Lead Indicator

Bambi

Bambi
I don't particularly like lead indicators or any kind of auto aim in space sims. It's pretty boring as essentially the computer is just aiming for you. Put the crosshair on the dot and pull the trigger, could do it with your eyes closed and it makes me snore. I far more enjoy having to lead the target myself and manually correct my aim. In games where the lead indicator can be turned off I do so.

But in a multiplayer game I don't think having an option is a good idea. You would only be crippling yourself as other players enjoy the benefits of what is essentially an aimbot while you do not. It'd be like having togglable aim assist in an FPS, why would you turn it off?

The enjoyment of aiming would be severely tempered with the pain of always losing.

The same applies to weapons automatically locking on to targets that are "close enough" to the reticule. I noticed this happening with the lasers in the alpha video. Zzzz
 

Mephane

Mephane
I don't think these features will make the game too easy. Both the alpha footage and comments here on the forum indicate that the game is still quite tough.
 

Cosmo Bozo

Cosmo Bozo
Bambi said:
The same applies to weapons automatically locking on to targets that are "close enough" to the reticule. I noticed this happening with the lasers in the alpha video. Zzzz
Click to expand...

I think they said that in order to have them do that, you had to fit a smaller laser to the hardpoint than you could if you fitted a fixed one.
More skilled players will go with the fixed weapons for a quicker kill

Also, lead indicators don't take into account any evasive maneuvers
 
Last edited:

Razorwire

Razorwire
I got the impression from the discussions in the DDF archive and from the dev diaries that the amount of autotracking depends on the mount-type; fixed (none), gimbal (some), turret (lots).
Also that the size and power of weapons you could stuff in a weapon mount increases as you give up mobility of the mount (fixed mount allows you bigger guns than a turret mount on the same hardpoint).

If i'm right, it would mean that if you went with lots of autotracking hitscan weapons, you could find yourself out-gunned by an otherwise identical ship as they sacrifice the autotracking for heavier punch.

**edit - ninja'd! Serves me right for not refreshing the page while i read a bunch of other pages...**
 

Mike Evans

Designer- Elite: Dangerous
Frontier
Bambi said:
I don't particularly like lead indicators or any kind of auto aim in space sims. It's pretty boring as essentially the computer is just aiming for you. Put the crosshair on the dot and pull the trigger, could do it with your eyes closed and it makes me snore. I far more enjoy having to lead the target myself and manually correct my aim. In games where the lead indicator can be turned off I do so.

But in a multiplayer game I don't think having an option is a good idea. You would only be crippling yourself as other players enjoy the benefits of what is essentially an aimbot while you do not. It'd be like having togglable aim assist in an FPS, why would you turn it off?

The enjoyment of aiming would be severely tempered with the pain of always losing.

The same applies to weapons automatically locking on to targets that are "close enough" to the reticule. I noticed this happening with the lasers in the alpha video. Zzzz
Click to expand...

Have you tried the alternative tracking method in the control options btw?
 

MikeSnos

MikeSnos
I don't think all weapons auto-aim; only those that are gimbal mounted it would seem which makes sense... You pay for what you get....
 

Bambi

Bambi
I am not an alpha backer so I can only go by what I see in videos. It was meant more as a general statement of dissatisfaction with space games than a specific.

Even if the option is there, I stand by not wanting to be put at a disadvantage in order to enjoy the game.

I don't care if the game is "easy" or "tough" because of this either. It simply isn't interesting gameplay to have the computer play itself.
 
Last edited:

michaelfife

M
Lead indicators exist in the real world, in fighter planes. If it's convenient enough for real-life jet jockeys, it'll do me. And you. :p

On a side note, watching the alpha streams, couldn't see one pilot following the lead! Crap shots the lot of them! :D
 

X2Eliah

X2Eliah
Equating a lead indicator with the comp playing itself is quite a stretch :)

Also, there's a core balance issue that the lead indicator *solves*. Consider - we have projectile weapons, and laser weapons, right? Laser-weapons are instantaneous, while projectiles by definition take time to fly to target.
Thus, with laser weapons, you *already* have the "Put the crosshair on the dot and pull the trigger, could do it with your eyes closed and it makes me snore." problem you described, and ammo-based projectile weapons have a horrible disadvantage of needing to be tracked. A lead indicator helps solve this, by bringing the two weapon types closer to each other - and don't forget, a decent pilot will fly erratically enough to confuse the lead indicator and avoid most of the fire anyway.

Now, I don't want to imply that "lasers are op" or anything like that. I'm just saying that the lead indicator serves a useful role and doesn't make things that much easier at all.

And, as the person above me said, we have real-world leading indicators. It's not a hard thing to have, tbh - we even have them in our videogames :D , so them being in spaceships seems logical.

Also - we have a *lot* of other factors to make the battles interesting and lengthy, among those the heat management / visibility setup, the energy shunting, and the sheer variety of ships/ship variants/weaponry/environmentals... A lead indicator won't make anything easier, but (imo) it will make things a lot more fair.
 

Bambi

Bambi
You could always turn off the sarcasm and be nice? I am stating my preference, and somehow that is so offensive to you that you need to make fun of it and try to rationalize why it's wrong?
 

Calebe

C
Having a lead indicator does not guarantee a hit with projectiles. It is only accurate till you pull the trigger and it takes time to arrive. They jinx and you miss. Also it is not one shot and they explode. From the game play (I am in Alpha but haven't played yet), it looks like a lot of misses going on so it is not just line up and fire. If you think about it it is just as hard to line up with the targeting ring as it would be to center the ship in your sights. If lasers that is what you do, if projectiles you line up targeting ring. Either way the pilot your aiming for will not fly a straight line. At times like that is may be better to be lucky then good.

Calebe
 

michaelfife

M
Bambi said:
Realism isn't a factor. The gameplay of being shown where to shoot is fundamentally not interesting.
Click to expand...

Realism is not the ultimate factor, however if fighter planes in 2013 have leading indicators on their HUDs, why wouldn't their space counterparts 1200 years hence?

Besides it only applies to guns, not lazers. Furthermore it may not be as easy as you think, especially with a good human or even AI opponent, with a twitchy joystick.
 

Bambi

Bambi
You'd have to be significantly more maneuverable than the speed of the projectile for that to factor in at all.

Rationalize all day long, I don't like shooting at dots. I do like thinking about how to curve shots to get a hit. End of story.
 

X2Eliah

X2Eliah
Each enemy spaceship is a dot. When you plan your curves, you are imagining an ideal dot. When you use lasers, you shoot at the spaceship 'dot'... I fail to see what's so different in all of those cases vs. having a lead indicator.
 

popuptoaster

P
Bambi said:
You'd have to be significantly more maneuverable than the speed of the projectile for that to factor in at all.

Rationalize all day long, I don't like shooting at dots. I do like thinking about how to curve shots to get a hit. End of story.
Click to expand...

You can curve bullets???????

I think you may be thinking of a film rather than real life.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom