1080 replies to this topic

[Cimarb]

Varent, on 09 January 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

You can create scenarios. For example test firing srm at different positons, in different volley types, alphas chain, etc. Just as a way we are testing srm.

For this you could test the effectiveness of heat vs pilot vs weight vs overall mech chasis size and setup some situations. Thats my own thought.

I just feel removing front load damage only really changes things for the light mechs. Who I feel dont need that buff. Mediums/heavies/assaults work just fine with this and can fight effectively with other weapons. Jump sniping on the other hand changing that would make a good effect to the overall game.

Front loaded damage would not be completely removed - Gauss would still have it, as it should - but it would not be the most prevalent type of damage in the game as it currently is. I'm also not saying to make all weapons 1s duration or anything crazy like that. I'm talking about short bursts (0.2-0.5 seconds) and innumerable opportunities to make varied rates of fire for every playstyle through different manufacturers. Unfortunately, you can't test that currently in game.

Varent, on 09 January 2014 - 08:35 AM, said:

except you can still use jump sniping with lasers and balistics to continue to mix max risk reward for weapons and move through terrain without issue. It might not be 'as effective' but it would still be a major issue. High alpha weapons only show prominence because the heat they incur can be negated by use of terrain that jump jets provide. Put them toe to toe with heat efficient highly damaging srm using mechs or even medium laser and machine guns or spread damage ac like the ac2/uac5 and they are cooked alive in very short order.

Jump sniping with lasers and other duration weapons would be a non-issue. While heat is an issue with jump sniping (meaning they avoid most of the penalties), the ability to put 100% of your damage exactly were you point in the fraction of a second you are visible while jumping is what the actual problem is. That problem is complicated by jump sniping, yes, but it is due to the front-loaded damage, not the jumping.

Humor me, please. Remove one or the other and see if the problem remains - that shows were the problem is. Test it objectively, without prejudices, and you will see what I mean.
Can you put 100% of your damage on target "with front-loaded damage" "while walking"? Yes.
Can you put 100% of your damage on target "without front-loaded damage" "while jumping"? No.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 09 January 2014 - 09:12 AM, said:

Front loaded damage would not be completely removed - Gauss would still have it, as it should - but it would not be the most prevalent type of damage in the game as it currently is. I'm also not saying to make all weapons 1s duration or anything crazy like that. I'm talking about short bursts (0.2-0.5 seconds) and innumerable opportunities to make varied rates of fire for every playstyle through different manufacturers. Unfortunately, you can't test that currently in game.


Jump sniping with lasers and other duration weapons would be a non-issue. While heat is an issue with jump sniping (meaning they avoid most of the penalties), the ability to put 100% of your damage exactly were you point in the fraction of a second you are visible while jumping is what the actual problem is. That problem is complicated by jump sniping, yes, but it is due to the front-loaded damage, not the jumping.

Humor me, please. Remove one or the other and see if the problem remains - that shows were the problem is. Test it objectively, without prejudices, and you will see what I mean.
Can you put 100% of your damage on target "with front-loaded damage" "while walking"? Yes.
Can you put 100% of your damage on target "without front-loaded damage" "while jumping"? No.

For the pure sake of argument I will reveal a low time in my life where I was learning to jump snipe.

I did not like ppc and liked large laser. I therefore jump sniped using ac5 (wich would not be effected by burst much) and large laser.

I got 500+ damage a game on a regular basis and several kills. I was also a very low skill player at that time and did not understand alot of the meta concepts of the game.

It can very very very much be done.

Changing pin point accuracy would only effect light mechs and there survivability.

[Joseph Mallan]

Khobai, on 09 January 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:

Its not. When players jump snipe with lasers its not overpowered. Its when they jump snipe with PPCs that its a problem. Jump sniping is a symptom of pinpoint alpha, not the other way around.

We keep coming back to convergence don't we!

[Cimarb]

Varent, on 09 January 2014 - 09:15 AM, said:

For the pure sake of argument I will reveal a low time in my life where I was learning to jump snipe.

I did not like ppc and liked large laser. I therefore jump sniped using ac5 (wich would not be effected by burst much) and large laser.

