Actually, it continues to assist when you aim too. You only need to keep the crosshairs semi-close to your target for it to lock on and follow it. However it's extremely hard to show that in a video, because all you would see is someone strafing, being followed perfectly.

that is not aim assist but 2 people strafing in the same direction at the same speeds while ADS

please proceed to amuse us more and post again some "proof"

What this video shows is a great example of the scientific method. You keep all variables constant but the one that you're trying to measure.

What aim assist does is allow people to get "close enough" with their own input, and the "auto track" function will take care of the rest.

Now... what I would like to see answered is the following:

Why do DS3 users get aim assist, when mouse users (when the mouse is basically a DS3 emulator, not raw input) does not get the aim assist?



Here's a better point:

When people are further away, their radial velocity is smaller than when they are close. I other words:

If I am moving at 7.0 m/s:
At 20m away from you. move across your screen at one speed (faster)
At 80m away from you, that same 7.0 m/s has me moving across your screen slower (from your perspective).

From an EVE perspective... the farther a ship is away from you, the less tracking speed you need in order to hit it. That is why blasters track faster than rail guns... because Blasters are short range, and Rails are long range.

So.... I understand that controllers may have problems tracking at short range, when the radial velocity is higher... so aim assist levels the playing field with the faster mouse users.

However, at longer ranges, radial velocity is lower... so Aim Assist at the same "strength" becomes WAYYYY over powered. The strength of Aim Assist should vary based on your distance to target.

I think you're only commenting on the test and not the implications of what that means in an actual game.

While in a match, you get someone in your AR sights up to 60m, (which is huge) and you can throw a volley of bullets at them and connect with, what? 5-6 before they realize what is happening, then they start to move (usually in a sprint, which the strafing is significantly slower, especially when you're not a scout), so you might lose the track, move the stick just to get back and have them touch your sight, then you get another 5-6 shots in. Which is most likely a kill at that point, with little work, at crazy long ranges.

With that context, can you see why some people are anti-AA, at least to this extent, in a 'high health' shooter?

Yes because all of the top players are KBM users

The vast majority of top players are DS3 users.

I don't use it...I know many who do, and the consensus is, without getting into detail, it works well...

I can also make the logical conclusion that if it was terrible, no one would use kb/m.

show me statistic proof of this

IM sorry if that offended you but what do you call someone who asks for something that they know A) cannot possibly be obtained and B) have already stated that X %'s of statistics are made up?

First, thanks for putting the time/effort to test, edit and upload this.

I think the video clearly shows that the magnetism is limited to fairly short distances. My hope is that the design intent here is to discourage the chop strafing tactic. Trying to hit someone who is spastically maneuvering around is not fun, it's annoying and obnoxious. People don't evade fire this way in real life combat, and I hate seeing in games. One of DUST's greatest aspects is the fear of loss of your expensive suit leads to gameplay that is much more similar to real life. There's a tension between wanting to complete the objective, but not wanting to be killed in the process: risk vs. reward, duty vs. survival. Chop strafing and bunny hopping destroy this illusion, as do evasive rambo players who can take out several players while dodging fire. This isn't "hardcore," is evidence that things were broken.

Ultimately, the most important aspect of AA is if it helps retain new players significantly better than before. DUST needs to grow by a couple orders of magnitude to have much of a future (and for us to see all of the amazing ideas CCP has for this game become reality), and that's not going to happen if new players aren't sticking around. AA is in-line with industry standards (if not weaker), and consequently will match new players' (and game reviewers') expectations for how the aiming experience on a console should feel.

I do agree that the TTK has become too low, and the best suggestion I've heard to fix it (and not reverting to chop strafing/bunny hopping) is to reduce all weapon damage by the 10% that was added at the uprising launch. Some weapons will need to be buffed back some, but that can be handled on a case-by-case basis. This will result in module choices having a greater impact on gameplay. Also scouts need a speed buff so it's easier to break AA, but still prevents chop-strafing tactics.

Since 1.4 matches have been the best I've ever played in DUST so far. They tend to play out more realistically to how a real firefight would, there are much fewer 1-sided battles and less proto-stomping in general. I've been getting a few more kills per match and dieing significantly more than before. Combat feels more tactical, with cover being more important than ever before.

