1094 replies to this topic

[Livewyr]

DoctorDetroit, on 09 February 2016 - 06:17 AM, said:

This doesn't happen to me and I pilot all sorts of light and medium mechs.

Anecdote.

I did it in a LPL/ERML TBR/Cauldy several, several, several times. (More often than not...)
Aren't Anecdotes Awesome?

DoctorDetroit, on 09 February 2016 - 06:17 AM, said:

Granted the shadow cat needs some love in the buff department, but it is definitely not as easy to take down as you describe.

Yes, yes it is. A LL stalker or the ML BJ will remove all (or nearly all) of the armor on the CT in a single strike. Even if that doesn't kill the SHC outright, it cannot be shot again and therefore spends the rest of the game trying not to be shot. (Or just dying.)

DoctorDetroit, on 09 February 2016 - 06:17 AM, said:

You are exaggerating to the level of a bold face lie. Is your argument so weak, that you cannot conjure up any real supporting points?

Is that supposed to be funny? You didn't actually counter with any point...let alone facts.

Just an anecdote and a simple assertion.

TexAce, on 09 February 2016 - 06:53 AM, said:

Please count the likes on my OP. Thanks.

I had forgotten to add mine- I'll do that now.

Edited by Livewyr, 09 February 2016 - 07:01 AM.

[wanderer]

1453 R, on 08 February 2016 - 06:12 PM, said:

Seriously?

Simply because some players don't want to see enormous, unpredictable, uncontrollable swings in their point-of-aim, suddenly we're all a bunch of overcaffeinated twitch-kiddy idiots Ruining Ur BattleTech™?

Strangely enough, the OP shows predictable and controllable changes in your accuracy based on your own choices. But I believe you were too busy howling about how you might miss something at extreme range while overheating and noscoping.

I could be wrong, but that's what it sounds like. Cone of fire doesn't equal "impossible to aim". It's "precision aiming gets more difficult with factors such as movement, heat load, and distance". You know, factors you control as the pilot.

[Livewyr]

wanderer, on 09 February 2016 - 07:03 AM, said:

Strangely enough, the OP shows predictable and controllable changes in your accuracy based on your own choices. But I believe you were too busy howling about how you might miss something at extreme range while overheating and noscoping.

I could be wrong, but that's what it sounds like. Cone of fire doesn't equal "impossible to aim". It's "precision aiming gets more difficult with factors such as movement, heat load, and distance". You know, factors you control as the pilot.

Well put.


I wonder how many of the people complaining about it actually read the OP...

[DoctorDetroit]

Livewyr, on 09 February 2016 - 07:01 AM, said:

Anecdote.

I did it in a LPL/ERML TBR/Cauldy several, several, several times. (More often than not...)
Aren't Anecdotes Awesome?



Yes, yes it is. A LL stalker or the ML BJ will remove all (or nearly all) of the armor on the CT in a single strike. Even if that doesn't kill the SHC outright, it cannot be shot again and therefore spends the rest of the game trying not to be shot. (Or just dying.)



Is that supposed to be funny? You didn't actually counter with any point...let alone facts.

Just an anecdote and a simple assertion.



I had forgotten to add mine- I'll do that now.

If TTK was as low as you claim matches would last a couple minutes. Since this is not the case, you are clearly exaggerating.

I understand there are a significant amount of players that do not have the ability to be skilled at this game. This is why I support PvE. This will allow many of you to feel good about yourselves as you play.
Cone of fire will not make you feel better about yourselves. It will just annoy ALOT of players, who will now just kill you with only SRM brawlers as opposed to lasers vomit, gauss, and SRM brawlers.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Jenovah, on 09 February 2016 - 05:29 AM, said:

The Arm vs CT vs ST is not cone of fire, it's convergence. In WWII aircraft with wing mounted guns had to set their convergence at a certain range so all guns hit at the same spot at that distance. Today we have targeting computers and more to account for this. In no way will I ever believe that in a 'mech I cant have a computer + the range finder in my targeting system re-compute the correct convergence vector.

The point isn't slavish realism (an absurdity in any mech-based setting), but rather to combine flavor (ever read any Battletech fiction?) and balance in a way that doesn't require random number generation or other unpredictable mechanics that screw over a player behind the scenes.

Having fixed precision reduction behaviors based on movement, heat, and stability would neatly accomplish all of those goals.