I got 500+ damage a game on a regular basis and several kills. I was also a very low skill player at that time and did not understand alot of the meta concepts of the game.

It can very very very much be done.

Changing pin point accuracy would only effect light mechs and there survivability.

I have a screenshot of a match were I did over 1000 damage with an LRM boat (my BLR), and I think we have already established that I suck and need to learn to play, so I'm happy for your example, but what does it prove? I'll tell you:

It proves that you can still be effective without 40-point front-loaded alphas.

Thanks for proving me right

Joseph Mallan, on 09 January 2014 - 09:15 AM, said:

We keep coming back to convergence don't we!

I don't think he meant convergence, more front-loaded. I'm trying to avoid the "pinpoint" word, since people read it differently based on their viewpoint.

[Khobai]

Quote

We keep coming back to convergence don't we!

yeah I mean everyone knows convergence is the problem. but everyone also knows PGI will never fix it. so the trick is to find a fix we like that we can convince PGI to actually do. And then we have to hope it doesnt go wrong and end up like ghost heat all over.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 09 January 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:

I have a screenshot of a match were I did over 1000 damage with an LRM boat (my BLR), and I think we have already established that I suck and need to learn to play, so I'm happy for your example, but what does it prove? I'll tell you:

It proves that you can still be effective without 40-point front-loaded alphas.

Thanks for proving me right

It shows that changing the weapon will not fix the main issue in the game being the prevalance of the jump sniping meta.

I also have a 1600 lrm game in beta. lrms used to be broken.

[Joseph Mallan]

Khobai, on 09 January 2014 - 09:27 AM, said:

yeah I mean everyone knows convergence is the problem. but everyone also knows PGI will never fix it. so the trick is to find a fix we like that we can convince PGI to actually do. And then we have to hope it doesnt go wrong and end up like ghost heat all over.

What will fix it is to add that much hated RoF when we fire more than one weapon. Making it bigger with every weapon added. I still haven't seen a naval broadside that can hit one paper plate sized target with all its guns! Cause I guess Naval Gunners don't have as mad of skillz as us video game geeks!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 09 January 2014 - 09:32 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Cimarb, on 09 January 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:

I have a screenshot of a match were I did over 1000 damage with an LRM boat (my BLR), and I think we have already established that I suck and need to learn to play, so I'm happy for your example, but what does it prove? I'll tell you:

It proves that you can still be effective without 40-point front-loaded alphas.

Thanks for proving me right


I don't think he meant convergence, more front-loaded. I'm trying to avoid the "pinpoint" word, since people read it differently based on their viewpoint.

No he means convergence. I front load lots of damage (up to 60 per Alpha) But since some of that is SRM and/or LRM not all of it is pin point. I can hit you with 2 AC20s in chain fire and it is not as painful as a 40 point converged hit.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 09 January 2014 - 09:35 AM.

[Khobai]

cone of fire is another system I really cant see PGI ever coding into the game...

I think the best we can hope for is simple fixes... like more internal structure or autocannons firing more rapidly to spread damage better.

[Joseph Mallan]

Khobai, on 09 January 2014 - 09:37 AM, said:

cone of fire is another system I really cant see PGI ever coding into the game...

I think the best we can hope for is simple fixes... like more internal structure or autocannons firing more rapidly to spread damage better.

Band-Aides are not fixes.

[Khobai]

Quote

Band-Aides are not fixes.

Oh I totally agree. But im just being practical. PGI is far more likely to slap bandaids on it than go into surgery.

[Varent]

Khobai, on 09 January 2014 - 09:40 AM, said:

Oh I totally agree. But im just being practical. PGI is far more likely to slap bandaids on it than go into surgery.

Only if people keep suggesting and pushing for bandaids =p

People need to start pushing towards fighting the true disease, not the symptoms.

[MustrumRidcully]

Varent, on 09 January 2014 - 09:42 AM, said:

Only if people keep suggesting and pushing for bandaids =p

People need to start pushing towards fighting the true disease, not the symptoms.

We did that in Closed Beta, when it was quite possibly "safest" to make such changes, because few people would have to relearn stuff. If they weren't willing to do it then...

