675 replies to this topic

[Steel Claws]

I did read them but I also see lots of people trying to shoot lasers of all flavors well beyond optimal range - hense reducing their damage. think about it - how many times you see people with mediums taking 400+ meter shots or larges at 700+. Yes the beam duration also spreads damage causes some reduction but that is as it should be. I repeat - there is no better weapon for p[in point damage.

Edited by Steel Claws, 15 January 2014 - 08:28 PM.

[Gaan Cathal]

Steel Claws, on 15 January 2014 - 08:27 PM, said:

I did read them but I also see lots of people trying to shoot lasers of all flavors well beyond optimal range - hense reducing their damage. think about it - how many times you see people with mediums taking 400+ meter shots or larges at 700+. Yes the beam duration also spreads damage causes some reduction but that is as it should be. I repeat - there is no better weapon for p[in point damage.

This is simply incorrect. As someone who largely pilots small, fast mechs, I am easily capable of forcing beam damage to be spread over multiple compartments. I.e. making it impossible for them to concentrate a beam on one compartment. Not hard, impossible. That cannot be done with an AC/PPC shell. Your logic is..faulty at best in any case. You blame any spread due to lack of holding beam on target on "lack of skill" but think that doesn't apply to failure to lead correctly with an AC (in one of the least-difficult-to-lead games I've ever played no less).

[nemesis271989]

Reducing beam time would make lasers a bit better?

[MustrumRidcully]

Varent, on 15 January 2014 - 01:56 PM, said:

Sorry, FLD .. .meant FLD.

I suppose if anything I would ask why are you so against the screen shake exactly? Why try everything else but that and what about the concept of the screen shaking a 'little' on the way down off sets you? I do agree that the damage could help but I also forsee alot of pilots simply getting very good at 'feathering' there fall abit at the last minute to not get hurt much. Where as I dont see many ways to get around that light shake. Close in it would do nothing but at ranges it would be everthing. Its also just something targetting Poptars and not snipers in general so long as you playing a true sniper wouldnt hurt either.

Probably because it seems "unrealistic" that falling would cause the same type of shake that jump jets firing does.

But maybe instead of that, a mech that turns of his jump jets should simply be unstable and fall in one direction and rotate a bit (indicating that the JJs when turned off don't end the mech ina perfectly stable state.)

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 15 January 2014 - 11:30 PM.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 15 January 2014 - 05:28 PM, said:

I know what you meant - just giving you a hard time for getting it wrong over and over, lol.

I am against the "off jet" shake because it makes no sense. Yes, I know this is a game about big stompy robots with fusion reactors under the pilots feet, but that's the "reality" of this game. Jump jets shaking the mech while blasting tons of metal into the air I can understand and it seems "logical", but it shaking while the mech is falling, not so much.

Also, while I know a skilled pilot can learn to feather their way down, but that is my point - they HAVE to save some of that thrust to do it. That means they are not able to get as high of a jump, require more jump jets to achieve the same result, and cannot do the "shutdown jump" trick. If the damage is significant, as it should be if a 80+ ton machine is plummeting to the earth, it will be a sufficient penalty to lessen the chance of someone using it as a valid tactic.

Regardless, I am just proposing this to try to meet you half way. I'm not going to support some weird shake voodoo just to make firing more difficult for a certain group of people. How about we make SRMs all have a horrible voodoo recoil making chain-firing them near impossible while we are doing that if so?

What I'm saying is, when someone meets you half way, don't try to yank them the other half...

I didn't say the idea was bad. I just am playing abit of devils advocate. And im not sure it will actually help resolve the issue. I suppose I just look at game balance as being a little more important then making sense myself.

[Void Angel]

nemesis271989, on 15 January 2014 - 08:49 PM, said:

Reducing beam time would make lasers a bit better?

It would - but going down this route would make all weapons more homogenous; it'd make the game less interesting. I'd rather preserve the variety of the game and use other means to balance.

MustrumRidcully, on 15 January 2014 - 11:29 PM, said:

Probably because it seems "unrealistic" that falling would cause the same type of shake that jump jets firing does.

But maybe instead of that, a mech that turns of his jump jets should simply be unstable and fall in one direction and rotate a bit (indicating that the JJs when turned off don't end the mech ina perfectly stable state.)

