Something I have begin to notice in MWO is that builds which can pin-point a lot of weaponry onto a single point for as long as possible than builds which can actually deal more damage but generally spreads the damage across a target.
This is part of why the phenomenon on why players generally only aim for the torsos. All their weapons can easily pin-point to a Left/Right Torso, which also destroys the arms in the process. Thus, there is little emphasis on destroying arms because you can just aim all your weaponry at the torso and destroy a mech or maim it by killing both a torso and arm.
I suggest three mechanic changes to fix this issue by placing more emphasis on arm mounted weaponry while removing some ability for all weapons to target a specific point, thus allowing more weapon fire to spread.
Suggestion One - Multiple Weapon Fire Out of a Single Weapon Port
This is an odd mechanic by PGI. I understand the logic behind allowing multiple weapons to be equipped to allow for more customization but why allow multiple weapons to fire out of the same physical weapon port at the same time?
A good example of this is the Atlas Right Torso 2 Ballistic hardpoint / 1 Physical Weapon port location. If someone equips two UAC/5s in this location, and places both of them on the same weapon group without chain fire, then why does both UAC/5s fire at the same time, having overlapping projectiles? This essentially makes it a UAC/10. This also fools your target because they believe a single UAC/5 is firing but actually it is 2 UAC/5s firing at the same time.
The Cicada is another prime example of this. With multiple Energy hardpoints in the same physical Weapon port, they can fire both laser, which overlaps each other looking like a single laser.
So I suggest adding a mechanic where if multiple weapons are fired at the same time out of a single weapon port, just fire the weapons immediately one after the other. This will help spread a bit of the damage just because of the delta time between each firing while moving and also not be used to fool your target.
Suggestion Two - Arm Actuators Given Meaning
This is a brand new mechanic added, which I believe PGI is planning on adding at some point in time. It is fairly straight forward implementation based on how existing mechs already behave and actually sticks to the TT actuator charts fairly well.
Shoulder actuator - Allow arm weaponry to converge on the Arm crosshair.
Upper Arm actuator - Allow vertical deviation of the Arm crosshair from the Torso crosshair.
Lower Arm actuator - Allow horizontal deviation of the Arm crosshair from the Torso crosshair.
Hand actuator - Allow hand related actions to be performed.
Suggestion Three - Torso Mounted Weaponry Do Not Converge
I personally think this is a big balancing factor to the game and part of the reason why nobody aims on arms and everyone can just place the crosshair on a single location and alpha strike, having all damage hit that single location.
I suggest making all torso mounted weaponry only aim straight ahead, aiming in relation to the cockpit view. Basically, a straight line is drawn down the center of the player's perspective. All torso mounted weaponry fires straight ahead from the mech in relation to this line. As a note, arm mounted weaponry will still only fire straight ahead, like torso weaponry. Just both arms point directly at the Arm crosshair.
A good example is the Atlas. The two Center Torso Laser ports will fire straight ahead, not converging on the location on which it is aimed at, but instead will be aimed at the Torso crosshair, landing in relation to the weapons mounted on the mech. So the two Lasers will land below the Torso crosshair, one directly below (because the cockpit is actually out of the left eye, thus the left Center Torso laser will be directly below you) and the other below and slightly to the right. The Ballistic and Missile hardpoints will be aiming to the below/left and below/right of the Torso crosshair.
What this does is removes the ability to pin-point all weaponry mounted on a mech (unless it is all in the arms) to hit a single location. Thus, placing a larger emphasis on arm mounted weaponry (with intact Shoulder actuators). While alpha strikes will still be around, they will not be the single location devastating that they are now, but instead be the wild firing of multiple systems to place as much damage on the target as fast as possible, not worrying about where on the mech it hits.
And with the greater emphasis on allowing convergence on arms only, players might start choosing to destroy an arm first before taking out the Left/Right Torso, especially on mechs which mount a large amount of weaponry on those arms.
Below is an example of what I am talking about:
TLDR
Remove ability to fire multiple weapons out of the same weapon port at the same time.
Add arm actuator functionality.
