404 replies to this topic

[Davers]

Varent, on 06 March 2014 - 11:57 AM, said:

Deal with the dregs of society on a daily basis and witness first hand the horrors some people are capable of and you really wont want to deal with people at all and will probly feel twice your age.

Are you describing these forums?

wanderer, on 07 March 2014 - 04:53 AM, said:

Again, there are no canonical AC/20's that fire a single shell per shot, in fluff or in rulebooks. There are larger AC's that DO fire single shells- these being the really, REALLY huge AC's carried on Dropships and warships- the "naval" autocannon.

Zero. None. Ditto with the AC/10, AC/5, and AC/2. The Mech-sized AC's, without fail are universally classified as "burst-fire" weapons, including their ability to hit multiple hexes with a single shot. They are written as firing multiple shells per shot in Battletech's fiction.

By contrast, the naval autocannon specficially states a single shell (and they're HUGE, with the smallest one being a fifth of a ton!). Light/medium/heavy rifles are single-shell per shot. Artillery cannons are single-shell per shot. 'Mech-sized AC's are not.

MWO is doing it wrong.

Yes all the weapons fire bursts. Yes the pilots are so good they always hit the same location.


Page 19. Any Devs respond yet?

[Varent]

Joseph Mallan, on 12 March 2014 - 04:23 AM, said:

I haven't used a Module other than The two targeting ones and Zoom... I used Cap Accel for a bit but as I rarely make it to the enemy base...

ah yes I frogot cap accelerator, thanks joe

Davers, on 12 March 2014 - 06:02 AM, said:

Are you describing these forums?

Funny story. I came in hopes of wanting the meta to change just a little (Overall happy with the game). I stay because im worried people will break the game im enjoying playing. So yes most of the time similiar sensation.

[Bhael Fire]

@OP: Yes, the devs have stated a while ago (back in beta) that they did not want ACs to be burst fire weapons because they did not want them to function like DOT weapons. Not sure if that was just their position at the time or not, but that's the last I heard anything about it.

If I find the reference I will post a link.

[Sprouticus]

OneEyed Jack, on 23 February 2014 - 02:38 PM, said:

I think "able to handle" might be a bit of a stretch. SRMs, anyone?


Maybe it's my age, but I don't remember it that way. As I recall, hit registration was actually pretty darn good. You just couldn't rely at all on the visual impact of the shot, since you were seeing something different than the server was. Hitting at all on a moving target involved some quick calculation and no small amount of guesswork, but when you hit (reticle flashed) it did damage... except maybe on the Raven, but that was another issue.

Yes, it is your age. Hit detection was HORRIBLE. Lag shooting was required, especially for high ping users. And even then sometimes you hit them and it did not damage the person I can remember plenty of times being hit by a gauss (because thats what people used those days) and getting the sound of being hit and the flash, and no damage!.

As a point in fact the issue appears to have reared its ugly head again recently (probably a HSR issue)

As evidence, we did a drop for Marik civil war last week, and ended up in a drop against teh wrong team. As often happens in tha situation, we just ran aruond teamkilling each other for fun. I was up against someone with an AC20. 3 times he ended up hitting me, I got knockback, the sound, and NO DAMAGE. Since then I have had anecdotal evidence enough in my testing that I believe it to be a real issue. Maybe HSR, maybe something else, but it is a real issue.

[Coralld]

Bhael Fire, on 12 March 2014 - 07:19 AM, said:

@OP: Yes, the devs have stated a while ago (back in beta) that they did not want ACs to be burst fire weapons because they did not want them to function like DOT weapons. Not sure if that was just their position at the time or not, but that's the last I heard anything about it.

If I find the reference I will post a link.

I have been here sense the start and do not recall the Devs ever saying that.

Also, ever sense the Gauss change, Paul has stated that they also wanted to change other weapons and the way they function and hinted at the ACs and other systems. One of which that we know is going to be changed in the near future is the NARC.

[Bhael Fire]

Coralld, on 12 March 2014 - 07:43 AM, said:

I have been here sense the start and do not recall the Devs ever saying that.

I can't find the specific post, but the devs have made various remarks since closed beta that they want to keep Inner Sphere ACs different from DOT weapons like lasers.

I did, however, find two comments from ATD that corroborate that sentiment:

Quote

Q: Is PGI aware that the canon laser firing mode is a burst of light over a fraction of a second as opposed to what we see in your many vids, a beam lasting up to two seconds long?
A: Yes, we are aware of this. It is done as a balancing mechanic. This was done to differentiate Laser and Ballistic weapons, as Lasers need to be held on target, yet Autocannons simply 'hit' an area.

Quote

Q: Is there any chance in perhaps seeing different versions of the current autocannon's perhaps like 5 round burst ac 20 (4 damage per shell for example) AC 10 2 round burst (5 damage per shell) and etc?...
A: Currently no, though we think that might work well for the RAC weapons.