Honestly, you don't even need to shake all the way back down - just for a little bit after you let up off the jets. That seems like it would put an unavoidable and sorely-needed damper in the jump sniping mechanic, without having to invent a system from scratch. If we want a pseudo-technical explanation: "it takes the gyros time to stabilize after you turn off the jets." Bam, done. What's more important, in my view, is that putting in a delay between when you stopped going up and when you were able to shoot accurately would take the first domino out of the chain reaction that I think is driving the current long-range meta.

What I'd really like to see is a constant - but much smaller- reticle oscillation whenever you were off the ground ("gyros are compensating imperfectly,) but with each weapon fired having its trajectory calculated differently. So the reticle is outlining a small cone of fire, and each weapon rolls its own "dice" to determine where the shots land. I feel that this is a much more elegant solution than extending jump jet shake - but it's also a much more technically demanding solution, I'd expect. Given that they're still trying to solve nagging issues with the game engine, I'd expect that shake extension is a far more workable choice.

[Lykaon]

Steel Claws, on 15 January 2014 - 08:27 PM, said:

I did read them but I also see lots of people trying to shoot lasers of all flavors well beyond optimal range - hense reducing their damage. think about it - how many times you see people with mediums taking 400+ meter shots or larges at 700+. Yes the beam duration also spreads damage causes some reduction but that is as it should be. I repeat - there is no better weapon for p[in point damage.

I'm not usually this blunt but...

You are wrong very very wrong.

Unless you mean lasers are best at applying miniscule values of damage to pinpoint areas?

Then you are correct lasers are more accurate and as such hit more often for **** damage.

Mechanics are the key.

A laser is fired from point A to target B it will nigh instantly hit the target but,now here is the key difference the target may react to the fire twisting or moving spreading the damage across several body locations.This is a dispersed damage pattern and is the opposite of pinpoint damage.In actual combat conditions it is highly likely that the shooter and the target are moving.this increases the dispersal chances and will result in non focused damage.

Meanwhile one trigger pull of grouped front loader damage weapons plops all the damage directly to one spot.It does not matter if the target reacts the damage has already been applied for it's full value to the initial target area.This is pinpoint damage.

Mechanics:the second part.

A beam weapon like a laser requires the firing mech to retain aim and line of sight for the entire duration of the beam.This obviously means the laser using mech is exposed to counter fire for the duration of the beam.

Conversley the snap fire nature of front loaded damage weapons means the firer can poke and shoot and reset to cover and has inflicted all of the damage that weapon can deploy in that firing cycle while reducing exposure to counter fire.

Mechanics the third part:

By and large ACs have superior rates of fire,DPS and cooling efficency to laser weapons.This of course translates to more frequent delivery of damage over lasers that require more down time for cooling.

Overall this means that Autocannons apply pinpoint damage more frequently and for longer periods of time over laser weapons that by their nature apply damage over the duration of a beam's firing.This allows factors like target reaction/movement or shooter's movement or terrain conditions to alter the beams impact point dispersing the damage across several target locations.

Recap:

Laser firing mechanics allow for their damage to be easily dispersed.

AC/PPC/Gauss firing mechanics only cause pinpoint damage.

Lasers have inferior cooling efficency,Rate of fire and DPS to most AC based platforms.

Laser firing mechanics require more exposure to return fire than front loaded damage weapons.

If these statements are correct then the conclusion is you were wrong.

Edited by Lykaon, 16 January 2014 - 04:39 AM.

[Magna Canus]

The amount of effort put into the OP with all of the calulations and well thought out arguments are great which makes it even less pleasant for me to say that the OP and all the other arguments were a titanic waste of time. No matter how much you put into your analysis PGI will not be reading or considering you post at all, ever.

While it is nice to talk about our perceptions, actions speak louder than words. If you find something OP and the rest under powered, use it and abuse it to the exclusion to everything else and encourage others to do so as well. If noboy used MLs for a month PGI would notice and maybe do something about it.

That being said, I agree that you need to apply the weapons at your disposal not as how you believe they should work, but as they actually do work. You use a can opener to open the can and the fork to eat the meat, e.g. pin point to strip armor and the rest to finish the enemy off.

