Pro Training Wheels: Abusing Arm Lock
#21
Posted 05 August 2013 - 04:34 AM
#22
Posted 06 August 2013 - 08:10 PM
#23
Posted 06 August 2013 - 08:36 PM
#24
Posted 07 August 2013 - 03:48 PM
#25
Posted 08 August 2013 - 08:25 PM
#26
Posted 09 August 2013 - 05:19 AM
cdrolly, on 08 August 2013 - 08:25 PM, said:
It was meant as a training wheels feature for pilots who couldn't adapt to the two-reticule play style. The fact it's a supreme sniper tool was never the stated purpose.
phaloxian, on 07 August 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:
I am biased against bad equipment and builds. Objectively bad ones.
#27
Posted 14 August 2013 - 04:18 PM
Victor Morson, on 09 August 2013 - 05:19 AM, said:
It was meant as a training wheels feature for pilots who couldn't adapt to the two-reticule play style. The fact it's a supreme sniper tool was never the stated purpose.
Mate it was always apart of the game if you pressed shift your arms would lock... they just added a feature to keep it locked... These mechs are in the future and we have Naval ships today that can lock all weapons on one target and you think the mechs shouldn't be able too? pull ya head in and quite the whinging.
All your points have been incorrect armlock does not instantly spring your targets together and locking your arms with your torso is not there just for new players. Let it go son let it go...
Edited by cdrolly, 14 August 2013 - 04:18 PM.
#28
Posted 14 August 2013 - 10:28 PM
cdrolly, on 14 August 2013 - 04:18 PM, said:
WRONG! This was around the time closed beta ended.
You must be new here.
cdrolly, on 14 August 2013 - 04:18 PM, said:
Because nothing about BattleTech makes one lick of sense compared to modern technology. 'mechs are objectively worse than modern tanks and everything about the future of warfare screams "lots of small drones." I wish people would stop trying to use real physics to justify 1980s sci-fi physics.
cdrolly, on 14 August 2013 - 04:18 PM, said:
Yes, it does. This is objectively and easily provable. I don't even know how you can say this.
cdrolly, on 14 August 2013 - 04:18 PM, said:
That was it's stated reason to be added. I doubt they wanted to make their arm system unimportant, and they specifically said it was being added to help new players and that "veteran could turn it off." It was not meant to make arm-guns a non-issue.
#29
Posted 14 August 2013 - 10:37 PM
Closed beta was is exactly that, closed... the game is evolving get used to it cos more changes are going to happen trust me...
2751 wins to 1993 losses hardly new here mate
See you on the battlefield ^^
Edited by cdrolly, 14 August 2013 - 10:41 PM.
#30
Posted 14 August 2013 - 10:41 PM
cdrolly, on 14 August 2013 - 10:37 PM, said:
In real life we have weapons that fire from so many miles away that you never, ever would see your target.
In real life a company of 'mechs would be shredded by an a modern day AC-130 and it would never show up on their radar.
In real life everyone would just blast knees, which are infinitely easier to kill than a tank track.
In real life we have weapons like MOABs that would, instantly, obliterate entire companies of 'mechs.
In real life, the concept of a 'mech is ludicrously impractical and the obvious future of warfare is drones, lots of drones. Small computerized swarms that think faster than a person ever could.
You have to accept BattleTech is in it's own 1980s version of the future with almost World War II era "future" weaponry.
And thus getting bent out of shape about things like this is without merit. Any time someone breaks out "real life" tech, there is no way for it to end well.
EDIT: For further "This has nothing to do with real life technology" I present to you ER PPC vs. M16
Describe the ranges for the M16/A2 Rifle.
- Maximum Range - 3,600 meters
- Max Effective Range for a Point Target - 550 meters
- Max Effective Range for an Area Target - 800 meters
- Maximum Range - 1,620m
- Max Effective Range for an Area Target - 810 meters
How can people still bring up real life technology when discussing this and be serious?
Edited by Victor Morson, 14 August 2013 - 10:48 PM.
#31
Posted 14 August 2013 - 10:43 PM
#32
Posted 14 August 2013 - 10:49 PM
cdrolly, on 14 August 2013 - 10:43 PM, said:
The game benefits from having arms and torsos not aligned instantly, which makes it more balanced for everyone and adds some more depth.
Just like it benefits from having "long range" weapons that are outdone by nearly 40 year old battle rifles.
#33
Posted 14 August 2013 - 11:02 PM
#35
Posted 15 August 2013 - 01:44 AM
- With arm lock on I now either miss you completely or deliver all my damage to one spot on your leg or torso...
As Vic says, it was presented to us as a "help the newbies" feature, but the unintended side effect is that it enables trigger happy noobs like me to deliver massive alpha strikes on target - I no longer have to worry about the second cross hair catching up or staying aligned, I can just mash all the mouse buttons at once - Quite how anybody could think this would be good for the game is beyond me
#36
Posted 15 August 2013 - 01:57 AM
Fire and Salt, on 26 July 2013 - 05:57 AM, said:
Because your "super high tech" walking robot is hundreds of years old and has been maintained and repaired by underpaid semi-competent spanner monkeys in the field using second-hand sub-standard parts salvaged from battle damaged enemies?
Oh - hang on - this is after the sudden rediscovery of lost technology and instant rebuilding of industrial capability that had otherwise vanished from the Inner Sphere...
*sigh* ... no... no logical* reason at all.
* Logic here refers to that specific flavour of setting logic where very tall bipedal war machines are not inferior/vulnerable to long-range guided missile strikes etc. etc.
#37
Posted 15 August 2013 - 06:27 PM
I'm also sick of people comparing this game to real physics and technology but little simple things like armlock is hardly something that would have come up in TT. Your comparing apples with oranges using those types of analogies. Every Vehicular FPS has this ability... I say harden up..... bro
#38
Posted 15 August 2013 - 06:34 PM
Fire and Salt, on 26 July 2013 - 05:57 AM, said:
Give me 1 logical reason where my super high tech walking robot cannot be made to point its arms in the same direction as its torso.
1 reason not to when stationary? None.
1 reason not to when moving in any way? Here we go, watch these arms.
1 reason why it should not be instant? Arms need time to align with the torso especially when they are previously pointed far away from where they were.
#39
Posted 15 August 2013 - 07:05 PM
#40
Posted 15 August 2013 - 07:18 PM
But hey, if you like your damage scattered, go ahead... I'll prefer to core you with arm-locked poptarting.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users