Can we get a fire sequencer please?

[Marklar_]

Let's go ahead and take this to its logical conclusion.

DEATH BLOSSOM!!!

 

[Doolittle]

I don't know.

Would such a thing be useful? Oh, definitely!
Would it be more interesting/fun/engaging? Questionable.

The problem with games is that, if you take more and more agency away from the player, the game starts to "play itself". Currently, you have to be active to change your weapon groupes, if you which to use more than the two weapon selections supported by the two available fire buttons.
A sequencer would make using more varied weapons easier. But would it add to the enjoyment of the game? Convenience does not always equal fun. On the contrary: Learning to use a system that forces the player to overcome challenge is oftentimes way more rewarding. Just my opinion.

LOL...... about all I can say. Overcoming a challenge based on design choice rather than gameplay............isn't gameplay.

 

[Omicron Psi]

Technically it can be achieved outside the game with T.A.R.G.E.T. in case you have a HOTAS Warthog.
If you have an X-52 or stuff like that you have the own programming thingamajing.

If you don't own either I strongly suggest you to, it's amazing.

I'm O.T. I know, sorry.

sshhh...not to loudly..

 

[Morbad]

Not a fan of macro programs and don't particularly think the game needs to integrate macro functionality.

I would not be opposed to more fire buttons, however.

 

[Grisnir]

it is funny to see, that some people never played a Battletech/Mechwarrior game, where weapons modi and Group fire is necessary, otherwise your Mech turn into hot molten slag.

and something like this would be really helpful, if you use weapons like PA,cannons and railguns, because currently you can only alpha strike in elite, yes you could split the weapons into 2 group, but if you have
a third weapon type, you are screwed again

 

[[VR] Deggial]

LOL...... about all I can say. Overcoming a challenge based on design choice rather than gameplay............isn't gameplay.

You know 'Dwarf Fortress', don't you?
50% of the incentive comes from mastering the horrid user interface (and I don't mean its simple presentation, but the terrible usability).
Don't get me wrong - I hate badly designed user interfaces and loath DF for it. Accordingly, I want ED to have the best usability possible.
Nevertheless, there is a certain amount of skill involved in changing weapons at the right time (if you think this is necessary/beneficial to do) - and if only a tiny bit of coordination. And a mastered skill - as little as might be necessary - generates satisfaction. Automatization isn't satisfactory! *)

Regarding the rest (heat and defense saturation): Sure, it might be helpful in this respect. As mentioned above, I don't deny the potential usefulness.
However, both are balancing factors. Why should FDev introduce a game mechanic that purposefully counteracts their carefully tweaked tuning?
Yes, in the real world, all efforts would be taken in order to gain dominance over an opponent in combat. Including a sequencer, I guess.

But this is a game, not reality. It both needs to make the player actively play the game (no automatization) and to achieve a balance in its mechanisms.

I think, my arguments are at least worth being discussed (you may very well disagree) and not just "LOL....."ed away.
What would make a passive sequencer more "gameplay"-y than an active player involvement in your opinion?

--

*) This is, by the way, the reason why I am very skeptical in respect to automated mining equipments that can be placed on planet surfaces and just picked up later - filled with materials that otherwise would require active playing. But I digress...

 

[Gryphorim]

UI functionality could turn into a bit of a mess, true. That is why I suggest having an "auto-sequence" option. Below each firegroup, an option for weapons assigned to fire button 1 to be group-fired or chain-fired, and same for button 2. If mode is switched to manual, then a more in-depth menu replaces that one, with adjustable sliders for time between each step of sequence, and how many weapons enabled at each step.
Yes the manual mode would be fairly complex, but it'd be there for those who want that fine degree of customisation. For most, the simpler "auto" mode should be sufficient, and the UI for that needn't be so complex.

As for issues with being able to deliver a crippling 1 - 2 punch with a fire sequencer, I doubt a sequencer would allow it any better than the current fire mechanics. What we have now hits harder, but at lower RoF.

And for those who haven't, I do recommend picking up one of the Mechwarrior games. MW Online is free to play, and it has an example of the mechanics I'm trying to suggest. On that game it's the difference between an alpha-strike and chain fire.

 

[avow555]

Idea has merit and been asked for many times.
I have never enjoyed weapon implementation in this game it's been amateur hour from day one.