SRMs for me are skermishing weapons, ACs for opening the can, etc. Lasers are great for harrasment when you have a difficult shot, or for "sure damage" when you are close enough. Lasers allow you to "walk the beam" to do at least partial damage to the spot you wanted, but also spread damage on a moving target. The advantages ACs have over Lasers come at a high cost, namely slots and tons. You can just as well argue that ACs are UP because the damage per ton or per slot ration is way off not to mention that you dont need ammo for Lasers or that ACs are "hit or miss" weapons where Lasers at least allow a shot that initially failed to be "walked" over to the target for at leat partial damage.

I really hate getting killed by a well placed alpha, but I accept it as a current part of the game that may or may not change. The next time I remember to keep my head down and advance under cover when I can or wait in ambush when the sniper becomes impatient and comes after me. I take solice in the fact that whatever my enemy can do so can I, something the real world does not always offer. Like any good game you can choose how you play, but not how others play. You run with the cards you get or fold.

[Cimarb]

nemesis271989, on 15 January 2014 - 08:49 PM, said:

Reducing beam time would make lasers a bit better?

Yes, it would, but at the cost of an even quicker TTK (time to kill), which is exactly the opposite of what we are aiming for. We want to spread the damage out to reduce the "instakill" meta caused by FLD (front-loaded damage) combined with instant convergence ("pinpoint fire").

Void Angel, on 16 January 2014 - 12:48 AM, said:

It would - but going down this route would make all weapons more homogenous; it'd make the game less interesting. I'd rather preserve the variety of the game and use other means to balance.

Honestly, you don't even need to shake all the way back down - just for a little bit after you let up off the jets. That seems like it would put an unavoidable and sorely-needed damper in the jump sniping mechanic, without having to invent a system from scratch. If we want a pseudo-technical explanation: "it takes the gyros time to stabilize after you turn off the jets." Bam, done. What's more important, in my view, is that putting in a delay between when you stopped going up and when you were able to shoot accurately would take the first domino out of the chain reaction that I think is driving the current long-range meta.

What I'd really like to see is a constant - but much smaller- reticle oscillation whenever you were off the ground ("gyros are compensating imperfectly,) but with each weapon fired having its trajectory calculated differently. So the reticle is outlining a small cone of fire, and each weapon rolls its own "dice" to determine where the shots land. I feel that this is a much more elegant solution than extending jump jet shake - but it's also a much more technically demanding solution, I'd expect. Given that they're still trying to solve nagging issues with the game engine, I'd expect that shake extension is a far more workable choice.

A delay to convergence after letting off your jump jets would be a good compromise on this. It takes the effect Varent wants and uses your example for logic, which I would be happy with. Basically, you shake on the way up, like you do currently, and when you let off the jets your reticles stay unconverged for a second or two as your gyro and targeting system recalibrate. Falling damage would also be very good to address regardless, but I think that would be a good compromise for the targeting issue.

Lykaon, on 16 January 2014 - 04:36 AM, said:

Recap:

Laser firing mechanics allow for their damage to be easily dispersed.

AC/PPC/Gauss firing mechanics only cause pinpoint damage.

Lasers have inferior cooling efficency,Rate of fire and DPS to most AC based platforms.

Laser firing mechanics require more exposure to return fire than front loaded damage weapons.

If these statements are correct then the conclusion is you were wrong.

Pinpoint post. Well said.

Edited by Cimarb, 16 January 2014 - 07:54 AM.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 16 January 2014 - 07:51 AM, said:

A delay to convergence after letting off your jump jets would be a good compromise on this. It takes the effect Varent wants and uses your example for logic, which I would be happy with. Basically, you shake on the way up, like you do currently, and when you let off the jets your reticles stay unconverged for a second or two as your gyro and targeting system recalibrate. Falling damage would also be very good to address regardless, but I think that would be a good compromise for the targeting issue.

*like*

That would make both sides happy since it would make rp sense, Wouldnt hurt snipers and would make it more difficult on jump snipers at least.


*word of cautioning*

Devs have stated that convergence works against hit registration. So that needs to be resolved first.

Edited by Varent, 16 January 2014 - 08:58 AM.

[Lupus Aurelius]

Almond Brown, on 15 January 2014 - 10:16 AM, said:

The short sightedness of that post is brutal. In order to get what you want, something has to get Sold. The Dev team and their families cannot live on Skittles and or your hatred, although surely soul sustaining for yourself.

Funny, I see neither Founders or Overlord tags next to your name....

