100 replies to this topic

[Profiteer]

PEEFsmash, on 24 June 2013 - 04:41 PM, said:

I do support removing arm lock. It would increase the skill-gap in this game, and is one of the few ways to reduce "pinpoint alphas" while still allowing people to alpha, and allowing them to hit exactly what they are aiming at.

Obviously, it doesn't fix everything, but arm lock was absolutely a dumbing-down of the aiming skill, especially on heavies/assaults that are so strong right now.

How do you think removing arm-lock will affect perhaps the best assault in the game right now: the Stalker? It won't. It will actually make it better relative to Atlas's and Highlander's who mount weapons in both the arms and torsos.

If it's removed I can see a battlefield consisting of Stalker-3F's, AC-40 Jaggers and a few Jenner-F's.

The game is cookie-cutter enough as is.

[Monky]

The only thing arm lock does is open up a wider variety of chassis to be sniper builds. previously you where limited to mechs with torso heavy on hardpoints, arm heavy on hardpoints, or no lower arm actuators. Arm lock is really only an equalizer here.

[Deathlike]

Welcome to adding a "newbie friendly" feature and turning it into the actual "fix" for "JJ shake".
It's amazing how the "law of unintended consequences" is responsible for brokenness.
I had figured this out at some point and it's hilarious that literally nothing of consequence has changed. Same will go with the next proposed changes for weapon boating...
Welcome to the new meta... same as the old meta.

Edited by Deathlike, 24 June 2013 - 05:36 PM.

[Phaesphoros]

Victor Morson, on 24 June 2013 - 04:22 PM, said:

There's a slight unaligned X axis even on 'mechs without lower arm actuators, actually.

Huh? X? Horizontal? That's news to me... and I'd bet this is a bug o.O

Victor Morson, on 24 June 2013 - 04:22 PM, said:

Furthermore the Highlander 1 Gauss / 3 PPC would be a great example of unaligned fire, since it would not longer be able to easily sync the Gauss and PPCs into the same shot, with the PPCs trailing the Gauss unless the sniper drastically leads the target to line up a perfect shot - which is more than fair.

Yes, but what I meant was it would still have 3 perfectly aligned PPCs (see below).

Victor Morson, on 24 June 2013 - 04:22 PM, said:

It's how MW:O used to be and I realize now was much better for. The minute easy "all guns aligned" mode was put in all this "every gun on one location" stuff started.

I don't think taking away the more reasonable and useful aiming system is the way to go -- but hey! it's BT
(It also think it'd be less dramatic w/o arm lock, but to remove something useful only to nerf high alpha...)

Victor Morson, on 24 June 2013 - 04:28 PM, said:

(comments on builds)

I could respond to those, but I agree with this:

Victor Morson, on 24 June 2013 - 04:28 PM, said:

Again, this is not a magic bullet cure all.

It might help a bit, but it doesn't cure everything, and again: I don't think it's reasonable to take away a useful and reasonable aiming system to force everyone to use a silly one (all the time). Rather than that, I'd even argue for improving the non-locked version (e.g. let the torso reticle try to catch the arm reticle), which would inevitably result in further advantages for sniper builds (and for other builds like swayback).
Use another mechanic to nerf high-alpha.

Victor Morson, on 24 June 2013 - 04:28 PM, said:

I am saying this VASTLY reduces the #1 complaint around here about every gun hitting the same spot every time, and being easy to aim. I think most of the people fighting to keep arm lock simply want to keep what is effectively an easy mode button. (Except the near blind poster. But he really needs a custom reticule, not arm lock.)

You'd have to aim a little longer, making skill more important -- and really quick shots would be less powerful for some builds. I doubt it would shift the meta (if it was the only change) nor would it only hit the high-alpha builds. I agree the nerf bat would hit jump snipers and peek-shooters the hardest, but that would probably lead to those swapping their guns into arms/torso and most of the nerf would be compensated.

Edited by Phaesphoros, 24 June 2013 - 05:42 PM.

