459 replies to this topic

[Ralgas]

tenderloving, on 14 June 2013 - 06:31 AM, said:

This statement is self defeating. Cone of fire would make teamwork more important, as volume of fire would be more critical to downing a mech as more shots overall were required to defeat it.

edit: my spelling was self defeating

I don't even wanna think what it will take to down a 3L if we were to get the spray and pray version........

Edited by Ralgas, 14 June 2013 - 06:55 AM.

[tenderloving]

Ralgas, on 14 June 2013 - 06:52 AM, said:

I don't even wanna think what it will take to down a 3L if we just get the spray and pray version........

Remember it works both ways. The other guy is just as affected by the system as you are.

[Ralgas]

read my post above that one, only works if all your targets are relatively the same size. I even included a test you can try at home!!!

Edit: oh and ssrms, he'll be hitting a lot more often than he'll cop. Add to that try stopping behind a light to actually shoot at it, by the time the firing mech stops they're gone, so there's only a little hope of actually being able to fire accurately at one

Edited by Ralgas, 14 June 2013 - 07:05 AM.

[rdmx]

This is not tabletop. Engagements beings decided by a dice roll or RNG makes for a frustrating experience.

I enjoy MWO right now because it is one of the few games that do not have a cone of fire.

Really don't want this to descend into CrapShootWarrior Online. (not that the inconsistent HSR isn't already helping)

tenderloving, on 14 June 2013 - 06:54 AM, said:

Remember it works both ways. The other guy is just as affected by the system as you are.

So why have the system at all?

Edited by rdmx, 14 June 2013 - 07:03 AM.

[tenderloving]

rdmx, on 14 June 2013 - 07:01 AM, said:

So why have the system at all?

What??? Have we completely abandoned logic at this point?

Lasers affect both parties equally, we should remove them.

Edited by tenderloving, 14 June 2013 - 07:05 AM.

[BigMekkUrDakka]

OP is BS go play some other game please

[ExtremeA79]

tenderloving, on 14 June 2013 - 06:54 AM, said:

Remember it works both ways. The other guy is just as affected by the system as you are.

Yeah but if one is facing a bigger chassis (medium, heavy, assault) then the light will have a significant advantage by able to hit the bigger one faster, running faster, while the other mech will miss more shots (these days it can be hard to get a skilled light pilot dead, with this CoF, things are going back to the ECM lagshield days) because of lights speed and small profile.
Lights will dominate. Right now they are in a good place.

[DocBach]

PEEFsmash, on 13 June 2013 - 11:04 PM, said:

Recoil is the effect of projectiles leaving the barrel, and does not affect the shot itself. The most accurate sniper rifles in the world also have very high recoil.

Ultra Autocannons, with their high rate of fire, should be balanced with a factor of recoil rather than high failure rate - especially when we see the Clan Ultra AC/20's which if kept the same will be capable of one shooting Assaults when OmniMechs boat them.

[Accursed Richards]

Tahribator, on 14 June 2013 - 04:11 AM, said:

They're not brawlers neither. Can you imagine the OP'ness if they gave the Jenner or Cicada the side torsos of a Raven or a Stalker?

So the Jenner isn't designed to be a brawler, but the Raven is. Gotcha.

[Further]

Armor buff

• Increases match time
  
• allows end game brawling to happen during a larger percentage of game time
  
• DPS weapons have higher importance
  
• Still allows for skill, while allowing people to shrug off high alphas
  
• Keeps multiple builds viable (sniping would be murdered with suggested nerfs)

Id say 15%-ish but open to debate. I think we need to step back from the typical suggestion that either overly-complicate the game or add too much randomness in what is a "Thinking mans" FPS

[rdmx]

tenderloving, on 14 June 2013 - 07:04 AM, said:

What??? Have we completely abandoned logic at this point?
Lasers affect both parties equally, we should remove them.

Because your strawman arguments really help me understand...

Darren Tyler, on 14 June 2013 - 07:05 AM, said:

Lights will dominate. Right now they are in a good place.

I disagree. Lights are the weakest they've ever been, what with jump-jet shake, seismic sensor completely ruining juking. When HSR is amended, they will be even weaker.

To do remotely well in a light mech means you have to work far harder than any other kind of mech.

Edited by rdmx, 14 June 2013 - 07:21 AM.

[John Mechlane]

Sybreed, on 13 June 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

Would you be fine with a system similar to World of Tank, where moving and turning your turret decreases your chance to hit directly where you aim?

NO FRIGGIN WAY!!!
It's 3050...i think by then the weapons should hit where you aim. You're not sitting in a piece-o-crap™ WW2 tank. Go play WOT to satisfy your cone needs...