Founders Elite - $80
Overlord - $80
MC purchases - 6500 x2 @ $29.95 ea, 3000 x1 for $14.95 ea

Total - $234.85 USD

Not counting hours of time researching, preparing data, for multiple posts on balance issues.

And that's just me, go figure with the thousand, or tens of thousands, of people that have done the same, and son't forget the milliond they recieved from the Quebec gov.

So, yes, at this point, after a year of unfulfilled promises, with a work staff that is over 50% artists, that cannot be assigned to programming the actual features that PGI committed to, showing their priorities is to get new artwork out that people will shell out money for, that has not even had it's functionality defined...no more money.

No tags on your name, and no constructive posts for balancing either. If you had bought those packages, or actually spent time working on concepts and posting them, instead of just trolling, you'd be singing a different tune...



Not counting the millions they got from the Quebec gov

[Varent]

Lupus Aurelius, on 16 January 2014 - 10:09 AM, said:

Funny, I see neither Founders or Overlord tags next to your name....

Founders Elite - $80
Overlord - $80
MC purchases - 6500 x2 @ $29.95 ea, 3000 x1 for $14.95 ea

Total - $234.85 USD

Not counting hours of time researching, preparing data, for multiple posts on balance issues.

And that's just me, go figure with the thousand, or tens of thousands, of people that have done the same, and son't forget the milliond they recieved from the Quebec gov.

So, yes, at this point, after a year of unfulfilled promises, with a work staff that is over 50% artists, that cannot be assigned to programming the actual features that PGI committed to, showing their priorities is to get new artwork out that people will shell out money for, that has not even had it's functionality defined...no more money.

No tags on your name, and no constructive posts for balancing either. If you had bought those packages, or actually spent time working on concepts and posting them, instead of just trolling, you'd be singing a different tune...



Not counting the millions they got from the Quebec gov

Look at my tags.

I agree with him.

That said he has made many constructive and well thought out posts along the forum and thats a pretty harsh thing to say regardless.

They are a company, they need to make money. Do they have communication issues. Yes. But no one is holding a knife to your throat and making you buy. Thats up to you. If you dont like it dont buy, But dont complain in a F2P while paying for extra benefits cause you dont wanna wait.

[Artgathan]

Lupus Aurelius, on 16 January 2014 - 10:09 AM, said:

Not counting the millions they got from the Quebec gov

That money was given to IGP, not PGI.

[Khobai]

Yep remember IGP is getting like 70% of the money as PGIs publisher. IGP takes the money and funnels it into other games that are doomed to fail instead of just focusing on making MWO the best game possible.

[Gaan Cathal]

Cimarb, on 16 January 2014 - 07:51 AM, said:

A delay to convergence after letting off your jump jets would be a good compromise on this. It takes the effect Varent wants and uses your example for logic, which I would be happy with. Basically, you shake on the way up, like you do currently, and when you let off the jets your reticles stay unconverged for a second or two as your gyro and targeting system recalibrate. Falling damage would also be very good to address regardless, but I think that would be a good compromise for the targeting issue.

If PGI were willing to play with convergence then we'd have a hundred alternative solutions to so many things. But they've made it very clear they won't, apparently due to processing power issues. There is, functionally, no 'convergence' as such in the game. All weapons converge perfectly and instantly on the central crosshair pixel. The pilot skill is entirely useless, there's no weapon or location based variety, even (ironically) jump-jet distorted weapons fire converges perfectly on it's randomised crosshair location.

[Cimarb]

Varent, on 16 January 2014 - 08:57 AM, said:

*like*

That would make both sides happy since it would make rp sense, Wouldnt hurt snipers and would make it more difficult on jump snipers at least.


*word of cautioning*

Devs have stated that convergence works against hit registration. So that needs to be resolved first.

Gaan Cathal, on 16 January 2014 - 10:50 AM, said:

If PGI were willing to play with convergence then we'd have a hundred alternative solutions to so many things. But they've made it very clear they won't, apparently due to processing power issues. There is, functionally, no 'convergence' as such in the game. All weapons converge perfectly and instantly on the central crosshair pixel. The pilot skill is entirely useless, there's no weapon or location based variety, even (ironically) jump-jet distorted weapons fire converges perfectly on it's randomised crosshair location.

