HaTe

Watch the video again. I showed that the same exact thing happens in third person without free-aim. Clearly I need to make another video for you to understand. You dont aim at shadows. You're assuming that this "light source" and camera angle are coming from the same spot and comparing that to the camera angle and gun coming from the same spot. The gun has to be aimed regardless of free-aim or not, and where the shot comes from doesn't change that fact. So while you may be able to see more of this imaginary shadow, you aren't able to use it to increase the area of which you are able to hit your enemy. You seem to have trouble on this part.

The "R" compromise would probably work well actually. Didn't think of that. I mean, how often do you want to exit a PT and do so with the intent of purposely avoiding a refill? Seems like a good idea to me.

The area (width/height) that you can effectively hit the target does not increase from free-aim though. It may look like it does, because you seem to apparently be aiming behind him, but the only reason you're able to see behind him is because of the angle. Meaning that if you were using normal third person, you'd effectively be aiming at that same exact spot, just from the different angle. The area does not increase because of this fact.

It did work like that in Renegade. That was the problem though, the possibility of pressing it too many times and bringing up the game Esc menu. A timer would fix it, but it isn't necessary if it is made with alternative hotkeys for each function. There was no way to immediately exit a PT from an advanced PT menu in Renegade. You could only go Back, and then Exit. I think having the option to do both via different hotkeys is far more convenient. So say you're in the advanced options and you hear an enemy start shooting at you. I'd rather just press one button and be out, rather than having to press 2 and worrying about accidentally triple tapping it and being stuck at a whole new Esc screen. Like you said, not a big deal - but it'd be nice.

the dude who created the keyboard was probably criticized for using "qwerty" instead of "abcdef." But look at you now, using the qwerty keyboard like a champ

It's an acquired taste that you learn to love, trust me. It does sound comical at first, but after a few games - it becomes a sound that is just music to the ears. I seriously sometimes play CoD competitively and wish there was a boink there too. It's truly an awesome sound that is a pure classic.

I'd just rather not have to double tap Esc because it would bring up the possibility of accidentally double tapping it in the home PT menu, and so bringing up the ESC menu to the game. I think backspace would work good as back, and ESC would just be an easy quick way to exit out of the PT all together, no matter what PT menu you are in. Just more convenient. I suppose that you could just give "Tab" the backspace function as well, for people like you who prefer the single hand ease of access. I just would prefer that there be a separate back and exit button availability.

Having a chat interface is rather obsolete if you ask me. Like you said, the console button sort of replaces the need for this. Renegade had a chat interface because there was never a console button until a more recent version of scripts came out (just a couple years ago). I just don't think it's a real necessity. What if the back button just replaced the Exit button in advanced terminal options? So that in order to leave the PT from these, you would have to double click backspace or the button, or simply press Esc once. I suppose some people might argue that this makes it take longer to exit the PT from an advanced PT menu, but really it shouldn't because the Back and Exit buttons are in the same place (so that double pressing the back button essentially exits the PT as well). Most people would probably use the backspace hotkey or Esc to exit the PT all together anyway, I assume. The order I have the free infantry in (vertically) is the order that they are currently listed (including 1-5 hotkeys).

Or have DM work like Gun-Game in Call of Duty. Everyone starts off with an automatic rifle. As soon as they kill someone, they get the next gun. First one to successfully get a kill with all of the guns (or goes around twice through all of the guns, for Renegade's sake) - wins. The last guns are the most difficult to get a kill with (you could have this be a few grenades or something). They die, they wait 5 seconds and respawn with the weapon they were at.

Now, obviously this is just a shitty mspaint drawing, but it's the layout that I want to get people's opinions on. The buttons and such could be scaled so that descriptions fit and whatnot, but the overall layout of the buttons is what I'm trying to highlight. I think it's better personally to have all 5 free infantry categorized together (I chose to do this vertically). Refill deserves to be the biggest button, since it is the most common purchase. The 4 advanced categories should be a bit larger than the free characters, to emphasize that they bring up more options and are advanced options. The vehicle queue was something suggested by me in the beta forums, and it didn't seem to get any negative responses (it's a helpful tool for the new system). Credits should be centered so that it is more clear. Exit and Purchase buttons should be separated equally on either side of the PT. The image behind the buttons could still be used in this case, since the vehicle queue will sometimes be empty, and sometimes not, and the character is already in the ideal position.

1. Yes, it is an open beta, so there is no regulation. 2. A previous user asked and got permission. Whether or not you need this permission is unclear, but they have no real reason to deny you, honestly. 3. This topic would probably be sufficient if/when a Dev posts with approval.

