195 replies to this topic

[Maerawn]

BlackWidow, on 13 August 2013 - 10:04 AM, said:

So, not only would this curtail alpha strikes, it would virtually eliminate jump sniping without breaking the rest of the game. Sure, you can still alpha strike, but unless you wait for the reticle to converge, you don't hit all weapons in one spot. And jump snipers? But the time your weapons converge to that sexy sweet spot you love to cheese with....you are already out of jump juice and on your way back down. So, it doesn't limit how you choose to play your mech, but it DOES limit how much damage you can do to ONE PIXEL of space instantly. It still allows for quick alpha strikes (non-pinpoint) and still does allow for point point selection but not instantly.

Where is the downside to this?

There have been many other threads with suggestions about weapon firing cones, or modified target reticles, or limiting how much a weapon can converge (beyond the torso and arm limits). Those all seem good, but also prevent players from utilizing a key mechanic in a FPS game. To hit where you aim.
I'm not suggesting that. I'm simply suggesting a time buffer to prevent instant pinpoint alphastikes from being the main mechanic.

Thanks for reading.

/Peace out

So what i get from this is your pissed about them desyncing a ballistic weapon from a energy weapon, and that your solution to the problem is basically desync the location of the weapon from the rest of the torso? what you proposed as your solution still does the same thing that your pissed about, making a gauss firing sequence take .5 - 1 second longer then an instant energy blast, is the same as making my arm weapons (usually energy) take longer to converge to a torso weapon ( usually a ballistic)... Im not sure why your upset...

[AntiCitizenJuan]

PPC being a charge up weapon could make some interesting results as well.

[Dimento Graven]

Taemien, on 13 August 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

...Its supposed to be a last ditch effort to destroy an opponent.

It was never meant to be done over and over and over. This is an abuse of customized mechs that translated from TT, which is also why I limit my games in TT to be stock only.

Says who? I've never read that rule.

No, you're completely misstating the REALITY of 'alpha strikes' and TT play. In TT play we had this extremely effective mechanism for limiting how often alpha strikes were used, PRIMARILY, the Heat Affects Table:


THIS is what is actually missing from the game. In TT if you fired your alpha strike OVER and OVER and OVER again with no delays for cooling, you had all sorts of negative stuff happen to you and your 'mech WELL BEFORE shutting down.

As it is now, PGI has left this key balance factor out. So that results in a game where people can fire high heat alpha strikes to their hearts content, riding that 99% heat with ZERO ill affects.

THAT is what needs to change, and in that, can be things like as you heat up your weapon aim deconverges.

I, not for one f'ing minute believe the lie that PGI is reported to have stated that they can't do on the fly convergence adjustments. The game is CONSTANTLY doing that already when you switch from targets of differing distance. So there IS a mechanism in place, it's a matter of having the gumption to utilize it fully.

Quote

So they are just hurting boating builds.

No this hurts your 'standard' builds as well. Builds that by default have more than X-penalized-number of any weapon system. That stacking heat penalty was among the f'ng dumbest things PGI has ever done to this game.

Quote

Which with the hardpoint system, are gimped builds anyway. It forces players to configure their mechs and play in a smarter way. And because mechs will be of more mixed loadouts, there won't be any cookie cutter builds, or at least a reduction in their must have quality.

Your experience in this game does not match mine. What happens is yeah, early on there's a little bit of juggling as people try and figure out what the new min/max level is, once that's figured out, they start cookie cutting them again.

Why? Again, it's not just the build, how 'pin pointy' the fire is, but how often and how quickly you are able fire that high damage alpha.

Raise the risk of firing that over and over again, FOR ALL 'MECHS, and across the board, not just on the cheese builds, not just on boats, BUT EVERY conceivable build. TT did that, again, through the use of that heat affects table listed above, and AGAIN, that table was part of EVERY SINGLE RECORD SHEET EVER PRINTED, REGARDLESS.OF.HOW.THE.MECH.WAS.BUILT!

Let's stop fooling ourselves and getting distracted by symptoms but go after the REAL cause.

Quote

Convergence isn't possible. Read the other QnAs. Hit detection is done via the server. Hit detection with convergence (a relatively unpredictable thing by the server to client and vice versa) causes unpredictable desynchs and a myriad of other issues (blame CryEngine netcode if you want to blame something). They may be able to remedy this, but it would take an overhaul of the entire system, an overhaul they just don't have time to do.

