185 replies to this topic

[DocBach]

OK, "MechWarrior is a simulation not of real life, but an in game universe in which weapons are nowhere near as accurate as they are in real life"

[Syllogy]

DocBach, on 12 July 2013 - 07:15 AM, said:

OK, "MechWarrior is a simulation not of real life, but an in game universe in which weapons are nowhere near as accurate as they are in real life"

Why do they have to be inaccurate?

Grey Death Legion found a 730kb data cache from the Star League and it was considered ERMAGERD! HUGE!... this forum probably couldn't sit on that kind of data cap.

The universe was developed in the Space 80's by guys that had no idea what weapons were like in real life using rules that sounded good at the time.

Edited by Syllogy, 12 July 2013 - 07:19 AM.

[DocBach]

Syllogy, on 12 July 2013 - 07:16 AM, said:

Why do they have to be inaccurate?

Grey Death Legion found a 730kb data cache from the Star League and it was considered ERMAGERD! HUGE!... this forum probably couldn't sit on that kind of data cap.

The universe was developed in the Space 80's by guys that had no idea what weapons were like in real life using rules that sounded good at the time.

Or like, rules that were built around dice? So like, the fact that hitting with three PPC's and a gauss rifle to a single location is such a rare location no 'Mech was built around surviving it, yet the same thing happens in repetition in this game, which keeps the same damage models?

[MrMasakari]

I think its quite stupid, not all weapons would converge at the same spot unless they are the same weapon, all in the same location firing at the same velocity in the same direction. They could still converge even if they are not in the same location but only at a very specific distance. i.e. were the firing arcs cross over.

Its understandable on non alpha builds because you could just compensate accordingly but it really doesn't make much sense otherwise. There should at the very least some tiny amount of variation in hits, compared to them all hitting the same spot within an inch of eachother. The only time you should get convergence on alphastrike is when you are at THAT position, were all your firing arcs intercept at point X.

Just my opinion as always.

[mistformsquirrel]

DocBach, on 12 July 2013 - 07:21 AM, said:

Or like, rules that were built around dice? So like, the fact that hitting with three PPC's and a gauss rifle to a single location is such a rare location no 'Mech was built around surviving it, yet the same thing happens in repetition in this game, which keeps the same damage models?

So maybe the damage model needs to change a bit.

[3rdworld]

DocBach, on 12 July 2013 - 07:21 AM, said:

Or like, rules that were built around dice? So like, the fact that hitting with three PPC's and a gauss rifle to a single location is such a rare location no 'Mech was built around surviving it, yet the same thing happens in repetition in this game, which keeps the same damage models?

hence mechs life was doubled to compensate.

also an atlas would survive a 3 ppc + gauss to the CT in stride

Edited by 3rdworld, 12 July 2013 - 07:25 AM.

[Syllogy]

DocBach, on 12 July 2013 - 07:21 AM, said:

Or like, rules that were built around dice? So like, the fact that hitting with three PPC's and a gauss rifle to a single location is such a rare location no 'Mech was built around surviving it, yet the same thing happens in repetition in this game, which keeps the same damage models?

They aren't using the same damage models.

Sure, the basic damage amount may be the same, but the recycle time, burn time, and armor rates that have been tweaked have a major impact on those mechanics.

[DocBach]

3rdworld, on 12 July 2013 - 07:23 AM, said:

hence mechs life was doubled to compensate.

yet lights and mediums can still be one shotted

[Tombstoner]

Ogresan, on 12 July 2013 - 05:16 AM, said:

Convergence is fine. Instant convergence isn't. The idea PGI had originally is that it would take some time for weapons to converge on the targeting reticles' distance. If you pop out from a building 5m in front of you to shoot a mech 500m away you would have to wait for those weapons to converge on that distance for an accurate shot. If you shot right away the weapons would still be converged at 50m and miss completely (exception being centre line weapons). Ever notice the pilot skill that speeds up convergence by 15%?

I agree with the above and i would add that if it worked well PGI would have left it in but i think it looked fing stupid when you fired too soon and your weapons form an x between you and your target making you completely miss with all your shots. worse yet you shoot a team mate in the back.