So, not sure if their position on this has changed, but I think pinpoint damage with IS ACs is here to stay. However, we may see future weapon additions like RAC and Clan ACs with some sort of DOT mechanic.

[Joseph Mallan]

Bhael Fire, on 12 March 2014 - 10:07 AM, said:

I can't find the specific post, but the devs have made various remarks since closed beta that they want to keep Inner Sphere ACs different from DOT weapons like lasers.

I did, however, find two comments from ATD that corroborate that sentiment:






So, not sure if their position on this has changed, but I think pinpoint damage with IS ACs is here to stay. However, we may see future weapon additions like RAC and Clan ACs with some sort of DOT mechanic.

A RAC would fire a 5 round clip of 2 and 5 point shots... effectively 2.5 times as much damage as an UAC. I do love RACs

[Cimarb]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 March 2014 - 05:22 AM, said:

Any damage over 20 is a chance to score a knock down on TT... Just saying the rule already exists.

Khobai, on 11 March 2014 - 05:59 PM, said:

Getting knocked down purely because of RNG would be terrible though.

In MWO its possible to have a working gyroscope with a stability indicator. When your stability reaches 0 you should fall over. Taking damage should lower your stability. Gyro hits should lower stability. Using jumpjets should lower your stability. Going full speed should lower your stability. While standing still or moving slow should increase your stability. Not falling over should be more player skill than RNG.

Eldagore, on 11 March 2014 - 06:15 PM, said:

That sounds good, but again is related to pinpoint dmg. Taking dmg affecting stability would favor dmg spikes over sustained DPS, so n00b tube AC40 jagers would not only get advantage in pinpoint alpha, they would also get advantage in overwhelming gyros. Make the threshold high enough to absorb that kind of alpha without a gauranteed knockdown means anything less is pointless.

I think the Knockdown mechanics are a good idea to put in..... once we can fix the whole getting killed to fast thing. One thing at a time.

It doesn't have to be related to pinpoint damage, as you could have a single shot do "20" points towards knockdown, while a burst shot could do 5 hits at "5" points each, for a total of 25 points towards knockdown. Same situation as the DPS itself, where a single shot should do less DPS, but in a more concentrated area.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 12 March 2014 - 10:52 AM, said:

It doesn't have to be related to pinpoint damage, as you could have a single shot do "20" points towards knockdown, while a burst shot could do 5 hits at "5" points each, for a total of 25 points towards knockdown. Same situation as the DPS itself, where a single shot should do less DPS, but in a more concentrated area.

I think id feel more comfortable with putting in a KD on a balistic if we gave extra abilities to other weapons. Like maybe PPC fries sensors for a time.... or lasers increase heat (a little) or polarize the cockpit glass for a moment. Also maybe make missles shake more to compensate for the buff.

Though I will admit adding knock down to gause would be nice, since it needs something...

just my own thoughts there.

Edited by Varent, 12 March 2014 - 10:59 AM.

[Cimarb]

Varent, on 12 March 2014 - 10:59 AM, said:

I think id feel more comfortable with putting in a KD on a balistic if we gave extra abilities to other weapons. Like maybe PPC fries sensors for a time.... or lasers increase heat (a little) or polarize the cockpit glass for a moment. Also maybe make missles shake more to compensate for the buff.

Though I will admit adding knock down to gause would be nice, since it needs something...

just my own thoughts there.

I'm having a blast with my GaussJager right now, but a nice knockdown affect would be icing on the cake, lol.

I agree with the other quirks, though. I think lasers could do heat damage like a flamer, but maybe only on internal damage. PPCs already have a sensor "fry" affect on ECMs, but maybe it could affect the radar or something. I think LRMs already have enough shake to them, personally, but they could always be "buffed" with a toggle to do direct/indirect flight paths instead.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 12 March 2014 - 11:31 AM, said:

I'm having a blast with my GaussJager right now, but a nice knockdown affect would be icing on the cake, lol.

I agree with the other quirks, though. I think lasers could do heat damage like a flamer, but maybe only on internal damage. PPCs already have a sensor "fry" affect on ECMs, but maybe it could affect the radar or something. I think LRMs already have enough shake to them, personally, but they could always be "buffed" with a toggle to do direct/indirect flight paths instead.

I tried the gause jager, just wasnt my cup of tea, but then I dont like long range warfare. I think it would give it a nice niche to have something have KD in game if you give it to it. Might see it really played again. Though I think it would have to be heavily... controlled on when it gives KD. maybe a chance of or something.