BS. It's more than possible it happens now. Switch quickly from a target far away to one that's close and watch your weapons fire go to either side of the target because convergence hasn't yet updated to reflect the new target. That's in-game repeatable. Even PGI stated that there is in fact a slight delay in convergence updating when switching to different ranged targets as an answer to, "How come my lasers keep going to either side, or cross in front of a target", way back in closed beta.

The ability to affect convergence is there, it's only a matter of utilizing it.

Quote

In otherwords don't hold your breath for this in MWO. Perhaps MW5 or MW6 will have it. What we have for convergence is what is here to stay. We'll probably see LAMs, Quads, and HAGs before convergence changes. By then we'll be playing MW7.

This portion of what you've stated is probably unfortunately true, but not because it can't be done, but because I don't think the group of programmers responsible for this area of MWO are creative enough to figure it out.

All it requires is to change the range reading +/- a certain percentage and you've affected convergence. Utilize two variables for range "REAL", which is the ACTUAL distance, and "MEASURED" which is another variable that can is used for weapons convergence calculations. If you have aimed long enough at the target "REAL" and "MEASURED" will be the same, and you have pin-point accuracy. However, if you quickly switch targets, "MEASURED" takes time to update, and the range used for convergence will be somewhere between "REAL" and "MEASURED" affecting convergence. With a heat affects table in place, at certain heat levels you can randomly affect "MEASURED" by 20% to 50%, so that a player running hot fires at a target, subtract 50% of "MEASURED" range from target and watch the weapons converge WELL IN FRONT of the target, and the opposite happens when adding 50%, they'll converge BEHIND the target.

Likewise with a heat affects table at certain heat levels, you could randomly have weapons just NOT FIRE, ALSO by default affecting 'convergence'...

C'mon PGI, get creative, these 'sofa king we tarred it' band-**** you keep slapping on are getting really, really BAD.

[Trauglodyte]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 13 August 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:

i am not fond of this idea, it sounds like gauss or ppc is getting a charge time. this is going to really hurt single ppc/gauss users, while doing little to hurt dual ppc gauss users.

id rather see dual ppc combos take more heat and link gauss to the ppc.

If I'm right in what they're saying, when you fire a Gauss Rifle or PPC, it will force a 0.5 recycle from the other. So, it is a forced chain fire from the two heavy hitting ranged weapons in the game.

Quote

Dimento

Convergence, in how you think of it, is what isn't able to be fixed. Your torso weapons will always hit what the torso reticle points at. This will never ever change no matter what because everything is fixed. Your arms, on the other hand, have a swing speed from side to side but there is no convergence speed. Now, don't hate me for doing this, but I'm going to reiterate that a little slower. Your arms move up and down and side to side. By way of the efficiency, your arms swing faster side to side (ie, when your torso twist with your arms unlocked from the torso) and up and down. When the game was originally designed, there was supposed to be an added amount of time based on changing ranges. This means that when you point up at the sky and then down to 5m in front of you, you hit dead center. In other words, convergence speed does not exist. The tier 2 efficiency, Pin Point, doesn't add anything to the game, either. As I wasn't in Closed Beta, I don't know if convergence speed ever existed and, if it did, why it is no longer in the game. But what they're struggling with, by way of coding, is adding a buffer time between when your torso weapons line up and when your arm weapon line up on top of the time it takes your arms to change weapon angles.

Edited by Trauglodyte, 13 August 2013 - 11:16 AM.

[Rippthrough]

Just find the balance team something else to do already, have them design a mech or something, maybe they'll be better at that.

We can use the money generated from the MC sales of the mech to hire someone that knows what they're doing.

[Corvus Antaka]

Trauglodyte, on 13 August 2013 - 11:08 AM, said:

If I'm right in what they're saying, when you fire a Gauss Rifle or PPC, it will force a 0.5 recycle from the other. So, it is a forced chain fire from the two heavy hitting ranged weapons in the game.

see this is wierd. unless a mech is standing still or moving straight at you, the flight times of gauss/ppc already make hitting one spot a forced de-sync. this'll just force this more i suppose, but it seems unnecessary when the problem is the dual ppc 20 damage hit much more so than the 1 gauss & 1 ppc or 2 ppc hit.

it could work, but as a single gauss single ppc user on various mechs its already quite hard hitting moving fast mechs with both shots on an alpha or putting both shots into a distant CT on travelling targets.

[DaZur]

BlackWidow, on 13 August 2013 - 10:54 AM, said:

When PGI originally stated TT as basis...I thought YEAH! Then I thought...blerg...it'll never work. Balance hell. Is it really that simple? I'm really can't tell if I'm intellectually or emotionally blind to this. I.e. Is my solution a desperate attempt to hold on to alpha strike (but balanced) capability when there is no real reason not to simply let it go.....