PGI wanted to make hitting your target a mater of pure player skill. i'm ok with that and they tried the convergence system. then found it lacking and removed it but replaced it with nothing. it over simplified targeting. push one button and multiple weapons hit the same pixel.... even at max range. pin point accuracy and weapon groups combine to make super weapons like ppc-60's and ultra-40's its flat out bad for the game and its only going to get worse when clan tech arrives.

PGI response to pop tarting was to implement a RNG COF. pop tarting went away, now that its been nerfed pop tarting is back.
PGIs next response to pinpoint accuracy is heat penalties for grouped weapons. this still doesn't address the 2x ultra-20 or the obvious work around of paired ppc's with 2x gause or 3-4 gause.

PGI is tring valiantly to keep as much player skill in aiming as posable but group fire exploits the game system. people who hate convergence want to make the game harder: The "Thinking mans shooter". People who object to any solution want to keep it easy to put 40-60 point hits into lesser skilled players. These people just want to pug stomp and call it a good game. My L337 skill in assigning all my weapons to fire button 1 rules.

Edited by Tombstoner, 12 July 2013 - 07:31 AM.

[Howdy Doody]

This is a great thread. There are lots of great points of views here and I honestly like all of them.

But for me, "In a game", I personally like the thought of hitting what I'm aiming at. Nothing make me hate a shooter more than "some random miss" equation.

That being said. I do hate high alphas coring everything easily, but for me I'm not sure convergence is the answer.

Maybe the high heat boat system will help (I want to try it before judging). This in theory should require more shots being taken. More shots = more human skill/error on the shooter and the target.

I would also like maybe having the CT/torsos tougher to kill so that going for arms becomes a greater choice. Right now it's a waste of Heat and weapon cool-down to shoot anything but CT/torso.

Great post. Good contributions. Thanks gents.

[Hotthedd]

mistformsquirrel, on 12 July 2013 - 06:20 AM, said:

Quite easily - not for me, but for a halfway decent taretting system. As noted by myself and others, a modern MBT can do all this for a target multiple kilometers away. That's 2013 technology, and has actually existed longer. For a Battlemech to even move at all then it has to have computers handling a lot of tiny adjustments in the machine already* so you can't give me the "it's lostech" excuse.

Heck, given the relatively short ranges at which our machines operate, it would be very easy to rig it all up with a simple laser range finder - paint the target with the laser, weapons converge based on the range. You quite simply cannot 'forget' technology that basic if you can run a functional battlemech. It'd be one thing if this were say... WH40k, where people don't even understand the machines they're using and even the people who come the closest still treat it all as some big religious mystery... but this isn't like 40k at all.

I mean look, I know that Battletech isn't realistic; normally I don't care and just get on with it - but there's a level where you start running up against my suspension of disbelief and this is kinda it. You cannot have a 100 ton walking tank and be unable to top 2013 targeting technology, it just doesn't make a lick of sense.

Balancing the game in such a way is just... well silly. The better way to handle it is to just keep nudging the numbers until they hit something that works. With luck, maybe this new heat system will work out - if it doesn't, maybe a damage reduction is in order, or a decrease in rate of fire.**

Besides, ignoring versimilitude for a moment, removing convergence hurts brawlers too (and that's what I play so understandably I'd rather not have my 'mech weakened). After all, the great strength a brawler brings is being able to deliver a LOT of damage once you get up close, but that means jack squat if it flies all over the place. My SRM 4s, medium lasers and AC/5s would be peppering the heck out of the enemy without actually bringing them down, meanwhile that guy with all the PPCs? Yeah he's still fine because convergence or no, they do a lot of damage per-hit so while they may not be able to just core me outright, they'll be ripping sections off my 'mech as we dance, something a more DPS oriented build would have trouble doing.

*For an example of this in real life, look up Fly By Wire. While in an aircraft it's useful for manueverability and allowing designs that otherwise cannot fly to fly, in a Battlemech a similar system would allow it to actually move/stand rather than just topple over.