I don't think I worded it correctly, based on your responses. What I meant isn't necessarily convergence, but the"shake" of the reticle makes the weapons fire all over the place, and THAT is what would take a second or two to "realign", instand of the instant realign that currently happens. Maybe the shake continues for a second or two, basically, but same theory.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 16 January 2014 - 12:11 PM, said:

I don't think I worded it correctly, based on your responses. What I meant isn't necessarily convergence, but the"shake" of the reticle makes the weapons fire all over the place, and THAT is what would take a second or two to "realign", instand of the instant realign that currently happens. Maybe the shake continues for a second or two, basically, but same theory.

thats.. quasi convergence I think? Admitedly I dont know how they have it scripted so it would really depend but it sounds like that might be the same issue. Either way would be nice to see if they can do it. Can only hope I suppose?

[Gaan Cathal]

Cimarb, on 16 January 2014 - 12:11 PM, said:

I don't think I worded it correctly, based on your responses. What I meant isn't necessarily convergence, but the"shake" of the reticle makes the weapons fire all over the place, and THAT is what would take a second or two to "realign", instand of the instant realign that currently happens. Maybe the shake continues for a second or two, basically, but same theory.

Varent, on 16 January 2014 - 12:27 PM, said:

thats.. quasi convergence I think? Admitedly I dont know how they have it scripted so it would really depend but it sounds like that might be the same issue. Either way would be nice to see if they can do it. Can only hope I suppose?

That is crosshair judder. You could extend the duration of that, certainly, since it's entirely unrelated to convergence. The issue I see happening is that people will expect, if it lasts a certain amount of time, it to 'phase out' rather than just be happening, or not. As far as I can tell, it's not deterministic in any way, a random pixel is just picked as the current aimpoint. So without changing that, it wouldn't be feasible to have it 'tone down' from "unaimable" to "normal".

The mild irony is that whilst the judder makes your aim point random, it's still perfectly accurate, and perfectly converged, on that point. Get a lucky judder and have good timing and you can still put your five PPCs, three Gauss rounds and an AC/2 shell into someone's cockpit.

[Varent]

Gaan Cathal, on 16 January 2014 - 12:58 PM, said:

That is crosshair judder. You could extend the duration of that, certainly, since it's entirely unrelated to convergence. The issue I see happening is that people will expect, if it lasts a certain amount of time, it to 'phase out' rather than just be happening, or not. As far as I can tell, it's not deterministic in any way, a random pixel is just picked as the current aimpoint. So without changing that, it wouldn't be feasible to have it 'tone down' from "unaimable" to "normal".

The mild irony is that whilst the judder makes your aim point random, it's still perfectly accurate, and perfectly converged, on that point. Get a lucky judder and have good timing and you can still put your five PPCs, three Gauss rounds and an AC/2 shell into someone's cockpit.

true.. but that would also be the 'lucky judder' and lucky shots will and should always exist. This would keep the high FLD hits more rare from distances and make them spread out wich would be a good thing and effect jump snipers only. So far it seems to be something most of the posers here can agree on at least.

[Cimarb]

Gaan Cathal, on 16 January 2014 - 12:58 PM, said:

That is crosshair judder. You could extend the duration of that, certainly, since it's entirely unrelated to convergence. The issue I see happening is that people will expect, if it lasts a certain amount of time, it to 'phase out' rather than just be happening, or not. As far as I can tell, it's not deterministic in any way, a random pixel is just picked as the current aimpoint. So without changing that, it wouldn't be feasible to have it 'tone down' from "unaimable" to "normal".

The mild irony is that whilst the judder makes your aim point random, it's still perfectly accurate, and perfectly converged, on that point. Get a lucky judder and have good timing and you can still put your five PPCs, three Gauss rounds and an AC/2 shell into someone's cockpit.

It may just be my limited experience with jump sniping, but it always seemed to me that my multiple weapons would fire at different locations during a jump?

Varent, on 16 January 2014 - 01:39 PM, said:

true.. but that would also be the 'lucky judder' and lucky shots will and should always exist. This would keep the high FLD hits more rare from distances and make them spread out wich would be a good thing and effect jump snipers only. So far it seems to be something most of the posers here can agree on at least.

I agree that I don't really mind if a lucky shot still got off, but I think it may help the issue Varent is worried about, at least.

Varent, did you mean "posters"? I don't deny being a poser, but I am just curious if it was a typo or if you meant to type that...