I realize that players at the highest levels want to be rewarded for skill more. I have proposed a compromise solution that I think is fair to them, but still keeps gameplay fun for the other 75% of us. AA should have 3 settings [Standard] which is how things are now, [Weak] which has the effects reduced, and possibly 0 magnetism, and [Off]. [Standard ] is available only in pub matches (which are in highsec and has been stated by CCP that they want to be friendly for everyone); it's not available in FW or PC. [Weak] is available everywhere, and conveys a small SP bonus that won't count towards the SP cap (maybe 2%). [Off] is obviously available everywhere and it provides an even better SP bonus (say 10%). This seems like a very reasonable compromise that won't turn off new players, still gives vets who like AA the option, and rewards the most elite players the most. It also means that to compete at the highest levels (i.e. FW & PC) you need to be a better shot.

First, thanks for putting the time/effort to test, edit and upload this.

I think the video clearly shows that the magnetism is limited to fairly short distances. My hope is that the design intent here is to discourage the chop strafing tactic. Trying to hit someone who is spastically maneuvering around is not fun, it's annoying and obnoxious. People don't evade fire this way in real life combat, and I hate seeing in games. One of DUST's greatest aspects is the fear of loss of your expensive suit leads to gameplay that is much more similar to real life. There's a tension between wanting to complete the objective, but not wanting to be killed in the process: risk vs. reward, duty vs. survival. Chop strafing and bunny hopping destroy this illusion, as do evasive rambo players who can take out several players while dodging fire. This isn't "hardcore," is evidence that things were broken.

Ultimately, the most important aspect of AA is if it helps retain new players significantly better than before. DUST needs to grow by a couple orders of magnitude to have much of a future (and for us to see all of the amazing ideas CCP has for this game become reality), and that's not going to happen if new players aren't sticking around. AA is in-line with industry standards (if not weaker), and consequently will match new players' (and game reviewers') expectations for how the aiming experience on a console should feel.

I do agree that the TTK has become too low, and the best suggestion I've heard to fix it (and not reverting to chop strafing/bunny hopping) is to reduce all weapon damage by the 10% that was added at the uprising launch. Some weapons will need to be buffed back some, but that can be handled on a case-by-case basis. This will result in module choices having a greater impact on gameplay. Also scouts need a speed buff so it's easier to break AA, but still prevents chop-strafing tactics.

Since 1.4 matches have been the best I've ever played in DUST so far. They tend to play out more realistically to how a real firefight would, there are much fewer 1-sided battles and less proto-stomping in general. I've been getting a few more kills per match and dieing significantly more than before. Combat feels more tactical, with cover being more important than ever before.

I realize that players at the highest levels want to be rewarded for skill more. I have proposed a compromise solution that I think is fair to them, but still keeps gameplay fun for the other 75% of us. AA should have 3 settings [Standard] which is how things are now, [Weak] which has the effects reduced, and possibly 0 magnetism, and [Off]. [Standard ] is available only in pub matches (which are in highsec and has been stated by CCP that they want to be friendly for everyone); it's not available in FW or PC. [Weak] is available everywhere, and conveys a small SP bonus that won't count towards the SP cap (maybe 2%). [Off] is obviously available everywhere and it provides an even better SP bonus (say 10%). This seems like a very reasonable compromise that won't turn off new players, still gives vets who like AA the option, and rewards the most elite players the most. It also means that to compete at the highest levels (i.e. FW & PC) you need to be a better shot.

I'd like to see somebody post a video of them playing with aim assist and actually hitting most shots.

As a mouse user, I'd have no reason not to join the "nerf AA" crowd if I could actually believe that it's OP. But without seeing it with my own eyes, I just can't.

My impression is that people are not upset because aim assist is too powerful, but because it raises the minimum skill, which means that there are less really bad players to dominate. This is understandable, because getting some skill and dominating those who don't have any is one of the more rewarding elements of multiplayer games.

The TTK argument seems to be a bit of a smokescreen. There've been good aimers before, and TTK shouldn't be any different on the highest level of skill. The change to strafe speed (and some hit detection fixes) certainly made a big difference, but mixing up the discussion about TTK and aim assist does not seem right to me.