**That's actually my preferred solution personally. If someone wants to snipe with 4 PPCs, that's fine, just make sure those PPCs can only do that every 6 or 8 seconds, that way the sniper has to have a good aim because if they screw up they may not get enough shots in to kill their target. That also reduces the PPCs efficiency as a brawling weapon since it's actual DPS isn't that great, it'd be a high alpha low DPS weapon. Gauss I'm unworried about - yeah it's powerful, but it also takes up a huge amount of space in your machine and unless I'm missing a machine, the most you'll ever fit on a single 'mech is what... 2? Don't get me wrong, that stings, but there's ammunition considerations there, and the shear weight and critical capacity used by the GR mean you can't carry much for backup.

We have no technology in 2013 that allows instant, perfect, pinpoint accuracy with MULTIPLE weapons hitting a single moving bullseye while at top speed and/or jumping.

You describe a tank with ONE weapon being accurate under those conditions, and I have no problem with a Battlemech being able to fire ONE weapon accurately under those conditions. The PROBLEM is multiple weapons having perfect convergence. Even if you could use hand-wavium to explain it, it is a GAME-BREAKING mechanic that removes skill from the equation.

About the lore: 3050 is a time where humanity is emerging from a technological Dark Age. We do not always have forward progression. It is something akin to arguing that technology in 10th century Europe MUST be more advanced than it was in 2nd century Europe. But it wasn't. It was BEHIND that technological level. Therefore the argument that because it is 3050 it must be possible is specious.

As far as targeting computers go, they do not exist in th3 battletech I.S. universe in 3050. When they DO arrive, they weigh several tons and occupy critical spaces on the mech. So, the whole TC argument can be thrown out of the window.

[3rdworld]

DocBach, on 12 July 2013 - 07:23 AM, said:

yet lights and mediums can still be one shotted

are you implying they couldn't be one shot in TT?

an AC/20 shot would nearly core a jenner in a single volley (1 internal left).

[DocBach]

a stock Jenner with 4 tons of armor; in our game, customized Jenners with 8 tons of armor, or better yet, a Centurion with 10 tons of armor, even with doubled values, can be killed by one volley of heavy weapons in this game.

[3rdworld]

DocBach, on 12 July 2013 - 07:31 AM, said:

a stock Jenner with 4 tons of armor; in our game, customized Jenners with 8 tons of armor, or better yet, a Centurion with 10 tons of armor, even with doubled values, can be killed by one volley of heavy weapons in this game.

No (non *****) cent can be killed in a single volley, unless it is a head or back shot. 1 is a good shot, the other relys on a stupid cent.

Edited by 3rdworld, 12 July 2013 - 07:41 AM.

[Kaldor]

DocBach, on 12 July 2013 - 07:23 AM, said:

yet lights and mediums can still be one shotted

Thats is due to other issues as well, not just the high alpha meta we are currently in. Im hopeful that PGIs changes next week will help mediums out.

Tombstoner, on 12 July 2013 - 07:24 AM, said:

PGI response to pop tarting was to implement a RNG COF. pop tarting went away, now that its been nerfed pop tarting is back.

Poptarting NEVER went away. If anything it lulled people into think it wasnt effective anymore and made it easier for me. JJ shake did not effect those that were really good at it. I just adjusted slightly and moved on.

[Strum Wealh]

GingerBang, on 11 July 2013 - 03:41 PM, said:

I'm just curious what, if any, reasoning PGI has given FOR convergence. I know everyone on the forums hates it right now, and i know it would fix all sorts of balance issues, but there has to be some reason PGI is completely ignoring 90% of its players. Anyone heard what it is? Is CryEngine simply not able to have weapon fine anywhere other than to your vanishing point? I honestly wouldn't be surprised if this was all ANOTHER shortfall caused by a bad choice of game engines.

The thing is, non-instantaneous convergence was originally part of MWO (so, it would seem to not be an issue with CryEngine), and was given as one of the measures employed to combat the various "high-alpha"/"finger-of-death"/"poptart" scenarios that has arisen since its removal in the April 02 patch (see thread/poll here).

The next question, though, is why it was removed...