[Livewyr]

DoctorDetroit, on 09 February 2016 - 07:19 AM, said:

If TTK was as low as you claim matches would last a couple minutes. Since this is not the case, you are clearly exaggerating.

Are you illiterate? I said "removes most of the armor so the mech spends the rest of the game trying not to be shot." Not immediate death, but not fun either.

You must just be acting the role of a bad troll...

DoctorDetroit, on 09 February 2016 - 07:19 AM, said:

I understand there are a significant amount of players that do not have the ability to be skilled at this game.

Oh this is adorable.

DoctorDetroit, on 09 February 2016 - 07:19 AM, said:

This is why I support PvE. This will allow many of you to feel good about yourselves as you play.
Cone of fire will not make you feel better about yourselves. It will just annoy ALOT of players, who will now just kill you with only SRM brawlers as opposed to lasers vomit, gauss, and SRM brawlers.

You are just too cute. You have no concept of balance, You don't want to have to think about what you are doing. You just want to be able to point, click, and call it skill no matter what you are doing.

You are afraid you might have to use your brain. You are afraid that you might actually have to be competitive with more than just your mouse. You & Tort have yet to point out another PvP game that has perfect accuracy the way this one does. (Let alone one with a competitive scene.)

You are afraid that you will have to note your heat bar for more than just avoiding a shut down.
You are afraid that you can't just snap-shoot someone who positioned themselves better than you.
You are afraid of having to plan ahead.


Every game has rough positioning as a skill.
Every other game has considerations when firing. This one does not, and you are afraid of what will happen to your "Skill" (and I do use that term loosely with you) when you have to think about more than just being in the right place at the right time.

It is clear that you have no argument. You are dismissed.

Edited by Livewyr, 09 February 2016 - 07:35 AM.

[Tarogato]

I've never seen anybody make a decent argument *against* CoF without monstrously misconstruing or inflating its proposed effects. The sad thing is... there's just so many people that fail at making the argument that it no longer matters how terrible the argument is because you can't hear anything else over it.



I put to you this thought experiment: MWO has CoF right now. The variable is currently set to 0.

Regardless of exactly how the CoF mechanic works or what effects it has, ... do you really think it would affect the game if we changed that variable to 0.00000001? Would that really kill the game? Is that so evil? How about 0.0001? Is it suddenly magically completely gamebreaking? If so, ... why?

Edited by Tarogato, 09 February 2016 - 07:46 AM.

[DoctorDetroit]

Livewyr, on 09 February 2016 - 07:34 AM, said:

Are you illiterate? I said "removes most of the armor so the mech spends the rest of the game trying not to be shot." Not immediate death, but not fun either.

You must just be acting the role of a bad troll...



Oh this is adorable.



You are just too cute. You have no concept of balance, You don't want to have to think about what you are doing. You just want to be able to point, click, and call it skill no matter what you are doing.

You are afraid you might have to use your brain. You are afraid that you might actually have to be competitive with more than just your mouse. You & Tort have yet to point out another PvP game that has perfect accuracy the way this one does. (Let alone one with a competitive scene.)

You are afraid that you will have to note your heat bar for more than just avoiding a shut down.
You are afraid that you can't just snap-shoot someone who positioned themselves better than you.
You are afraid of having to plan ahead.


Every game has rough positioning as a skill.
Every other game has considerations when firing. This one does not, and you are afraid of what will happen to your "Skill" (and I do use that term loosely with you) when you have to think about more than just being in the right place at the right time.

It is clear that you have no argument. You are dismissed.

Nope not afraid of change. I support changes to the heat system to lower high alphas or increases in laser duration to limit pin point laser vomit. Buffing LBX would also be a big part in giving alternatives to pinpoint damage.

I think the cone of fire system would cause too much strife to players and I know I will curse up a storm as soon as the random number generator takes away a perfectly setup kill shot from me.

Edited by DoctorDetroit, 09 February 2016 - 07:50 AM.

[Hotthedd]

DoctorDetroit, on 09 February 2016 - 07:48 AM, said:

Nope not afraid of change. I support changes to the heat system to lower high alphas or increases in laser duration to limit pin point laser vomit. Buffing LBX would also be a big part in giving alternatives to pinpoint damage.

I think the cone of fire system would cause to much strife to players and I know I will curse up a storm as soon as the random number generator takes away a perfectly setup kill shot from me.

