34 replies to this topic

[MadcatX]

My main issue with making changes with convergence is that sure, it may be a fix for the current meta, but if implemented, how much could it change and cause even more issues over the next meta?

For example, think back a few meta's to the Streakpault. The two primary tactics were to engage it at range or shoot off the "ears". Both would have been much less effective without pinpoint damage. Also as already stated, increasing convergence would actually have a larger impact at short-ranged combat then at long range.

[XSerjo]

I love this suggestion. It may solve another issue: facehugging alphastrikers like 2xAC20/6xSRM.

Today only mechs with lower arm actuators suffer from convergence at close range, mechs with torso/arm-without-lower-actuators mounted weapons have magic projectiles: they're able to turn ~80 degree after leaving the barrel/tube.

MadcatX, on 09 May 2013 - 07:28 PM, said:

My main issue with making changes with convergence is that sure, it may be a fix for the current meta, but if implemented, how much could it change and cause even more issues over the next meta?

For example, think back a few meta's to the Streakpault. The two primary tactics were to engage it at range or shoot off the "ears". Both would have been much less effective without pinpoint damage. Also as already stated, increasing convergence would actually have a larger impact at short-ranged combat then at long range.

Streakpults hits your CT only whitin 270m (thanx PGI, continue ingnoring this bug). Alphastrike-spammers hits your CT at much greater range.

What is better: 1-2 overpowered close-combat mechs or tons of long-ranged Alphaspammers?

Edited by XSerjo, 09 May 2013 - 08:01 PM.

[mania3c]

Neverfar, on 09 May 2013 - 07:26 PM, said:

So what's your solution?

If it's "L2P" know that it's fast not becoming an option.

I know this thread about alphas and not so much about snipers..but increasing convergence time is not really the best solution..because it will affect snipers very lightly and also nerf lights and brawlers which is really not needed.

Maybe we are too focused to nerfing these alphas and snipers that we really can't thinking outside the box?? Maybe the right path is somewhere in between?

We have to accept one thing.. MWO is first person shooter..very different but still...people want to know where they are shooting and if there are weapons which need precise aiming, they really don't want some random **** around. but i agree poptarting should be a more difficult task ..so maybe cursor shake based on mech weight during jump-jetting is the solution..

But nerfing snipers? how? why? Snipers are always about precise aiming and big damages.. do we really want snipers not to be dangerous and artificially make their job harder? TBH..I don't believe this is the right path.. maybe buffing other weapon systems..some anti-sniper systems like LRM, artillery/airstrike..something which will force snipers to move..or take cover..maybe buff mediums and lights which could charge these snipers ..and maybe add more maps, which are very unfriendly for snipers with low visibility, more urban environments or even maybe some cave-like scenarios .. but I don't believe nerfing snipers in direct way will do any good..

for alphas..well.. I think we have to accept boating will exists and of course..first point.. MWO is first person shooter..we just can't mess with aiming much...but maybe changing hard point system is the key? or perma(match long) overheating penalties? High temperature temporary penalties? whatever which will force us to think about our shots?.. I know.. we still have AC20 or gauss..but one has short range and can be easily outranged..and second one is ticking bomb...

all in all...bad suggestions are...just that..bad..sometimes is better to do nothing than changing something just for sake of changing (and create even more problems)..

[Aidan McRae]

Sure, people want their shots to go where they aim them, but from tons of FPS gaming experience, there are millions of players out there who are totally okay with 'cone of fire.' Barring actual sniper rifles, every game from CStrike to COD to Halo had some variance in shots.

Variance is exactly what this game needs. It's not like we're only shooting once every 10 seconds. If *that* were the case, then sure, I could understand bristly people with cones of fire, but...you're firing every 3-4 seconds at the very longest.

AND - for those who argue 'you can use the same tactics and builds I do, so don't make changes to the system, 'cause it works for me'..making this change or cone of fire ALSO effects all players equally, so...I'll take your point as a support for this movement. Thank you.

[Caustic Canid]

mania3c, on 09 May 2013 - 07:58 PM, said:

all in all...bad suggestions are...just that..bad..sometimes is better to do nothing than changing something just for sake of changing (and create even more problems)..

I would rather they change something balance related rather than just releasing premium content every two weeks...

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Convergence is literally, non-existant.

They actually went OUT OF THEIR WAY TO REMOVE IT several patches ago and didn't tell anyone until it was mentioned in one of the Interviews on NGNG that they removed it.

And there are no plans to reintroduce it any time soon because it's "Broken."

[Cycleboy]

I've been on this same thought a long time. I'd even go for a "spread bar" above the target reticle that spreads and narrows as the computer calculates convergence and moves the weapon points into line based on rate of change to target. A locked target (use for spotters) gets calculations made faster, and weapons are trained on that spot, so jump snipers to a KNOWN target can do it, but popping up to scout/target/fire in a 3sec window is not pinpoint. The spread bar needs to be there to let the pilot know how close his weapons are to full convergence lock... give us the info and you get your precious "skill only" portion.

