98 replies to this topic

[8RoundsRapid]

This thread lasted 4 pages?

Didnt you guys ever hear the phrase, 'Don't feed the troll?'

Good lord.

Originally i would've only given the OP a 2/10 on the troll scale, but he got 4 pages out of his troll, and the proof is in the puddin, so I gotta give his sorry arse an 8/10.

[Otto Cannon]

Kaldor, on 15 July 2013 - 08:30 AM, said:

And you expect PGI to be able to code this without breaking something else?

8RoundsRapid, on 15 July 2013 - 08:38 AM, said:

This thread lasted 4 pages?

Didnt you guys ever hear the phrase, 'Don't feed the troll?'

Good lord.

Originally i would've only given the OP a 2/10 on the troll scale, but he got 4 pages out of his troll, and the proof is in the puddin, so I gotta give his sorry arse an 8/10.

We know he's a troll. But a thread's a thread, you can still post on the subject even when the OP makes no sense, and often troll threads attract the most people to discuss the subject. I have no objection to OP making the instant pinpoint brigade look silly by association.

Edited by Otto Cannon, 15 July 2013 - 08:46 AM.

[cerealspiller]

Fix con. rgce with convergence speed. Wasnt this the plan from the start (looking at the pilot skill tree)?

To represent convergence on screen they could add convergence brackets aside the arm reticle (assuming that what ever your arms are pointing at is the point where you wish to converge your weapons).


Wide Convergence:
(- o -)

Negative Convergence:
-) o (-

Perfect convergence:
(o)

So, as the range under your reticle increases or decreases (example: looking at your mechs feet then tracking upwards to a distant mountain peak) so would the convergence brackets move towards or away from the arm reticle.

If the convergence brackets are over a target mech then weapons will still hit the mech just a little spread out over that area.

[Jaguar Prime]

imo the ones who are challenging the OP's assertion are basically a bunch of people who can't shoot straight wanting to punish those who can.........

[Ken Fury]

Otto Cannon, on 15 July 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:

Correct.

You have clear markers to show exactly how the spread groupfire shots will land. Nothing random about it at all. You need to use skill to either single fire and hit the same place or compensate for the spread on an alpha strike.

http://mwomercs.com/...active-reticle/

Yeah and this changes death due nearly instant CT death exactly how? Keep in mind there might be 6x Stalker with 4 PPCs each firing at your Atlas. Your Atlas has LESS than 200 CT hitpoints, including rear armor. Those 6 Stalkers do 240 damage with their combined fire.

If you even look at them for 1 second, that's enough. They'll fire 2 PPCs each, wait 0.5 to 1 second (depending which brain dead suggestion you use) and fire again. BANG Atlas is down.

Hope the Atlas Pilot enjoyed that.

[Tombstoner]

Jaguar Prime, on 15 July 2013 - 08:49 AM, said:

imo the ones who are challenging the OP's assertion are basically a bunch of people who can't shoot straight wanting to punish those who can.........

Or we find the game play to simplistic, easy and not very satisfying to bundle up a 40-60 point alpha and 2 shot people. It got boring real fast. now i use MG's for a challenge

[DocBach]

If the other team is running 6 4 PPC stalkers that can all fire and hit you in the same location at the same instant it doesn't matter how much you increase the armor for 'Mechs because you'll be dead any way you cut it.

[Orzorn]

DocBach, on 15 July 2013 - 08:55 AM, said:

If the other team is running 6 4 PPC stalkers that can all fire and hit you in the same location at the same instant it doesn't matter how much you increase the armor for 'Mechs because you'll be dead any way you cut it.

Which is why the heat system needs a looking at. If ERPPCs were 15 heat again, and the heat cap did not raise or lower based on heat sinks (it was a static 30 heat, same as TT), and DHS were 2.0, you could only fire two ERPPCs at once, and only 3 PPCs at once.

We will always have large PPC alpha strikes so long as their heat is 8 and 11. Its too little heat for too much power.

[Otto Cannon]

Tank Boy Ken, on 15 July 2013 - 08:52 AM, said:

Yeah and this changes death due nearly instant CT death exactly how? Keep in mind there might be 6x Stalker with 4 PPCs each firing at your Atlas. Your Atlas has LESS than 200 CT hitpoints, including rear armor. Those 6 Stalkers do 240 damage with their combined fire.

If you even look at them for 1 second, that's enough. They'll fire 2 PPCs each, wait 0.5 to 1 second (depending which brain dead suggestion you use) and fire again. BANG Atlas is down.

Hope the Atlas Pilot enjoyed that.

And if you double or triple the armour and keep the pinpoint strikes you get the same result, so what's your point?

[Obelus]

Otto Cannon, on 15 July 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:

Correct.

You have clear markers to show exactly how the spread groupfire shots will land. Nothing random about it at all. You need to use skill to either single fire and hit the same place or compensate for the spread on an alpha strike.

http://mwomercs.com/...active-reticle/

It's different but I'm not convinced it's better. It slows down combat but I don't see how it's more challenging.

Edited by Obelus, 15 July 2013 - 09:03 AM.

[Tegiminis]

I like all the people assuming my position for me.

My only position is that an overcomplicated convergence system is a bad idea, and people who propose and promote it are bad players who are bad. Bad.