Make torso weaponry not converge, but instead fire straight ahead based on distance to selected target or longest range weapon.
All weapons fire straight ahead.
1
Reduction Of Pin-Point Alphas And Emphasis On Arms
Started by Zyllos, Mar 11 2013 07:06 AM
9 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 11 March 2013 - 07:06 AM
#2
Posted 11 March 2013 - 08:07 AM
Sorry, bumping so that I will get some views, at least.
#3
Posted 11 March 2013 - 08:50 AM
Whatever you just said, i like it.
Gives more emphasis on arms, which i use as shields cause i have no weapons there on my rubbish CDA-3C.
Maybe this would make single, large weapons slightly better than boated MLs
I just really hate how all weapons converge onto a single point and instantly destroy it. *cough*6xPPC stalker*cough*
I also never understood how, for example, you can replace cicada's machine gun with double autocannons, but can't even put 2 small lasers in place of the PPC
Gives more emphasis on arms, which i use as shields cause i have no weapons there on my rubbish CDA-3C.
Maybe this would make single, large weapons slightly better than boated MLs
I just really hate how all weapons converge onto a single point and instantly destroy it. *cough*6xPPC stalker*cough*
I also never understood how, for example, you can replace cicada's machine gun with double autocannons, but can't even put 2 small lasers in place of the PPC
Edited by Stormeris, 11 March 2013 - 08:51 AM.
#4
Posted 11 March 2013 - 03:07 PM
No way people are just ignoring this...
#5
Posted 12 March 2013 - 07:58 PM
this is a really nice thread, the game really need less pin point, especially with the upcoming clan technology when people torso will just melt in seconds.
i agree with pretty much all youve said. torso mounted weaponry cannot possibly converge unless there was a mechanism to allow them to aim... because it wouldnt converge the same way at 10 meters and 10000 meters. AND if there is such a mechanism, torso weapons would obviously synchronised to aim at the same place as the arms to make it more convenient for the pilot.
any weapons that isnt in the arms should be a pain in the *** to aim, allowing mech design to focus primarly on arms mounted weaponry. Lets take a gausscat for example, its canons are clearly mounted on the side and if they converge, it should be at a set distance only. lets say 750 meter. when you shoot gauss's, your line of fire would be that of an elongated X where the two vectors converge (the center of the X) exactly at 750 meters.
its just unrealistic,unappealing and funbreaking to have those kind of weapons converge at any distance. if you take convergence out of weapon with no 'aiming system', you solve like 85% of all the cheesy dual ac/20 // gausscats // 6ppcs // etc...
tldr,
its the torso that aims, not the weapons tube, so you cannot have multiple weapons that converge at any given distance if the weapons dont have a syncronised aiming system (wich they obviously dont have, or they would aim at the same place as the arms).
i agree with pretty much all youve said. torso mounted weaponry cannot possibly converge unless there was a mechanism to allow them to aim... because it wouldnt converge the same way at 10 meters and 10000 meters. AND if there is such a mechanism, torso weapons would obviously synchronised to aim at the same place as the arms to make it more convenient for the pilot.
any weapons that isnt in the arms should be a pain in the *** to aim, allowing mech design to focus primarly on arms mounted weaponry. Lets take a gausscat for example, its canons are clearly mounted on the side and if they converge, it should be at a set distance only. lets say 750 meter. when you shoot gauss's, your line of fire would be that of an elongated X where the two vectors converge (the center of the X) exactly at 750 meters.
its just unrealistic,unappealing and funbreaking to have those kind of weapons converge at any distance. if you take convergence out of weapon with no 'aiming system', you solve like 85% of all the cheesy dual ac/20 // gausscats // 6ppcs // etc...
tldr,
its the torso that aims, not the weapons tube, so you cannot have multiple weapons that converge at any given distance if the weapons dont have a syncronised aiming system (wich they obviously dont have, or they would aim at the same place as the arms).