Though, convergence actually had a delay during Closed Beta, it was apparently only the introduction of HSR that forced PGI to remove the feature entirely. I am not convinced convergence was ever enough, but back then, the game had so many issues and different jump jets so that many current tactics wouldn't have worked anyway. Though back then, Dual Gauss Catapult was one of the best mechs you could build, and that was all about convergence and the heat system working beautifully together, but then countered by hit detection / lag.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 09 January 2014 - 09:55 AM.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Looking at what might be possible in the way of changes. As changing convergence is out and I can appreciate the reasons for not making ACs burst fire.
Why don't they just drop AC (and PPC) range to 2x and up lasers to 3x? Could even leave ER PPC at 3x so it and the Gauss are the premier long range weapons. It will make jump sniping a bit more skillful and Sandpits Stalker even more deadly.
If it doesn't work out how could it be that much worse than what we have now?. It would even help pulses.

Edited by Nik Van Rhijn, 09 January 2014 - 10:58 AM.

[Cimarb]

Varent, on 09 January 2014 - 09:28 AM, said:

It shows that changing the weapon will not fix the main issue in the game being the prevalance of the jump sniping meta.

I also have a 1600 lrm game in beta. lrms used to be broken.

I'm not talking about when the system was broken. I'm talking about current meta (as in last month).

I just don't understand your fixation on jump jets. You need to take your goggles off, man. You're speaking French in an English discussion.

Joseph Mallan, on 09 January 2014 - 09:35 AM, said:

No he means convergence. I front load lots of damage (up to 60 per Alpha) But since some of that is SRM and/or LRM not all of it is pin point. I can hit you with 2 AC20s in chain fire and it is not as painful as a 40 point converged hit.

I really think we need a definition clarification on all these terms, lol.

It all depends on what happens when you pull the trigger once. How and where does it apply that damage?

When talking how a weapon does damage: Missiles, LBX and MGs spread damage over area. Lasers spread damage over duration as a beam. Flamers are one of the two, but I'm not sure which would best apply. I think the confusion comes with autocannons, since they do anywhere from a small amount of damage to a huge amount. Regardless, they are front-loaded damage, as are Gauss and PPCs.

Pinpoint is more about targeting (where), in regard to the ability to hit exactly where you are pointing, and includes lasers, autocannons, Gauss and PPCs. MGs, LBX and missiles, on the other hand, are not pinpoint because there is no way to make sure they hit exactly where you are pointing.

We may not agree on these definitions, but that is how I see them. I would love to have an official definition from PGI to use, but that isn't going to happen.

Varent, on 09 January 2014 - 09:42 AM, said:

Only if people keep suggesting and pushing for bandaids =p

People need to start pushing towards fighting the true disease, not the symptoms.

If we could agree on the true disease, that might be possible, Mr. JJ...

Nik Van Rhijn, on 09 January 2014 - 10:58 AM, said:

Looking at what might be possible in the way of changes. As changing convergence is out and I can appreciate the reasons for not making ACs burst fire.
Why don't they just drop AC (and PPC) range to 2x and up lasers to 3x? Could even leave ER PPC at 3x so it and the Gauss are the premier long range weapons. It will make jump sniping a bit more skillful and Sandpits Stalker even more deadly.
If it doesn't work out how could it be that much worse than what we have now?. It would even help pulses.

I agree about reducing AC range, but energy weapons don't need a boost.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 09 January 2014 - 11:53 AM, said:

I'm not talking about when the system was broken. I'm talking about current meta (as in last month).

I just don't understand your fixation on jump jets. You need to take your goggles off, man. You're speaking French in an English discussion.


I really think we need a definition clarification on all these terms, lol.

It all depends on what happens when you pull the trigger once. How and where does it apply that damage?

When talking how a weapon does damage: Missiles, LBX and MGs spread damage over area. Lasers spread damage over duration as a beam. Flamers are one of the two, but I'm not sure which would best apply. I think the confusion comes with autocannons, since they do anywhere from a small amount of damage to a huge amount. Regardless, they are front-loaded damage, as are Gauss and PPCs.