If it were "perfectly set up", it would still be accurate under the OP's proposal.

[TexAce]

Hotthedd, on 09 February 2016 - 07:49 AM, said:

If it were "perfectly set up", it would still be accurate under the OP's proposal.

"Perfectly set up" for him means he is pointing onto a location and clicking the mouse button.

"Perfectly set up" in my proposal means he has to take his heat, his movement and his equiptment into account, then place his crosshair on the location and click.

Which one requires more skill?
Which one can say from himself that he is a skilled shooter?

He destroyed his own argument with what he said, and it clearly shows the mindset of those hating on ANY CoF proposals.

[DoctorDetroit]

Hotthedd, on 09 February 2016 - 07:49 AM, said:

If it were "perfectly set up", it would still be accurate under the OP's proposal.

Clearly you do not flank your enemies much. Maneuvering tactics are the most fun part about the game. It is already plenty hard to keep your guns accurate while moving and torso twisting.

Edited by DoctorDetroit, 09 February 2016 - 08:07 AM.

[Tarogato]

TexAce, on 09 February 2016 - 07:54 AM, said:

"Perfectly set up" for him means he is pointing onto a location and clicking the mouse button.

"Perfectly set up" in my proposal means he has to take his heat, his movement and his equiptment into account, then place his crosshair on the location and click.

Which one requires more skill?
Which one can say from himself that he is a skilled shooter?

He destroyed his own argument with what he said, and it clearly shows the mindset of those hating on ANY CoF proposals.

One requires thought and foresight. The other requires twitch skills. They both require an equal amount of skill, albeit different kinds of skill, and therein lies the issue.

[DoctorDetroit]

Tarogato, on 09 February 2016 - 07:58 AM, said:

One requires thought and foresight. The other requires twitch skills. They both require an equal amount of skill, albeit different kinds of skill, and therein lies the issue.

That is a gross oversimplification of the game. Just because there isn't a random number generator making it less likely to make shots that you feel are "taboo", doesn't mean there is any less thought and planning with regard to maneuvering. The current rules just favor mobility over stagnation compared to the proposed CoF rules presented here.

[Ratpoison]

TexAce, on 09 February 2016 - 07:54 AM, said:

"Perfectly set up" for him means he is pointing onto a location and clicking the mouse button.

"Perfectly set up" in my proposal means he has to take his heat, his movement and his equiptment into account, then place his crosshair on the location and click.

Which one requires more skill?
Which one can say from himself that he is a skilled shooter?

He destroyed his own argument with what he said, and it clearly shows the mindset of those hating on ANY CoF proposals.

Fallacious, all of those factors still have to be considered even with convergence, the only difference is that there isn't an RNG affecting the end result.

In MWO, the difference between hitting the enemy's arm and hitting their side torso is pretty frequently the difference between life and death. I'm not okay with an arbitrary RNG system making that choice for me, NOR am I okay with it encouraging me to stand still like an idiot. How would lights even survive in that environment, anyway? Movement modifiers are okay in foot soldier FPS games where you can stop and aim on a dime, but battlemechs don't get that luxury and it's not reasonable to expect people to stop in the name of RNG.

You insist RNG is somehow skill, but it's only the opposite, because anything it would make you "consider" is something you should have already been considering in regards to the possibility of pilot error. A more stale and rigid meta is all it will accomplish, there's nothing to be gained with this system.

[Mystere]

Kuritaclan, on 08 February 2016 - 10:58 PM, said:

Where is your ******* problem.

82mm @ 1 click sounds good to me. Not to say that the actual beam is even more directed to actually melt and ignite the test objects on that "projectile".


Well "your" navy is not in everything the best measure. Nevermind drill JTFEX 01-2 in 2001 and the submarine U 24 which made a "picture" of the "USS Enterprise".

http://www.spektrum....chbruch/1350468

Hint: Optical wire / Piezo Actuators and so on.

(I did not watch video before responding thinking it was in German ...)

That is neither the free-electron laser (extreme ultraviolet, x-rays) nor gamma-ray laser used in Battletech.

Heck, I might not know German, but looking at your diagram it looks like it uses an array of electrically driven lasers, such as diode lasers and fiber laser amplifiers. If so, then I think that is similar to this:




Heck, they may even be using the same or similar basic devices, and differing only on the beam focusing/aiming mechanism used.