I mean, I see a point. As long as we have the mechs and weapons we love.....everything else from TT can be scrapped in the name of balanced, and more importantly, fun game play?

It's hard to tell at this point. Part of it may be that, but mostly it's the frustration that it's 2013 for crying out loud, and we have to choose between either having a really fun game with cool features or having one where client can't be hacked.

As you eluded to in your original post, there are core aspects to mechwarrior combat and an Alpha-strike is one of them. The problem in MW:O is not alpha strikes... it's the ignorance of the mechanics behind it that allows it to be utilized as a de facto means of combat, be it at range or at brawl.

An alpha strike is meant to be an all or nothing last-resort / finishing blow option... not the selective choosing of select weapons (i.e.. PPCx2 + Gauss) ignoring the remainder of your weapons. If Alphas were modelled in such a way... they would not be a problem as they would severly be hampered by heat, wasted ammo and be highly inefficient outside of the above referenced use.

Instead because of group fire we have means to craft the perfect sniper mix and literally use it with impunity as a all-around weapon configuration...

Group fire is the catalyst of a whole lot of "perceived" balance issues where in reality there is none... Just the incorrect application the Alpha mechanic.

Edited by DaZur, 13 August 2013 - 11:18 AM.

[NinetyProof]

BlackWidow, on 13 August 2013 - 10:28 AM, said:

Are you 12 years old, bro? Only people that say that are losers and posers on forums.

But, I'm always hungry for some troll bait. So, I'll bite.

No, not angry. Not even coming off as angry. I'm simply bewildered and frustrated by the countless dev cycles being wasted on trying to bandaid a solution they have created.

So, I put forth a suggestion with reasoned points to support it.

What did you do? You opened your mouth and took a crap.

But, I expect nothing less from you.

He was right ... just wait and see what they do before passing judgement. This community is sooooo knee jerk that it's forced PGI to dis-engage with the community for the most part. You, an other "knee jerk" people are just making it worse.

You can't possibly be adding anything meaningful to situation at this point as you don't have enough details to actually be able to form a valid opinion.

PGI says: We are testing going "Left" ... and then you stand up and say: "Since you have not explain exactly what LEFT is, I am going to Assume much and say: Go Right Instead!!!1!11 or MWO will Die!!11!!! and kittens will be killed!!11!".

Give it a rest already, let's see it on the test server, then we can judge. Who knows, it might actually be good. Or it might be terrible, but good for the game .. or it might be terrible and terrible for the game.

[East Indy]

I understand skepticism on the effectiveness of the change to curb these kinds of alphas.

But where is the Gauss guaranteed a cooldown that's either as short as it is or the same as PPCs? Cycle time's whatever PGI makes it.

[AntiCitizenJuan]

Rippthrough, on 13 August 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

Just find the balance team something else to do already, have them design a mech or something, maybe they'll be better at that.

We can use the money generated from the MC sales of the mech to hire someone that knows what they're doing.

SHUT UP MAN. YOUR AN ISLAND BRO.

[Rippthrough]

AntiCitizenJuan, on 13 August 2013 - 11:20 AM, said:

SHUT UP MAN. YOUR AN ISLAND BRO.

I usually am, comes from living on one.

[Jman5]

If I understand "desync" correctly, I think it could be quite a good change to finally put the PPCs in a balanced place. I am not in favor of making convergence or aiming RNG. What PGI's proposed change would do is make landing a PPC on target more difficult, but also skill-based. People who can hold their cross hairs on the target during the charge up would still hit the mark.

I just hope I'm not misinterpreting what Paul meant. If he's simply talking about changing cooldowns, that's not going to help. Also, I hope it's the PPCs that get altered and not the Gauss. I feel like the Gauss is fine in its current form.

[Dimento Graven]

DaZur, on 13 August 2013 - 11:15 AM, said:

[/size]
As you eluded to in your original post, there are core aspects to mechwarrior combat and an Alpha-strike is one of them. The problem in MW:O is not alpha strikes... it's the ignorance of the mechanics behind it that allows it to be utilized as a de facto means of combat, be it at range or at brawl.

An alpha strike is means to be an all or nothing last-resort / finishing blow option... not the selective choosing of select weapons (i.e.. PPCx2 + Gauss) ignoring the remainder of your weapons. If Alphas were modelled in such a way... they would not be a problem as they would severly be hampered by heat, waste ammo and be highly inefficient outside of the above referenced use.