Pinpoint is more about targeting (where), in regard to the ability to hit exactly where you are pointing, and includes lasers, autocannons, Gauss and PPCs. MGs, LBX and missiles, on the other hand, are not pinpoint because there is no way to make sure they hit exactly where you are pointing.

We may not agree on these definitions, but that is how I see them. I would love to have an official definition from PGI to use, but that isn't going to happen.


If we could agree on the true disease, that might be possible, Mr. JJ...


I agree about reducing AC range, but energy weapons don't need a boost.

oh come on man, ive been very civil and agreeable. Mr. JJ? Ok mister Alpha. *eyeroll*

Keep in mind coming from where I am I can say the same and it appears to me you are just trying to put in something and push towards something that truly only effects light mechs and new players that have no map awareness as upposed to a larger end change that would truly effect the game without losing the feel it has now.

[Joseph Mallan]

Good point Cimarb

Convergence is when I fire 2 or more weapons and they hit one location.

With lasers it isn't as big an issue, as movement can spread the damage. But having 2 AC20 or 4 AC5s hit you all in the same pixel is what is breaking the system. A single AC20 round is only half as bad as it is on TT thanks to double armor. Firing 4 AC5s should have some variance to where the projectiles hit.

Pin Point Convergence is what is messing up the game. Direct fire weapons should only be this accurate with a Clan or IS advanced targeting computer. Including the weight and crit costs that that entails.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 09 January 2014 - 12:04 PM.

[Sandpit]

Cimarb, on 09 January 2014 - 11:53 AM, said:

If we could agree on the true disease, that might be possible, Mr. JJ...

[Cimarb]

Varent, on 09 January 2014 - 12:02 PM, said:

oh come on man, ive been very civil and agreeable. Mr. JJ? Ok mister Alpha. *eyeroll*

Keep in mind coming from where I am I can say the same and it appears to me you are just trying to put in something and push towards something that truly only effects light mechs and new players that have no map awareness as upposed to a larger end change that would truly effect the game without losing the feel it has now.

Sorry, the Mr JJ thing was meant to be a tongue-in-cheek comment, not offensive.

I have agreed with several of Sands suggestions, so I'm not sure where you are getting that I am being a hard liner on anything. I do think burst-fire would be very good for the game, but I am open to anything that helps. Changing jump jets wouldn't, though, and neither would ammo caps, ammo reductions, etc. You continue to avoid my comment about how to determine the true problem, btw, but it's probably because you don't agree with me on it.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 09 January 2014 - 12:25 PM, said:

Sorry, the Mr JJ thing was meant to be a tongue-in-cheek comment, not offensive.

I have agreed with several of Sands suggestions, so I'm not sure where you are getting that I am being a hard liner on anything. I do think burst-fire would be very good for the game, but I am open to anything that helps. Changing jump jets wouldn't, though, and neither would ammo caps, ammo reductions, etc. You continue to avoid my comment about how to determine the true problem, btw, but it's probably because you don't agree with me on it.

I would say you continue to ignore my comment on how taking alpha out of the game would benefit anything but a light mech? That said I have not tried in any way to avoid comments about how to determine what the problem is. I would actually (as I said) welcome testing. I feel a good way to test this would be to take a testing of the ac40 jager vs similiar 65 ton mechs with different configurations and see how they do in comparison. I know ive faced ac40 jager in 65 ton mechs withough dirtect fire, using alot of srms and ive come out on top more often then not. Actually ive faced them using 55 ton mechs so having a 10 ton loss on my end and won.

I would like to test mechs out vs this build over and over in test runs with help, take videos, make notes to see if this is truly as overpowered as people think or if its just an assumption people are coming to for lack of being able to deal with it themselves.

SIDENOTE - None of this is ment offensive in any way. Im honestly trying to come to a middle ground here to try to resolve a debate. Also I would love to test out mechs that use jump jets without using jump jets vs mechs of similiar weight and different builds to see how those mechs fair without the use of jump jets (even while using high alpha weapon). Personally I feel they will fair quite poorly.

I know from experience in playing my stalker-misery that if I dont play smart and get out of position I die fast to any type of flanking force. The moment someone gets on top of me im pretty much dead. This mech does not have jump jets and uses a high alpha, Wich is where many of my thoughts are coming from.