[Ph30nix]

GingerBang, on 11 July 2013 - 03:41 PM, said:

I'm just curious what, if any, reasoning PGI has given FOR convergence. I know everyone on the forums hates it right now, and i know it would fix all sorts of balance issues, but there has to be some reason PGI is completely ignoring 90% of its players. Anyone heard what it is? Is CryEngine simply not able to have weapon fine anywhere other than to your vanishing point? I honestly wouldn't be surprised if this was all ANOTHER shortfall caused by a bad choice of game engines.

umm no 90% of the forums doenst hate it, only people who charge face first into big assault mechs hate it

convergence is common sense to me in this game maybe not pinpoint but i have zero problem with it and note i dont have a stalker, highlander or caraphract nor do i pilot ppc/gauss builds.

[FireSlade]

mistformsquirrel, on 12 July 2013 - 07:12 AM, said:

My point is the problem isn't convergence - it's PPCs. Nerf their damage or rate of fire; make it so that a PPC boat (as opposed to someone with 1 PPC), has to actually aim carefully - if they hit it should hurt, but if they miss they ought to regret it. As noted in a previous post, I prefer lowering ROF, since that means you can preserve the shock value of a big hit; but it requires a sniper to actually act like a sniper - if a big brawler gets in their face they're in trouble because their actual damage per second is simply not up to snuff.

I also want to add a specific note about 2: I don't spray damage all over their mech at present. I can, with effort, keep my guns on a specific body part as I move and fight; I'm not saying it's the easiest thing ever (or that I'm all that good a pilot); but someone with even a modicum of skill *can* use a brawling set effectively. My point is that with convergence as it is, I can actually maintain this kind of aim - without it, my shots WILL hit all over their mech because the range I operate at means my guns will be hitting shoulders and arms rather than torso most of the time. (I'm generally within 150m if I can help it, keeps the LRMs from being a pain).

The PPC guy is going to be having the same problem of course, but their PPCs are as much as possible going to be clustered together so that as many hit single locations as possible - sure they aren't going to be coring me as fast, but they will take my arms and legs off faster than I can them. Hence my point that it's PPCs that are at issue, not convergence.




Right, more PPCs = Better Pilot, I consider myself informed.

PPCs are not even the issue either. How can you call the hottest weapon in the game that needs several DHS just to run (making it the equivalent of an AC10) OP when it only does 10 damage? What makes it OP is that you can run 4-6 of them on a mech, alpha, alpha, shutdown, and then alpha again with little drawback dealing out 120-180 damage to single locations. Same things go for LLs, LPLs,UAC5, and the AC20 just we do not call them OP because lasers do not deal damage instantly; UAC5 can run in groups of effectively making a 1.1 Gauss Rifle but because it weighs so much and is an ammo hog we do not care; and the AC20 is so big only a few mechs can put them anywhere. Every weapon in this game has its drawbacks but because of instant pin point convergence we cry fowl on a weapon that is balanced (it is balanced but the current heat system allows you to abuse it) and if PGI nerfs the PPC the next weapons that take its place will start this all over again. Slow down the rate at which individual weapons converge and you will start to notice that the meta will shift from pin point damage back to weapons like lasers, SRMs, and others. It will not kill brawling it will help it and it will not effect sniping it just means that they need more skill to aim 1.3km out.


Also do not get me started on realism, you guys want it so bad sure lets get it. Personally I prefer the challenge realism provides. Ok first up for realism, recoil: well goodbye AC40 Jagermechs since we all know a 203mm cannon would either knock the mech on its *** with every shot or tear the arms off. Little point of reference go look at an M1 Abrams fire off its main cannon; that is one hell of a kick and that is only 120mm. Next up cone of fire: every FPS game has it and it even occurs in real life. If you do not believe me go to a shooting range and hold a rifle you will see a circular sway and the more skilled a shooter that you are the less there is. Fire off a few rounds down range and depending on skill and ammo used you should see a semi circular pattern in the target. Even the best shooters in the world cannot get perfect pin point accuracy and they only have a 10 pound weapon to steady so with computer tech and accounting for all the other factors then battlemechs should have similar abilities when standing still but running well...... Go run an shoot something and let me know how well that you did (The human brain is still the most advanced computer that we have so you cannot say that a computer can aim better). More to the point we will need time added to the game. For computers to calculate where to aim to hit the spot at some point infront of the mech based on distance, altitude, the rotation of the planet (yes comes into play at long ranges), wind temperature, humidity, etc. then calculate how much that it has to move its arms or weapon gimbals to hit that point. This all takes time to do and even the fastest computers will still take more than a second to do. A second is not much time but in stressful moments seems like an eternity. Well guess what your realism argument just threw out instant convergence. This is what is the issue and this is why we think that it needs to be fixed. We are not asking for it to make the game harder or unplayable we are asking for it to balance multiple weapons in one more since a lot of them are already balanced.