[Cimarb]

Varent, on 12 March 2014 - 11:33 AM, said:

I tried the gause jager, just wasnt my cup of tea, but then I dont like long range warfare. I think it would give it a nice niche to have something have KD in game if you give it to it. Might see it really played again. Though I think it would have to be heavily... controlled on when it gives KD. maybe a chance of or something.

Definitely. Anything that had KD added would have to have a longer recycle time than the KD itself, and you would have to do some sort of KD immunity for a short duration to prevent griefing. For instance, if the Gauss had KD, I have two on my Jäger, so I could effectively stunlock an opponent unless there was a very small chance of it happening. It couldn't be like the ECM-stun of the PPC, basically, which is 3 seconds for both the stun and the recharge.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 12 March 2014 - 11:42 AM, said:

Definitely. Anything that had KD added would have to have a longer recycle time than the KD itself, and you would have to do some sort of KD immunity for a short duration to prevent griefing. For instance, if the Gauss had KD, I have two on my Jäger, so I could effectively stunlock an opponent unless there was a very small chance of it happening. It couldn't be like the ECM-stun of the PPC, basically, which is 3 seconds for both the stun and the recharge.

ya know... a degree of KD immunity could also allow for KD to be reintigrated for collision...

[OneEyed Jack]

Sprouticus, on 12 March 2014 - 07:38 AM, said:

Yes, it is your age. Hit detection was HORRIBLE. Lag shooting was required,

Lag shooting has nothing to do with whether the the system registers a valid hit. Lag shooting is simply about getting the shot to meet the target in the first place.

[Coralld]

Bhael Fire, on 12 March 2014 - 10:07 AM, said:

I can't find the specific post, but the devs have made various remarks since closed beta that they want to keep Inner Sphere ACs different from DOT weapons like lasers.

I did, however, find two comments from ATD that corroborate that sentiment:






So, not sure if their position on this has changed, but I think pinpoint damage with IS ACs is here to stay. However, we may see future weapon additions like RAC and Clan ACs with some sort of DOT mechanic.

Thanks for providing quotes on their stance at the time.

That being said, Paul did state that they wanted or were looking into to change up the way some weapons and systems behaved/functioned for balance reasons. So there is at least a possibility that they changed their stance on ACs, just wish some one on the Dev team would come out and say yes, no, looking into it, or possibly considering.

[wanderer]

PGI has repeatedly done things they had "no intention" on doing if they thought it'd bring in more players.

3PV and coolant flushes, for example.

[Coralld]

wanderer, on 13 March 2014 - 05:14 AM, said:

PGI has repeatedly done things they had "no intention" on doing if they thought it'd bring in more players.

3PV and coolant flushes, for example.

Very true. However, the coolant flush was an issue at the time sense we had no idea how it was going to behave but when we found out it was a 1 time deal per match and that it cost C-bills it was really a none issues, 3PV on the other hand, well, all you need to do is go look into the history to see the outrage that has caused and for good reason.

But back to PGI changing their stances, yeah, they are like pancakes, always flip flopping on things, and this is one instance where I would not only be fine but also happy to see that they go with a burst fire rout, hopefully like what was mentioned before here with the missile tube style for ACs. That would be very interesting to say the least.

[Lightfoot]

Laser duration is too long, DHS needs to be full 2.0, Ghost heat needs to be replaced by Battletech Heat penalties to speed, aim, shutdown and engine explosion. And the Mechs would need to be tougher to handle it, but you would have a much better game that everyone could gauge and understand and play.

[Artgathan]

Lightfoot, on 13 March 2014 - 08:00 PM, said:

DHS needs to be full 2.0

Fun Fact: as long as you carry 17 DHS or less they function as "true" DHS on a mastered mech. (Essentially, the Heat Dissipation Bonus from the Mech Skills on the Engine DHS makes up for the fact that the 8 external DHS are working at 1.4). Even if you mount 30 DHS (which is a mech carrying a 400 STD engine and then nothing except DHS) it functions at 92% of the TT dissipation rate.

The problem here is not "heat dissipating slowly", it's "weapons firing quickly".

[Mcgral18]

Artgathan, on 14 March 2014 - 04:37 AM, said:

Fun Fact: as long as you carry 17 DHS or less they function as "true" DHS on a mastered mech. (Essentially, the Heat Dissipation Bonus from the Mech Skills on the Engine DHS makes up for the fact that the 8 external DHS are working at 1.4). Even if you mount 30 DHS (which is a mech carrying a 400 STD engine and then nothing except DHS) it functions at 92% of the TT dissipation rate.

The problem here is not "heat dissipating slowly", it's "weapons firing quickly".

You could make the weapons have proper TT damage and heat ratios with stock amor and while it would indeed increase TTK, FLD will still be superior, since you still can't spread it. Unless they didn't do all that damage in a single shot, but over 10 seconds *gasp*


I sure wish PGI would have done it properly though, it would have made this less of a twitch shooter.