There are so many other legitimate proposals - none of them mine - that better address the problem. Convergence changes, especially the targeting computer and reticule proposals, are needlessly complex and do nothing except add an unnecessary and esoteric system to the game in the effort to fix a problem which doesn't really exist. The issue isn't that people can shoot you - if you are getting shot, maybe you should play better - it's that you are dying in 1-2 hits. Nerfing aim so that you fire like an epileptic drastically raises the learning curve, lowers the skill ceiling, and still fails to address the problem of high damage. It's the most insidious and awful of design proposals: it fixes nothing while actually making things worse. Even PGI's fix is better, and it's still stupid.

Here are a few of my personal favorite proposals from here and elsewhere.

1.) Increase armor values to better favor heat efficient builds.
2.) Fix matchmaking to take into account battle values and tonnage.
3.) Create new modes that favor alternative builds and variants, specifically support roles like recon.
4.) Create "hardpoint" sizes.
5.) Force a global cooldown on large caliber weapons on top of the cycle time.

I think it's funny that I call a bunch of ForumWarriors bad and dumb - quite possibly the two most benign ways to rib someone - and they come out of the woodwork with all sorts of crazy nonsense, from roleplays to 1v1 requests to assuming my mech loadouts to assuming I'm in favor of the current meta (I'm not, I haven't played in weeks even while my premium ticks down).

I like sassing forums because inevitably all of the people without humor or wit ooze from the slime pool they originated from to make wild accusations and get mad because I happened to say that they or an idea they had is stupid.

Keep it classy, MWO forums.

Now back to sass.

Edited by Tegiminis, 15 July 2013 - 09:10 AM.

[Dakkath]

Moving.

[Ken Fury]

Otto Cannon, on 15 July 2013 - 08:59 AM, said:

And if you double or triple the armour and keep the pinpoint strikes you get the same result, so what's your point?

Actually not it changes the way fights turn out. And doubling it has already been done once. Any further hitpoints buffs don't need to be that "aggressive". It is a problem needing more than one change.

We need:
More PPC Heat +1 (maybe +2 after a while)
Less heat capacity (most Mechs currently come in at 50 to 70) - perhaps less Capacity on DHS and leave SHS alone.
and more hitpoints
non-broken brawling weapons

this combination is needed to "fix" the game

[Tegiminis]

I make my first serious post and the thread gets thrown into the periphery. Clearly I made a mistake.

[Mister Blastman]

K-Town is the most happenin' place this side of the galaxy. Welcome to my new home!

Oh, and you missed the message from PGI, Teg. PGI only wants lackeys and brownnosers posting in the main forums. Buck the bull and get thrown to the ghetto.

[RG Notch]

Tegiminis, on 15 July 2013 - 09:12 AM, said:

I make my first serious post and the thread gets thrown into the periphery. Clearly I made a mistake.

Yes, liking your own posts means this is where your posts belong. Took them long enough!

[MaddMaxx]

DocBach, on 15 July 2013 - 08:55 AM, said:

If the other team is running 6 4 PPC stalkers that can all fire and hit you in the same location at the same instant it doesn't matter how much you increase the armor for 'Mechs because you'll be dead any way you cut it.

There. Finally it has been said. That is why "convergence" is not the issue, nor would be even limiting group fire, to say 2 or 3 weapons per group.

MWO is a Team game, even when played Pug style. Thus, when another team, who carry Long Range weapons of the same type, even in pairs, communicate well and all focus fire the same target at once, even just once, that Mech will be heavily damage, if not outright dead.

So given the advent of 12 v12, if even 50% of a Team, all carrying just 2 PPC's get one shot at you, you will likely not survive, or if you do, will likely be so tentative as to be no good to your team afterwards, anyways.

It doesn't even have to be PPC ffs. 6 Mechs, each with 2 AC10's would do the trick real nice.

P.S. Cone of Fire has it own issues with range. If at 200m the cone is nice and tight, as you have slowed down for the perfect shot, how do they represent that same Cone at +800m? It certainly cannot be the same size as @200m, or it would be a pinpoint cluster and it certainly can't be to big or hitting that long ranged target efficiently becomes a prayer.

We will see what the Stacking rule does, but if that proves lacking I vote to remove Group fire altogether and simply implement a global cool down and Test if on the PTS for a couple days.

P.S.S. Sorry for further feeding this thread.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 15 July 2013 - 09:50 AM.

[Otto Cannon]

Tank Boy Ken, on 15 July 2013 - 09:08 AM, said:

Actually not it changes the way fights turn out. And doubling it has already been done once. Any further hitpoints buffs don't need to be that "aggressive". It is a problem needing more than one change.

We need:
More PPC Heat +1 (maybe +2 after a while)
Less heat capacity (most Mechs currently come in at 50 to 70) - perhaps less Capacity on DHS and leave SHS alone.
and more hitpoints
non-broken brawling weapons

this combination is needed to "fix" the game

You just used a really bad example that has nothing to do with your ideas- 6 Stalkers will insta-gib an Atlas even if if all those points were changed to make the game how you want it. That fight would never turn out a different way, in fact I can't think of anything that would change the outcome of 6 vs.1 no matter how the game works.

I still don't agree with you, but thanks for actually posting something meaningful.

[Tegiminis]

BRINGING THIS BACK