98 replies to this topic

[Tegiminis]

You're wrong.

*walks around the stadium, making the whoop whoop gesture with his hands. the crowd goes wild, screaming and chanting "Tegiminis, we love you!!!" roses fall from the stands onto the grass and are trampled*

Convergence is not the issue, and screwing with convergence in any significant way beyond adding quirks to certain bots is an unnecessary increase in complexity for little to no benefit. I have no clue where all you grognards latched onto the notion that "being a good shot" is the problem, but this advocacy for a step backwards is a prime example why nobody actually takes you seriously besides other braindead jerks.

Mechwarrior is not BattleTech Tabletop, and all your advocacy to make it that way is both stupid and damaging to Mechwarrior Online.

Feel free to tell me how adding cone of fire and/or making big weapons not converge and/or adding like 40 new targeting reticules and/or making your mech fire like it has RoboParkinson's is a good idea below.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Liked your own post...instant fail.

And there are 3 or 4 LONG threads explaining why and how it's a good idea.

Your post is superfluous.

Go use one of those threads to debate your views.

[fil5000]

Why? No one else seems to think it's necessary to contribute to an existing discussion instead of just making their own. At least this one has a descriptive title.

[Ken Fury]

fil5000, on 15 July 2013 - 06:21 AM, said:

Why? No one else seems to think it's necessary to contribute to an existing discussion instead of just making their own. At least this one has a descriptive title.

Yeah don't post in here. Just make your own thread about how chain fire will solve problems with too much firepower being thrown around. Hint: It won't.

[DaZur]

Even "I" having elected to not take the blue pill... am not so myopic to not see there is a gameplay mechanic adjustment need for pinpoint alpha-meta...

That said, I do agree it's reach a "chicken-little" level of hysteria...

Edited by DaZur, 15 July 2013 - 06:26 AM.

[Tegiminis]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 15 July 2013 - 06:20 AM, said:

Liked your own post...instant fail.

And there are 3 or 4 LONG threads explaining why and how it's a good idea.

Your post is superfluous.

Go use one of those threads to debate your views.

All of those threads are wrong and dumb and their explanations are bad and they are bad ideas on so many levels, not the least of which being that MWO is not a tabletop game and also punishing player skill is the height of bad design.

*slam dunks so hard the backboard breaks*

[MustrumRidcully]

Quote

I have no clue where all you grognards latched onto the notion that "being a good shot" is the problem, but this advocacy for a step backwards is a prime example why nobody actually takes you seriously besides other braindead jerks.

You seem to have missed the point. Which is kinda ironic, since convergence normally allows you to not miss it by simply allowing you to tie 2+ guns together and have them all hit the exact same spot for the same effort as aiming a single gun.
If the level of understanding you had of this topic is as you displayed in your post, despite all the topics, threads and post made on the topic, I should not be surprised if the issue hasn't really been understood by PGI, either.

People that want convergence limited are all about this aspect. Firing 4 PPCs in succession but fired separately and still hitting the same spot is harder than firing 4 PPCs at once. That's all due to convergence + group fire.

I am not a fan of limiting convergence, because it sounds complicated to community "non-convergence". Without convergence, every weapon would need its own crosshair, or you would have to learn aming every mech and every weapon configuration seperately.

Thus, I'd rather just get rid of unlimited group fire. Then weapons still hit where you aim with the crosshair, but you don't get effortless free aiming benefits for the other guns you equipped.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Tegiminis, on 15 July 2013 - 06:25 AM, said:

All of those threads are wrong and dumb and their explanations are bad and they are bad ideas on so many levels, not the least of which being that MWO is not a tabletop game and also punishing player skill is the height of bad design.

*slam dunks so hard the backboard breaks*

...

Oh no, they are wrong and dumb!

So I'm curious, if I create a way to make the game require MORE skill, is that better? Because if we just turned off group fire and required chain fire, it would be MUCH harder to kill someone and require MORE skill because you have to aim each shot.

So you are ok with that?

[MustrumRidcully]

Tegiminis, on 15 July 2013 - 06:25 AM, said:

All of those threads are wrong and dumb and their explanations are bad and they are bad ideas on so many levels, not the least of which being that MWO is not a tabletop game and also punishing player skill is the height of bad design.

*slam dunks so hard the backboard breaks*

Really impresive slam dunk, it would look more impressive if you weren't fighting a straw man.

Is it really punishing skill if you need to land 4 shots on a spot to deal 40 damage to one hit location, rather than one just one shot? Or isn't that actually rewarding skill, because only good players can do the latter?