[Maj Motoko Kusanagi]

Hotthedd, on 12 July 2013 - 07:27 AM, said:

We have no technology in 2013 that allows instant, perfect, pinpoint accuracy with MULTIPLE weapons hitting a single moving bullseye while at top speed and/or jumping.

You describe a tank with ONE weapon being accurate under those conditions, and I have no problem with a Battlemech being able to fire ONE weapon accurately under those conditions. The PROBLEM is multiple weapons having perfect convergence. Even if you could use hand-wavium to explain it, it is a GAME-BREAKING mechanic that removes skill from the equation.

About the lore: 3050 is a time where humanity is emerging from a technological Dark Age. We do not always have forward progression. It is something akin to arguing that technology in 10th century Europe MUST be more advanced than it was in 2nd century Europe. But it wasn't. It was BEHIND that technological level. Therefore the argument that because it is 3050 it must be possible is specious.

As far as targeting computers go, they do not exist in th3 battletech I.S. universe in 3050. When they DO arrive, they weigh several tons and occupy critical spaces on the mech. So, the whole TC argument can be thrown out of the window.

First off, the only way you get perfect convergence is if your target is standing still. The moment your target moves after your projectile is fired, perfect convergence goes out the window.

Secondly, if you compare the distances we fight to the distance between the multiple weapons on a mech, the compensation angles to allow for convergence are very small. That combined with the fact that the trignometric calculations for such an operation are trivial, means the the time for convergence is negligible. Seriously it is reaaallly easy to calculate. You know the distance to the target, and the distance from the weapon the range finder (it is fixed). This is done on a weapon by weapon basis, no need to solve simultaneously for anything. Try it, you will see that the delta angle is typically less than a degree.

Thirdly the 3050 folks may have been in a dark age, but they built and maintained had fusion reactors using complicated magnetic fields to hold the nuclear reactions together. Certain technologies need to be available to accomplish such a feat. I am pretty sure that computers capable of quickly calculating a tangent should be one of them. Its find of like saying there is a society which built and maintained internal combustion engines, but had no knowledge of metallurgy. That is ludicrous!!

Now I am not saying that we should not fix high alpha builds, but convergence is not the way, because it basically nerfs everybody as well. Yes your light will die slower if each of the enemy stalkers 6 ppc'***** different panels, but have you thought about how long much longer the stalker would live when each of your measly medium laser were spread out on the stalker, especially when you are trying to aim at his cockpit for or for a specific panel so that you could get rid of him quicker? I cannot count the number of times when I had an exposed torso and I have survived a battle with a bigger mech because I was able to take out a specific component (I drive a K2 with 2 erppcs and 2 ac 5s).

Edited by Kabenla Armah, 12 July 2013 - 08:18 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

3rdworld, on 12 July 2013 - 07:41 AM, said:

No (non *****) cent can be killed in a single volley, unless it is a head or back shot. 1 is a good shot, the other relys on a stupid cent.

mmm...pretty sure 6 PPC's can one shot a Centurion unless he leaves only 18 armor on back, and 60 in front, but you have basically stripped him of all of his armor, with no recourse.

Doesn't include the possible Centurion using an XL (yes, it does happen), which would get one shotted.

But lets bring it to 2 shots. 4 PPC stalker, 2 shots, kills the Centurion, with no recourse.