[DocBach]

One Medic Army, on 13 June 2013 - 11:30 PM, said:

Because the lasers would also be affected?
Group firing your lasers would result in something like a shotgun spread of lasers hitting the target in multiple sections.

not really as random as a shotgun if they use convergence spread rather than completely random cone of fire;


using an expanding or contracting version of the same reticule they have but changing the convergence points of the different locations to different aiming stadia references on it would open the damage up a bit, but could be countered by player skill in multiple ways, while making the huge one shot alpha strikes much harder to achieve.


Arm lasers fired at a target, even though the expanded reticle is largely pointed over the enemies arm, one of the lasers hits the adjacent torso as the lasers are no longer pinpointing together


CT lasers firing with the expanded reticule - because they are in the same location, the hits will be much closer than say arms fired in opposing limbs or torso, but still have a chance to hit different locations


what it would look like if the lasers were mounted in the left and right torsos - it isn't a random spread, in fact even the reticule opening and would not be random and be determined by factors such as heat and speed; the player still has control of those, and if he chooses to push his machine too hard he suffers the consequences.

[DaZur]

(Communal proposal derived and expounded from several similar suggestions): "Harmonic" convergence

This proposal assumes we have a semi-viable targeting / stabilization-computer that attempts to "harmonize" the weapons mounted on the lt. arm, torso and rt arm. At any point and time the targeting computer is trying to harmonize these three reticle as well as adjust for target range... Torso movement, movement speed & impact return (movement due to taking hits from enemy weapons) and collision all affect harmonization.

Pillar: No magic cone of fire with random deviation... Each weapon mount should always aim where it's aim-point is pointing.

Examples:

Reticle at full stop

1 to 33% throttle

34-66% throttle

67 to 100% throttle


What does it accomplish?
- Stationary sniper still viable
- Mitigates pin-point damage at speed = Eliminates the pin-point aim while moving issue.
- Impact return momentarily de-harmonizes reticle, eliminating the pin-point aim while under fire issue.
- Reticle de-harmonization is small enough to increase ranged shots difficulty level while at the same time decreasing is while within brawler range.
- De-harmonization still provides a small convergence window of pin-point damage under movement if timed properly.

**.GIF NOTE: I flipped my RT & LT mounts when making the animation... My QA department is currently under fire for overlooking this error during editing.

[Ralgas]

DaZur, on 14 June 2013 - 07:42 AM, said:

(Communal proposal derived and expounded from several similar suggestions): "Harmonic" convergence

This proposal assumes we have a semi-viable targeting / stabilization-computer that attempts to "harmonize" the weapons mounted on the lt. arm, torso and rt arm. At any point and time the targeting computer is trying to harmonize these three reticle as well as adjust for target range... Torso movement, movement speed & impact return (movement due to taking hits from enemy weapons) and collision all affect harmonization.

Pillar: No magic cone of fire with random deviation... Each weapon mount should always aim where it's aim-point is pointing.

Examples:

Reticle at full stop

1 to 33% throttle

34-66% throttle

67 to 100% throttle


What does it accomplish?
- Stationary sniper still viable
- Mitigates pin-point damage at speed = Eliminates the pin-point aim while moving issue.
- Impact return momentarily de-harmonizes reticle, eliminating the pin-point aim while under fire issue.
- Reticle de-harmonization is small enough to increase ranged shots difficulty level while at the same time decreasing is while within brawler range.
- De-harmonization still provides a small convergence window of pin-point damage under movement if timed properly.

**.GIF NOTE: I flipped my RT & LT mounts when making the animation... My QA department is currently under fire for overlooking this error during editing.

what about the armless mechs with no lateral movement though?

[ExtremeA79]

Like this ^^^^
Most people wanted something like Call of Duty, which should NOT happen.
This is canon too!

[Satan n stuff]

How about a crosshair that moves around as you move, with the weapons converging on whatever it happens to be pointed at. Convergence speed or lack thereof should make it extremely difficult to hit a single spot while moving, and the crosshair movement would make it really hard to hit a mech at all at range when you're running full speed.
Edit: not like that ^^^^ one, the same ones we have now, with both crosshairs drifting around at the same speed.

Edited by Satan n stuff, 14 June 2013 - 07:55 AM.

[DaZur]

Ralgas, on 14 June 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:

what about the armless mechs with no lateral movement though?

Good question... Answer is Mechs with little vestigial arms (Jenner, Cicada, Jager, Cat, Stalker) will have a small horizontal movement arch for their respective mounts.

Even though they are not "arms" proper... each "mount point" (RT, CT, LT) each have their own aim-point reticle.

Edited by DaZur, 14 June 2013 - 07:58 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Ralgas, on 14 June 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:

what about the armless mechs with no lateral movement though?

Vertical shake?

[John Mechlane]

Please just close this topic before the devs even start considering this....."idea"....

Edited by JaniTheWeedman, 14 June 2013 - 08:01 AM.