Having said that, do you have an English translation or source for that same device. I many no longer work with laser and plasma(!!!) devices, but I am still interested.

And finally. no, I obviously do not have a problem.

Edit:

What a useless video. It's just the typical marketing fluff. I thought it would at least contain a good description of the underlying lasers.

IronClaws, on 09 February 2016 - 12:20 AM, said:

Modern Lasers are cool, but MWO is set in 3053(ish) and therefore far more advanced (theoretically).

BattleTech uses an entirely different set of laser technologies. The "beams" their real-life equivalents produce -- extreme ultraviolet, x-ray, gamma radiation -- are not exactly easy to "aim".

Edited by Mystere, 09 February 2016 - 08:32 AM.

[Mystere]

jay35, on 08 February 2016 - 10:41 PM, said:

Cone of fire? No. Bad idea.

As someone else said: "If I wanted a cone of fire mechanic I'd play a tank game. It's not skillful and impossibly frustrating when you have a 90% chance to hit and it still misses."

And another notes: "Anything CoR related invokes the power of RNGesus. Which gets a big, fat, loud, and angry NO from me."

And also: "Its still a bad idea the 100th time someone posts about it, even if they have some pictures to go with it. It even gets worse with aim penalties on heat. Its like people just want to stand behind a rock at 0 heat all game. Personally I like getting in there shooting mechs, which inevitability generates a lot of heat."

And finally: "The thing about cone of fire is that it's basically a system to punish players. Obviously it makes sense for weapons to be less accurate while the mech is moving or very hot, but do we really want to punish players for moving? Play World of Tanks (which uses a CoF system) for a while and you'll notice that players are strongly discouraged from attacking. Why risk shots missing when you can just sit and wait for the enemy to come into your minimized CoF?
Granted, World of Tanks has a much greater CoF than the one proposed in the thread, and sensor detection in WoT plays a role in discouraging attacks. However, with the added heat punishment, a CoF system in MWO would basically kill brawling and encourage static, defensive play - where poking with high pinpoint alphas then cooling off becomes even stronger relative to other styles of play.
Not to mention that it punishes new players way more than anyone else with the proposed CoF reductions by skill tree, module, targeting computers, etc. that they won't have access to - and isn't the learning curve steep enough? We don't need to add more gameplay mechanics.
And lastly, it's just frustrating to have shots miss because of RNG. Hit registry on lights is a pain already. A CoF will just make it worse."

Reddit is not exactly the best collection of humanity's greatest minds.

[Lockon StratosII]

How about this: assume perfect convergence we have now unless you try to shoot ____________ at the same time in which case your weapons fire paralel to each other. Revert to original state after 2 seconds

Pick one to fill empty space:
a) more than X amount of weapons
weapons whose combined damage is over Y
c) weapons whose combined tonnage is over Z
d) weapons that will push over TCL limit (assumes Homeless Bills TCL load idea)

Easy to implement, easy to understand, no RNG (when you are penalized you will shoot the outline of your mech weapon positions, doesn't penalize single weapons or chain firing, just huge alphas and mechs get distinct flavour depending on weapon positions on them if you choose to trigger penalty on purpose (ie weapons grouped on one of Novas arms would be less affected due to small placement distance between them

X, Y and Z are variables prone to value adjustment

[YueFei]

Khereg, on 08 February 2016 - 06:38 AM, said:

I'm not sure how you learn and adapt to a random number generator.

Same way Counterstrike players adapt. Instead of spraying shots as quickly as they can, they stutter-step and take deliberate shots.

[Tarogato]

DoctorDetroit, on 09 February 2016 - 08:02 AM, said:

The current rules just favor mobility over stagnation compared to the proposed CoF rules presented here.

I noticed that you spelled 'Nascar' incorrectly here.

[Hotthedd]

DoctorDetroit, on 09 February 2016 - 07:54 AM, said:

Clearly you do not flank your enemies much. Maneuvering tactics are the most fun part about the game. It is already plenty hard to keep your guns accurate while moving and torso twisting.

Clearly you have no idea at all what my preferred play styles are. As I enjoy medium 'mechs most of all, flanking is a maneuver that I must master if I hope to be effective in battle.
Your guns are always accurate in this game, any problem hitting your opponent is on the pilot.