Hmm... I'll have to give this reduce shake effect a look-see and test out how the revised shake impacts poptarting. Since it gave me minimal trouble before, I suspect that the only thing that will significantly bother me will be the randomized shot direction.
DeaconW, on 02 July 2013 - 04:07 AM, said:
No, the way I understand convergence as it works now is that any simultaneously fired weapons under the same arm or torso mount reticule hit the same point, regardless. This means if you have arm lock, all weapons can hit the same point. Every time. TT had a random aspect to this and so does real life. WRT PPC be OP, nerfing the PPC without addressing the convergence issue will just move another long range weapon into the PPC slot. I don't believe we can know if the PPC needs any changes until they fix perfect convergence. The good thing is, they already have the mechanic built to fix convergence...it is the random feature of the JJ shake patch. They just need to reduce the amount a lot in normal use.
*Edited for clarity.
Hmm... That's not how I understood convergence to work, and I agree with you, that's not how it should be. If you've got weapons in the arms, they should be converging with each other wherever the reticule is, at whatever range the object under the reticule is, but torso weapons should not converge, period, and arm weapons should only converge if they have lower actuators.
If that is not the case, if torso weapons and weapons in arms without a lower actuator are converging, then I agree with you that that needs changed, because that then effectively removes the distinction between mechs and mech variants that have more weapon hardpoints in the arms vs the torsos, particularly for fire support mechs.
So it seems like we are in agreement there, as well: Only weapons in arms with lower actuators should converge, all other weapons should fire straight ahead. Do you agree?
Also, do you agree that the PPC needs to be nerfed, reducing travel speed and increasing heat generation? I didn't see a clear answer from you on that, and if you do agree on that, I want to get it confirmed and out of the way so that we can stop talking past each other over it, and move on to more constructive dialogue (and also add it to the list of things that everyone agrees on that we can present to PGI).