[Victor Morson]

Monky, on 24 June 2013 - 05:35 PM, said:

The only thing arm lock does is open up a wider variety of chassis to be sniper builds. previously you where limited to mechs with torso heavy on hardpoints, arm heavy on hardpoints, or no lower arm actuators. Arm lock is really only an equalizer here.

I honestly do not believe "Making some builds exceptional snipers" is why they added Arm Lock; it was an unintended consequence. If this all comes down to the Stalker "not being impacted" I would like to remind everyone that the torso still trails slightly, making it more difficult to aim.

Arm mounted weapons might see a resurgence, but if more people are forced to use them, their builds become more fragile. And isn't that a good thing for powerful damage builds?

[Profiteer]

Victor Morson, on 24 June 2013 - 06:10 PM, said:

I honestly do not believe "Making some builds exceptional snipers" is why they added Arm Lock; it was an unintended consequence. If this all comes down to the Stalker "not being impacted" I would like to remind everyone that the torso still trails slightly, making it more difficult to aim.

Arm mounted weapons might see a resurgence, but if more people are forced to use them, their builds become more fragile. And isn't that a good thing for powerful damage builds?

Having the torso trail slightly is meaningless in a 4x PPC stalker as you can easily train yourself to focus only on the circle.

I guess this is just one of the consequences of taking a turn-based TT game and making it into an online FPS.

Removing arm-lock will hurt some mechs and not others, leading to more imbalance; right now it is actually leveling the playing field somewhat (whether by design or not).

It's a shame because I agree that it lowers the skill level required to snipe effectively in some builds.

[Stoicblitzer]

the silent majority wanted armlock and 3PV. buy more

Profiteer, on 24 June 2013 - 05:24 PM, said:

If it's removed I can see a battlefield consisting of Stalker-3F's, AC-40 Jaggers and a few Jenner-F's.

lol you just described the current game.

[El Bandito]

Best sniper mech ATM--The Stalker--laughs at any notions of removing arm lock feature.

[Darling_In_The_MeXX]

http://www.qqmercs.com/?p=2780, little lengthy but problem solved.

[Ralgas]

I support the removing of the "on the fly" shift toggle, while retaining the options toggle while outside of a match.

It was added as an aid to those using controllers/joysticks and new players learning the game, but has ended up a semi exploit by anyone that runs arm/torso weapons in the same weapon group.( i say that because i even find it useful in the QD as a laser aligner) .

Edit: this solution gives a choice, line up weps and suffer under brawling conditions, or have the arm freedom with the harder targeting alignments

Edited by Ralgas, 24 June 2013 - 09:03 PM.

[xengk]

How about making weapon converge worst as more weapon are fired together (alpha strike/group fire)?
Like most FPS title, when you use rapid fire weapon like AK, the bullets will be less true than a single firing pistol/or using short burst.

This will fix some of the high alpha meta issue in the game.

Whenever more than 1 weapon are fired together, each weapon will deviate x% from the center of the reticule. The greater the number of weapon are fired together the greater the deviation.
This make long range sniping with 6PPC still possible but they will not all hit the same component, brawler with multiple weapons firing at close range will suffer the least from this effect but will still stop high alpha brawler to punch through a single component quickly.

Meanwhile, this make the converge pilot skill more useful by reducing the deviation by y%.
Dev can also introduce Targeting Computer module to reduce the deviate by another z%.

However AC40 will hardly be affected by this due to only boating 2 weapons.
Possible give ballistic weapon a higher deviation rate than energy weapon, due to recoil.

Deviation rate for using different weapon type
Energy < Missile < Ballistic


This is somewhat inline with TT on how weapon will hit different locations, IS just have sucky targeting computer.

[PEEFsmash]

xengk, on 24 June 2013 - 09:03 PM, said:

Like most FPS title, when you use rapid fire weapon like AK, the bullets will be less true than a single firing pistol/or using short burst.

Based on this post, I'm going to make the merciful conclusion and assume you actually have no idea how AKs work.