The only "anti-convergence" suggestion that doesn't reward this kind of skills are the ones that introduce cone of fire. But even those can reward skill - just not the impressive skill of holding your mouse steady on target, but the skill of knowing how to minimize the effects of COF. But that's just a subset of the whole "anti-convergence&groupfire" approaches, and the sooner you understand that, the better you can actually engage the discussions and level actual concerns, and maybe score some real slam dunks.

[OneEyed Jack]

If you disagree with the OP, he'll just move on to the logical next step in his argument. He'll jump up and down screaming and then hold his breath until he turns blue.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

OneEyed Jack, on 15 July 2013 - 06:42 AM, said:

If you disagree with the OP, he'll just move on to the logical next step in his argument. He'll jump up and down screaming and then hold his breath until he turns blue.

I'm good with this, as long as he continues to hold his breath long enough that we might not have to hear from him ever again.

[SuperJoe]

convergence will handicap us all and slow the game down in a even more not fun way.

[Tegiminis]

The convergence crowd is even worse than PGI at taking criticism. I don't even have to say anything. They make my arguments for me, and they don't even know it.

Calm down guys! Take off your fedoras and come sit in this jacuzzi with me. Let's talk about heat scale and armor values and mech quirks. I've got coronas and whiskey sours! It'll be a grand ol' time. Just a couple of old pruney men in a tub talking about internet robots.

[MustrumRidcully]

SuperJoe, on 15 July 2013 - 06:46 AM, said:

convergence will handicap us all and slow the game down in a even more not fun way.

Are you sure you understand what convergence is?
We have convergence.
It is what makes your crosshair work, so that your arms and all your weapons point where you're aiming at.
Without convergence, if you aim at a spot on the enemy mech, a gun installed 3 m below and 2m to the side of your cockpit would hit the enemy 3m below and 2m to the side of where your crosshair points at.

[Rovertoo]

Convergence really doesn't seem like the issue to me. It wasn't too long ago that nobody ever ever used PPCs. Every 'new thing' that people find works most effectively can be balanced out without needed to add any randomness to shooting, which I think would really bug a lot of players to find their perfectly lined up shot missed due to factors they can't control. Though I am partial to 'no convergence' in the sense that arms converge but torso weapons fire straight, but that's just me.

[Roland]

At this point, there is little utility in continuing to argue over convergence issues.

PGI has, presumably, read some of these threads.

They'll do what they see fit. I don't believe any amount of discussion beyond what's already taken place is really going to change things.

Play the game until it's boring, and then stop playing.

[Karl Streiger]

Tegiminis, on 15 July 2013 - 06:49 AM, said:

Calm down guys! Take off your fedoras and come sit in this jacuzzi with me. Let's talk about heat scale and armor values and mech quirks. I've got coronas and whiskey sours! It'll be a grand ol' time. Just a couple of old pruney men in a tub talking about internet robots.

You jump in the middle of a bunch of Crusaders laugh at them and you really think that we will put our swords back into the scabbard - before cutting you into pieces of meat and bones?

However show me your options - about heat scale, armor and mech quirks - or I don't prevent them in cutting you down.

Edited by Karl Streiger, 15 July 2013 - 06:53 AM.

[Felbombling]

I hope you like seeing Mechs getting one-shot, because when the Clans arrive, it will be commonplace.

[Acid Phase]

EDIT: For Mustrum



Ask me why I couldn't take this OP serious.

Tegiminis, on 15 July 2013 - 06:17 AM, said:

You're wrong.

*walks around the stadium, making the whoop whoop gesture with his hands. the crowd goes wild, screaming and chanting "Tegiminis, we love you!!!" roses fall from the stands onto the grass and are trampled*

Tegiminis, on 15 July 2013 - 06:25 AM, said:

*slam dunks so hard the backboard breaks*

Tegiminis, on 15 July 2013 - 06:49 AM, said:

Calm down guys! Take off your fedoras and come sit in this jacuzzi with me. Let's talk about heat scale and armor values and mech quirks. I've got coronas and whiskey sours! It'll be a grand ol' time. Just a couple of old pruney men in a tub talking about internet robots.

....Oh yeah. That.

Edited by Acid Phase, 15 July 2013 - 07:18 AM.

[General Taskeen]

So what you are saying OP is that a simulated accuracy of a Mech's targeting and sensor computers would not be a fun time for a Mech Warrior game?



We can either have simulation or we can have what all Mech game's always have been, an extension of FPS with hints of simulation sprinkled in. Their original MW5 simulation concept stuff looked pretty interesting to me.