it or when would other classes find it useful. Is there any significant drawbacks to an ideal implementation that would make the gameplay mechanic impossible to implement? You can't just go "nah can't have it since in Gears of War it was annoying". It makes a direct assumption on the implementation. I'm glad not too many people are doing it in this thread. The prone thread was fill with those types of arguments instead of merely using them as spring boards toward a "so what I'd prefer is".

See I don't think of how I would use it personally. I focus more on impact and worth. How it effects large scale battle and whether or not that effect would be worth developer time (and money) to put into the game. The last thing I want is to argue for a system that could very well just be half assed into the game and that I'd hate or not use.

I came to the conclusion that prone would be all but useless and a death trap not based on how it worked in other games. But directly on scenarios and thought experiments I run through my head. At the pace PS1 played at (which was slow I guess) nobody would use prone. Except maybe inexperienced snipers. The game didn't have many places where a prone person would be awesome. It was designed without prone in mind to begin with, and I know that the reason wasn't for game pace or stupidification. The reason was most likely that the game didn't need it, and the DEVs didn't want to design little hidey holes in bases or cover that capitalized on someone being prone. Crouch was enough.

PS2 has the same scenario going. There's probably not enough places to go prone and be at all effective. And with combat being the way it is, going prone just begs the LA ahead of you to jump up and capitalize on a serious height advantage over your suddenly very exposed body. In reality people go prone more to avoid being obliterated by shrapnel from explosions (and explosions themselves) then improve accuracy and make themselves into a smaller target while at close range. At long range they use it for accuracy, but in PS1 the sniper's biggest threat was cloakers, and you did NOT want to be immobile when one is nearby.

A cover system had potential, but lean... The more I think about it the more I feel it has no real PLACE in PS1 or 2.

I honestly think you are a very intelligent person Siri. It's just you have a habit of trying to compromise or trying to force your own idea. I tried avoiding giving any kind of idea on what I personally wanted. I wanted to see if I could uncover whether or not it would be a cause worth arguing for in general. And to be honest, it's not. A lot of people have already said it, it's a "could take it or leave it" issue.

Originally Posted by Sirisian

I'm saying you can't interpret independent variables like the ones you included. You can't make any claim that because one person voted for the first part of the poll that they voted such a way for the other part. You need to take a basic statistics class or something if the concept isn't clear.

Why not? The way I voted was I put down for the ability to aim and shoot, as well as the ability to just peek. I wanted a system that would let me do either or and not lock me into a position for an hour and a half. I also put that I'd like a cover mechanic because what I had in mind put all 3 of these things into a neat package in my head. And I'm pretty sure others did the same thing.

As my boss enjoys saying "it'll come out in the wash".

I don't vote in polls usually, but for this one I made fun of it by voting just for "Aim & Shoot while leaning" to show that the way you designed your poll allowed me to not vote for the second set of options.

That's fine, you still put your vote in favor of a mechanic of some sort. And I'm assuming that you ARE in favor of a mechanic, right? I'd just assume that as an individual, you don't care if there is a cover mechanic attached to it or not.

Yeah I know this set up has flaws, it's messy and sloppy. But it's the unwashed masses, you can't use precision and scientific analysis to understand the opinions of everyone. Hell I doubted that this thread would stay open this long. But I'm not the scientific analysis type. The poll gave me the insight I wanted and the simple conclusion is that no, a system isn't really needed. Most people don't want the features that would actually call for a mechanic (quick peek is almost as low in popularity as cover mechanic is).

[Aesir]

To be honest, after all the thinking about cover system, 3rd person, leaning or be it what ever else goes (gadget's, skills to name some more), I came to my personal conclusion of either adding nothing of those, or one, well thought out, balanced and mainly working system that does fit into the game but does not destroy any of it's core gameplay, which is practically very unlikely to happen, but maybe someone thinks of something so very good that it will happen.

Currently it only feels like people only want a certain feature because they think it's cool, well I have to grab me on my own nose for thinking a locked 3rd person system would be cool, it would add a cool looking way of peeking around a corner, but really, does it add so much more depth to the game, for so much effort to even make it remotely work? No probably not, the same goes for many other ideas, if you think in the bigger picture, which should not discourage us from thinking about them, share them and openly discuss them, that's what a forum is, or should be.

A simple lean mechanic alone, like tactical shooters got does not fit in the core gameplay, which is massive battles, if everyone hides behind something and only peeks around it for such a little time, you lose the "massive" effect because you don't see anyone. Sure you should make use of cover, but it's not a core element of the gameplay. So to make it work you need something on top of it and integrates it into the core gameplay, what that is differs from opinion to opinion. Same goes for prone.

Basically, to make it part of the core gameplay, would call for a total change of the current infantry movement system.

This of course is my own and personal view on this.

[Mr DeCastellac]

Planetside (1 and 2) already has a cover mechanic. What I mean here is that the game trusts you to be smart enough to walk behind a wall or duck behind cover with having to super-glue you to the wall.

Don't get me wrong, cover mechanics work great in single player games.

I just don't think they should be used in PvP shooters, especially Planetside.

[Pillar of Armor]

Nope, not a fan at all. Lean and cover slows down the pace way too much. I could deal with prone (maybe), but if lean is introduced... I would not play PS2. All combat would happen from cover and I have never encountered a cover/lean mechanic that worked 100% how I expected it to work. The moment I start dying because lean/cover pointed my face at a wall or it looked the wrong direction is the moment I put down the game and don't come back. As soon as lean is introduced, it will be the only viable method for fighting and I seriously dislike the idea of lean/cover in any FPS game.

[DerFurst]

Leaning is a perfect mechanic for a realism shooter like Insurgency, but I don't think it fits here.

[Pillar of Armor]

Originally Posted by DerFurst

Leaning is a perfect mechanic for a realism shooter like Insurgency, but I don't think it fits here.

I should clarify, lean doesn't belong in multiplayer FPS. Lean is a good mechanic in campaign, but I am heavily against it in multiplayer.