FROM WHERE DOES THIS INCOMPLETE IDEA KEEP COMING?!?!!

No the reason to NOT constantly and rapidly fire an alpha strike in TT and all subsequent computer versions of BattleTech was because of HEAT build up. You do that too often to quickly and you'll start having problems.

Again, as part of EVERY 'mech standard or CUSTOM, IS or CLAN 'mech, THIS TABLE:
Pretty much dictated EVERY move you made, PERIOD.

Sure, you could make low damage builds that could ignore that table, or high damage gauss boats (but of course you suffered from decidedly FINITE ability to fire) could ignore it, but those builds had their own compensating factors.

As long as you could do so without slowing yourself down, affecting your aim, or risking blowing yourself up, you could alpha to your heart's content on TT, it was just extremely rare to see anyone doing so (like an Atlas with 20 MG's).

Quote

Instead because of group fire we have means to craft the perfect sniper mix and literally use it with impunity as a all-around weapon configuration...

Group fire is the catalyst of a whole lot of "perceived" balance issues where in reality there is none... Just the incorrect application the Alpha mechanic.

The lack of impunity results from being able to shoot until your 'mech shuts down with no ill affects, no risk UNTIL shut down.

Add the f'ing heat affects table that's been part of BT for the past 30 years and you'll see a change, TRUST ME.

[BlackWidow]

NinetyProof, on 13 August 2013 - 11:16 AM, said:

He was right ... just wait and see what they do before passing judgement. This community is sooooo knee jerk that it's forced PGI to dis-engage with the community for the most part. You, an other "knee jerk" people are just making it worse.

Give it a rest already, let's see it on the test server, then we can judge. Who knows, it might actually be good. Or it might be terrible, but good for the game .. or it might be terrible and terrible for the game.

Thanks for the post. Two things.

1. This isn't knee-jerk. I'm not just venting about the de-sync issue. Far from it. This is just frustration levels culminating over a year, waiting for balance fix.
2. Test server? What new system are they implementing that I am unaware of? Are you talking specifically about the de-sync issue?

Maybe DaZur is right. Maybe it all stems down to poorly handling the Alpha strike itself.
But, that comes down to two things:

Heat and Random Hit Tables. It's been mentioned MANY times, by me and others, that by allowing and alpha strike to a single location, breaks the game because even at double the armor levels a mech was never designed to take that kind of hit.

But if we agree that RNG is bad, and that player skill should allow for pinpoint selection, then HEAT is the only way to balance. Which is what they are trying to do. I just don't like the way they did it, but it's a fair point.

And just to officially declare my insanity, I guess they de-syncing is simply a way of saying:

"look...your mech simple cannot produce the electrical output needed to fire a gauss coil and multiple PPC capacitors at the same time. Or, the recharge times would have to be even longer."

Which fits within my suspension of disbelief.

Hell, many of you have made great points. I don't know what to think anymore.

I suppose I just need to take a break from the game and wait for CW so there is actually something to do in game beside focus on build imbalance.

Peace out.

Edited by BlackWidow, 13 August 2013 - 11:40 AM.

[Trauglodyte]

Adding heat penalties would help but it wouldn't solve everything. I've been pushing for a three fold system of 1) dividing the heat bar into three sections (green, yellow, and red), 2) having the yellow and red sections remove all efficiencies x2 per level, and adding a movement+heat penalty that would grow gradually to the point of putting you at 50-75% of the JJ reticle impact. If that doesn't disuade you from alpha striking every chance you get or building exceptionally hot mechs, I don't know what would.

[Waking One]

waah waaah waaah

first of all, "de-sync their firing" could mean just about anything

second, you're a worse whiner than the people who want stuff nerfed, ridiculous

[FatBabyThompkins]

All other factors being the same I believe a desync of PPC/Gauss would cause a power shift towards light mechs. Light mechs are already fairly powerful, especially considering hit reg issues. Of course, as someone put the analogy, you wouldn't try to smash a fly with a hammer, you'll likely to miss. The same should be said here. You shouldn't try to smash the light pilot with a PPC, you're just going to miss most of the time (except you PPCWarrior twitch master bro). But I feel it definitely would put too much power in the light mechs hands.

Disclaimer: I'm primarily a light mech pilot.

[DaZur]

Dimento Graven, on 13 August 2013 - 11:23 AM, said:

FROM WHERE DOES THIS INCOMPLETE IDEA KEEP COMING?!?!!