#6
Posted 12 March 2013 - 08:55 PM
People aren't ignoring you...It's nothing personal, I love this suggestion, and I've suggested it myself - but it's been said before, many times. We never really get a response on the idea. Not in "ask the devs", nor in polls or suggestion threads. Not the barest hint that the crosshair-weapon dynamic could change in any way. Even discussions of convergence speed or range is glossed over. I get the impression that the devs really don't like this idea. Especially since it was said many times in CB, which would have been the best time to experiment with the idea. Changes tend not to be as drastic these days, and I don't see it happening.
Wish it would, though! It would be cool.
Wish it would, though! It would be cool.
#7
Posted 13 March 2013 - 04:52 AM
Shakespeare, on 12 March 2013 - 08:55 PM, said:
People aren't ignoring you...It's nothing personal, I love this suggestion, and I've suggested it myself - but it's been said before, many times. We never really get a response on the idea. Not in "ask the devs", nor in polls or suggestion threads. Not the barest hint that the crosshair-weapon dynamic could change in any way. Even discussions of convergence speed or range is glossed over. I get the impression that the devs really don't like this idea. Especially since it was said many times in CB, which would have been the best time to experiment with the idea. Changes tend not to be as drastic these days, and I don't see it happening.
Wish it would, though! It would be cool.
Wish it would, though! It would be cool.
Well, I have asked the devs in Ask the Devs 34 if they have any specifics on weapon convergence.
#8
Posted 13 March 2013 - 04:57 AM
NO.
Because first, that would make Mechs with most of their weapons torsomounted inferior, and totally unbalance the game.
Second, basically forcing people to only use chainfire when using all the hardpoints will also unbalance the chassis to which this applies, and therefore make them inferior.
The arm actuator thing is already implemented to a degree. And I think to a sufficient degree.
Because first, that would make Mechs with most of their weapons torsomounted inferior, and totally unbalance the game.
Second, basically forcing people to only use chainfire when using all the hardpoints will also unbalance the chassis to which this applies, and therefore make them inferior.
The arm actuator thing is already implemented to a degree. And I think to a sufficient degree.
#9
Posted 13 March 2013 - 06:50 AM
Vincent Lynch, on 13 March 2013 - 04:57 AM, said:
NO.
Because first, that would make Mechs with most of their weapons torsomounted inferior, and totally unbalance the game.
Second, basically forcing people to only use chainfire when using all the hardpoints will also unbalance the chassis to which this applies, and therefore make them inferior.
The arm actuator thing is already implemented to a degree. And I think to a sufficient degree.
Because first, that would make Mechs with most of their weapons torsomounted inferior, and totally unbalance the game.
Second, basically forcing people to only use chainfire when using all the hardpoints will also unbalance the chassis to which this applies, and therefore make them inferior.
The arm actuator thing is already implemented to a degree. And I think to a sufficient degree.
Why would it unbalance them compared to those wielding many arm hardpoints? Mechs with many torso hardpoints would have to do a bit more work to get weapons to land onto the same location, their weapons are much more protected from weapon fire.
And even arm hardpoints don't 100% converge. They still spread across the arm convergence square, it's just that arm convergence square will always be smaller than a torso convergence square. And both arm convergence squares are centered on the Arm crosshair, thus allowing for both arms to fire at those locations.
#10
Posted 13 March 2013 - 02:27 PM
Lynch it would go a long way to balance things like the stalker boats and Catapult K2's that have twin gauss that still hit the same spot regarless of me standing 10m or 1k away... That just shouldn't happen.
A Stalker with 6 er-PPCS should be less effective up close but at the moment a 60 point Alpha to any part of my mech in instant death. The will spread the damage and encourge these players to think more clearly. It also give a clear reason to put big weapons on ,my arms which are more vulnerable. Right now I always put my heavy hitter in the torso for protection and ammo in my legs. Arms are meat sheilds or secondary weapons only
A Stalker with 6 er-PPCS should be less effective up close but at the moment a 60 point Alpha to any part of my mech in instant death. The will spread the damage and encourge these players to think more clearly. It also give a clear reason to put big weapons on ,my arms which are more vulnerable. Right now I always put my heavy hitter in the torso for protection and ammo in my legs. Arms are meat sheilds or secondary weapons only
2 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users