AKs shoot one bullet, it leaves the barrel, then the next bullet, and so on. The reason AK bullets spread is due to the fact that each bullet causes recoil that makes the next bullet harder to aim. Shooting multiple bullets at once would not have this sort of effect (given a reasonable barrel length, like the ones in MWO).

Edited by PEEFsmash, 24 June 2013 - 09:10 PM.

[Genewen]

Mighty Stalker laughs at your puny attempt to nerf snipers. I hear some Heavy Metals giggling as well.

Seriously, your idea would only narrow the used sniping models down. It does nothing to diminish the amount of sniping done.

[Corvus Antaka]

a significant part of the problem is that the arm/circle convergence does not hit the same spot or converge like the torso does - unless locked - and this does create an issue with ease of pinpoint convergence.

[PanzerMagier]

Sephlock, on 24 June 2013 - 03:34 PM, said:

Didn't just about everyone immediately shut off arm lock and never turn it on again?

Everyone except mr. L33tf4g who doesn't check forums, doesn't have friends, but does have a big wallet and a 4pcc/gauss misery which he will always state is his favorite mech until it is nerfed.

Edited by PanzerMagier, 24 June 2013 - 09:19 PM.

[xengk]

PEEFsmash, on 24 June 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:

[/size]

Based on this post, I'm going to make the merciful conclusion and assume you actually have no idea how AKs work.

AKs shoot one bullet, it leaves the barrel, then the next bullet, and so on. The reason AK bullets spread is due to the fact that each bullet causes recoil that makes the next bullet harder to aim. Shooting multiple bullets at once would not have this sort of effect (given a reasonable barrel length, like the ones in MWO).

Yes, I never hold a physical firearm before.
The basic idea is that the more gun you fire the less accurate your shot should be.

Edited by xengk, 24 June 2013 - 09:26 PM.

[PEEFsmash]

xengk, on 24 June 2013 - 09:24 PM, said:

Yes, I never hold a physical firearm before.
The basic idea is that the more gun you fire the less accurate your shot should be.

That basic idea is incorrect. The your accuracy is not affected until you try to shoot AGAIN during recoil. This is why Korean War era battleships could put a gigantic (and I mean gigantic) slug into a trash can from miles away.

Edited by PEEFsmash, 24 June 2013 - 09:27 PM.

[TOGSolid]

PEEFsmash, on 24 June 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:

[/size]

Based on this post, I'm going to make the merciful conclusion and assume you actually have no idea how AKs work.

AKs shoot one bullet, it leaves the barrel, then the next bullet, and so on. The reason AK bullets spread is due to the fact that each bullet causes recoil that makes the next bullet harder to aim. Shooting multiple bullets at once would not have this sort of effect (given a reasonable barrel length, like the ones in MWO).

Well, that and the tolerances being so loose that you could use the receiver as a rock tumbler but yeah, you're basically correct. There are other things that affect accuracy but they're not particularly relevant here.

I own an AK among other firearms so there you go.

[xengk]

TOGSolid, on 24 June 2013 - 09:39 PM, said:

Well, that and the tolerances being so loose that you could use the receiver as a rock tumbler but yeah, you're basically correct. There are other things that affect accuracy but they're not particularly relevant here. I own an AK among other firearms so there you go.

Alright, the AK was a bad example.
And I never own or physical shot any firearm before due to the law of the country I am in.

What I am proposing is that accuracy should drop when more than 1 weapon is fired together.
Reason? Game Balance and Magic.

[Genewen]

PEEFsmash, on 24 June 2013 - 09:27 PM, said:

That basic idea is incorrect. The your accuracy is not affected until you try to shoot AGAIN during recoil. This is why Korean War era battleships could put a gigantic (and I mean gigantic) slug into a trash can from miles away.

Ever since I stood next to a slug used by the "Schwerer Gustav", I reserve the term gigantic for those ones:


Totally useless 80cm barrel, but surely impressive as hell.