This kind of cone of fire narrows as the target distance is locked. So a shut down mech... 2sec later... BAM! Circling mechs between 100-120m... no issue. Angled attack at fast speed... yeah... problem. Lights straffing past at 150kph... problem... but if you are close enough to an assault mech... their sections are big enough that it wouldn't matter anyway. Same thing tho as the light angle streaks past... that 6PPC boat will not be able to compute AND move the actuators fast enough to get all shots in a 2mx2m box and damage will get spread.

Now, if this is no longer a Battletech heavy based simulator/fighter, and is truly just another FPS... I'll rethink the amount of time I put into playing and commenting to try to make it a better game. Devs.... define this game title! What are you trying to make so that those of us that want a mech simulator can move on down the road.

[Lefty Lucy]

Jade Kitsune, on 10 May 2013 - 12:14 AM, said:

Convergence is literally, non-existant.

They actually went OUT OF THEIR WAY TO REMOVE IT several patches ago and didn't tell anyone until it was mentioned in one of the Interviews on NGNG that they removed it.

And there are no plans to reintroduce it any time soon because it's "Broken."

I think you must mean convergence time, because weapons always converge on the cross hairs. They converge, they just take no time to do so.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Lefty Lucy, on 10 May 2013 - 11:43 AM, said:

I think you must mean convergence time, because weapons always converge on the cross hairs. They converge, they just take no time to do so.

No I mean convergence, as a whole.

Yes everything instantly "converges" on the crosshair... but for there to be convergence at all, there has to be convergence time for things to converge to.

The way I say it, there is no convergence, everything ever hits where you point... there's no need for anything to converge, it just does. Convergence would imply that it takes time for everything to move to where you point.

We're both right just looking at it differently. Anyway, the point is, there's no time between pointing to pulling the trigger, there's no mechanic in place at the moment, it's been removed. Everything fires dead center on the crosshair. thus there is no "Convergence"

[Jaguar Prime]

Maybe it's me, but I see this as a veiled way of getting long range play nerfed. Who benefits most from from high alpha builds? Long range players. I have an idea. Lets fix it this way. No weapon (not including missiles) can do damage outside of, let's say 300m. Everybody brawls now. Recycle and heat make boating ppc's impractical since they can only shoot 300m. No need to change convergence because everyone is now humping each other.

I'm sorry for the sarcasm but it is what it is. This entire complaint about high alpha builds is just an attack against Long Range play. Probably aimed at 4-6 ppc stalkers and "poptarts" of any kind.

(my thoughts on the matter......If you expose yourself to an assualt, you should get 2 shotted. If you expose yourself enough that a heavy jumpsniper kills you. Thats more a problem with whats between the chair and keyboard than it is problem with game mechanics......I'm just saying......)

[mike29tw]

Aidan McRae, on 09 May 2013 - 08:02 PM, said:

Sure, people want their shots to go where they aim them, but from tons of FPS gaming experience, there are millions of players out there who are totally okay with 'cone of fire.' Barring actual sniper rifles, every game from CStrike to COD to Halo had some variance in shots.

Variance is exactly what this game needs. It's not like we're only shooting once every 10 seconds. If *that* were the case, then sure, I could understand bristly people with cones of fire, but...you're firing every 3-4 seconds at the very longest.

AND - for those who argue 'you can use the same tactics and builds I do, so don't make changes to the system, 'cause it works for me'..making this change or cone of fire ALSO effects all players equally, so...I'll take your point as a support for this movement. Thank you.

Common misconception. Counter-Strike doesn't have random "cone of fire". What it has is called "recoil pattern". It's one of the reasons why Counter-Strike is still a e-sport game after many years while everyone makes joke at CoD players.

[Roadbuster]

We need both, convergence and heat threshold, to lower the ammount of boating and high alpha builds.
Don't nerf them too hard though. Alpha builds and boats will and should exist in the future, but they shouldn't make mixed builds as inferior as they do now.

[Vodrin Thales]

Lefty Lucy, on 09 May 2013 - 11:03 AM, said:

Right now weapon convergence time is so nearly instantaneous as to be a complete non-factor at range. A jump sniper can find and hit a target in a precise spot with multiple weapons all in the short time that he or she is in the air. Similarly stalkers can hit you with 6 PPCs in the exact same point on a "snap shot."

Increasing convergence time would mean that while the same mechs could likely hit you with all of their weapons only moments after targeting you, those weapons would also be much more likely to hit all over your mech, rather than in one precise spot.

This would be a very "skill based" approach to solving the pin-point damage issue, because while it decreases precision of fire, it is in a non-random way. A player who is skilled at holding aim points would see that skill pay off.

I'm really wondering how they could pull this off without making it much more difficult to make all your weapons hit reliably. Just make zoom non-functional with jumping and see what that does. It may solve the problem.

Some heat and rate of fire adjustments on the currently most effective pinpoint weapons may also be helpful.

Edited by Vodrin Thales, 13 May 2013 - 06:47 AM.