No the reason to NOT constantly and rapidly fire an alpha strike in TT and all subsequent computer versions of BattleTech was because of HEAT build up. You do that too often to quickly and you'll start having problems.

Again, as part of EVERY 'mech standard or CUSTOM, IS or CLAN 'mech, THIS TABLE:
Pretty much dictated EVERY move you made, PERIOD.

Sure, you could make low damage builds that could ignore that table, or high damage gauss boats (but of course you suffered from decidedly FINITE ability to fire) could ignore it, but those builds had their own compensating factors.

As long as you could do so without slowing yourself down, affecting your aim, or risking blowing yourself up, you could alpha to your heart's content on TT, it was just extremely rare to see anyone doing so (like an Atlas with 20 MG's).

The lack of impunity results from being able to shoot until your 'mech shuts down with no ill affects, no risk UNTIL shut down.

Add the f'ing heat effects table that's been part of BT for the past 30 years and you'll see a change, TRUST ME.

I agree with you...

​And the heat build up from an alpha strike was the result of a full weapons launch, not just just a select few... thus, the group mechanic contributes to the ability to mitigate the inherent heat issues by dropping non-desirous weapons from the group.

While I agree in premise it brings the two-headed monster of chance with it... something that largely is frowned upon in a real time shooter. How exactly do you invoke punitive repercussions as list in your table if not through a randomized chance side-effect?

Edited by DaZur, 13 August 2013 - 11:35 AM.

[Bilbo]

Jman5, on 13 August 2013 - 11:23 AM, said:

If I understand "desync" correctly, I think it could be quite a good change to finally put the PPCs in a balanced place. I am not in favor of making convergence or aiming RNG. What PGI's proposed change would do is make landing a PPC on target more difficult, but also skill-based. People who can hold their cross hairs on the target during the charge up would still hit the mark.

I just hope I'm not misinterpreting what Paul meant. If he's simply talking about changing cooldowns, that's not going to help. Also, I hope it's the PPCs that get altered and not the Gauss. I feel like the Gauss is fine in its current form.

The de-sync would have to be on the front end, at trigger pull, to do anything meaningful. Otherwise, like you said, it would do absolutely nothing as pilots will just wait the extra beat to fire.

[TOGSolid]

BlackWidow, on 13 August 2013 - 10:59 AM, said:

Wow. Great suggestion! Even more simple to execute than mine! Not sure everyone would love this but keep thinking outside the box!

Interestingly, it's almost all stolen from prior Mechwarrior games. In MW3 the Autocannons were all burst fire weapons. In MW4 the missiles all shot in streams. The only thing different is the PPC/Gauss bit. All the prior games had them basically work the same way but in MW4 we saw how that could end up being a huge issue and again in MWO so obviously something needs to change with them.

Dimento Graven, on 13 August 2013 - 11:23 AM, said:

FROM WHERE DOES THIS INCOMPLETE IDEA KEEP COMING?!?!!

No the reason to NOT constantly and rapidly fire an alpha strike in TT and all subsequent computer versions of BattleTech was because of HEAT build up. You do that too often to quickly and you'll start having problems.

Again, as part of EVERY 'mech standard or CUSTOM, IS or CLAN 'mech, THIS TABLE:
Pretty much dictated EVERY move you made, PERIOD.

Sure, you could make low damage builds that could ignore that table, or high damage gauss boats (but of course you suffered from decidedly FINITE ability to fire) could ignore it, but those builds had their own compensating factors.

As long as you could do so without slowing yourself down, affecting your aim, or risking blowing yourself up, you could alpha to your heart's content on TT, it was just extremely rare to see anyone doing so (like an Atlas with 20 MG's).

The lack of impunity results from being able to shoot until your 'mech shuts down with no ill affects, no risk UNTIL shut down.

Add the f'ing heat affects table that's been part of BT for the past 30 years and you'll see a change, TRUST ME.

+1 to this. It wouldn't be hard to do seeing as how we have all the mechanics in place already. If your mech gets hot your accuracy degrades and it loses mobility.

Easy to understand, intuitive, already has a visual indicator via the heat bar, and basically stops a lot of ******** ********. It leaves double Gauss as the new pinpoint king but slap their minimum range on like they're supposed to have in some fashion and that will be a self-solving problem.

It blows my mind that PGI keeps coming up with hairbrained schemes when the obvious solutions are staring them right in the face. There are a lot of simpler options they could turn to then this wacky **** they keep coming up with and yet they don't. I'd love to know what the hell is going through their heads.

Edited by TOGSolid, 13 August 2013 - 11:47 AM.