I wish people would try it in practice rather than make assumptions in principle: 0:00-0:13 Showing that the reticle does not "snap" any more when using free-aim than when not using free-aim. It has the same exact tendencies. 0:14-0:20 Showing that the FoV is only altered by angle, nothing more. You have to create that angle by viewing that angle first. You cannot turn or widen your view passed 180 degrees while locked in on free-aim whatsoever. 0:21-0:25 Showing that the reticle movement has the same tendencies while in free-aim than when not using free-aim. Literally the only thing it does it lock your camera at a specified angle and allow you to move your reticle around the screen freely. It doesn't change the tendencies of the reticle. So while, yes, it is true that your reticle will work differently, it does not provide any sort of advantage in aiming. The only advantage that can possibly be argued with free-aim is the ability to target through walls - which I have already proposed a logical working fix for. No need for any pictures or drawings. If you're looking to prove something, find out how it actually works by using the real thing. Then make a video from that if you still decide that you disagree with me...

I'll see if I can create a simple alternative rough layout later.

Please check the following 3 pictures: Legend: the circle is the player, the triangle is the camera, the bar is the gun. Blue lines represent the area the weapon can fire at to hit the enemy red lines represent the area of wall you can fire at that still counts as a hit for your weapon green lines represent the total area you can fire at to hit the other person. Note that the actual representative area is actually a bit smaller, as you cannot see everything that your weapon can hit. and here is the kicker. The pictures are a bit misleading: if you look solely at the green area they represent on the wall it's way, way bigger. The actual area you can hit is the surface area of your enemy, combined with the entire visible 'shadow' of your weapon on the wall and floor behind him. As you can see, the more you offset your camera the larger the area you can hit him with. The third picture shows something very important: At some point you have effectively doubled your hit-area, as you can hit your enemy's full body... but also the full 'shadow' that his weapon projects. The closer your enemy is, the larger this area becomes. The last situation in picture 3 shows this best: anywhere you shoot in the green area, you hit your enemy. What's more, this doesn't just increase the area you can fire in the horizontal plane, but also vertically. If you offset your camera very high and very far to the side you can double your 'hit area'... from long ranges. The closer you are, the larger the 'shadow' your enemy leaves on the wall behind him, the larger the area you can aim for and still hit. This gets pretty weird, actually. It's not just on the wall behind him, but also on the ground... so anywhere his foot would leave a shadow on the ground, you can hit him there if you can see that shadow and aim for it. The bullet will have to pass through your enemy. Just look at picture 6.1, it illustrates it perfectly: you can either fire straight at your enemy... or fire at the wall behind him, creating a massive area you can hit him It locks the camera at an angle, not a position. You can't aim outside of the 180 degree view you are locked at regardless. It doesn't narrow or widen your view at all. It literally just locks it at one angle. Meaning you have to have been looking at that angle in the first place in third person. It changes up the angle you are shooting, so yes, naturally the area behind the enemy will be more or less visible, depending on the situation. It isn't an advantage though, because it can be a disadvantage in that aspect just as easy...

You'll see

Except you aren't aiming for a shadow or behind an enemy....you're aiming at him. It doesn't make him bigger or make him easier to hit in any way at all. I'll make a video and show you (I would know...). Literally all it does is lock the camera to a certain angle. All that does is change your fov (which gives advantages and disadvantages equally, since you can use third person regardless), and makes the fov not constantly turning when aiming on a high sensitivity like I use. The only direct aiming advantage this gives is for hugging because you can target the enemy and have his target box visible before ever coming out. I proposed a solution to this already that would effectively solve this though, and make it so hugging with free-aim wouldn't enable the target box.

Can't give a definitive answer on that one. I hope so though.

All it does it lock the camera to a certain angle. Don't over complicate it to make it seem like it gives some other sort of huge advantage...

It would take a second teammate to call one in, and it cots $700. Plus the additional 5 second call in time where you become pretty vulnerable to enemies. It also doesn't last that long, and you'd have to time it pretty well. As far as spamming them goes, I'm sure there will be something put in place. As of right now, the beta is focusing more on glitch prevention than balancing (as it is hard to find balance on an ever changing game with a limited amount of beta testers). That's where the public beta comes in. Your concerns are very valid though, and I can assure you they have been considered. Right now priorities are put in place on other places for the current time though.

I don't think anyone is bashing anyone...

The EVA warning for the airstrikes has recently been thoroughly discussed between devs and testers. How it works now will likely change for the next beta build, so I can't say anything for sure. I believe the overall consensus was that it should notify the team that calls one in when it is called in, but not the enemy team until about 5 seconds before impact (airstrike incoming type of thing). Friendly fire is off by default server side. You can damage/kill yourself with one though I believe.

1 has previously been explained I believe. It has been discussed, and it is up to the devs on whether or not they will implement such an algorithm. 2 is yes. Same as Renegade. Saves the credits and points by nickname. Haven't tested it, but this was a key element that I know wouldn't be removed (if it isn't in the game now it will be).

She is...not someone I am fond of

No further comment

Yeah, but it's really only fair to the person being banned that the evidence be seen by each community before the ban. Some communities have an immediate no-tolerance rule for racism. Others will give 3 warnings for it. It's just hard to make a global set of "level of wrongdoing," especially when the fact that it's even harder to know who to trust. I'd rather see for myself, personally. It's a good idea, but the system in place for it in Renegade actually already works pretty effectively.