9 replies to this topic

[Tombstoner]

I understand convergence to be a ray traced from each weapon to a point in space that moves either closer to or further away from the mech such that the convergent point is resting on the targeted surface. The rate of change is what give rise to targeting issues when you cross a ridge line or stop targeting your team mates back for a new target 1000 meters away. it takes time for the convergent spot to move.

PGI had issues with the way this functioned. adjusting the rate of convergence such that early shots didn't form an x shaped pattern completely missing your target, as your right arm weapons missed to the left and the left missed to the right even thought you where aiming dead on for the CT. now we have a convergent rate near instantaneous creating pinpoint alpha shots.

My question is why have the convergent point move between the mech and the targeted spot. if the rate of convergent is too slow you get targeting issues, too fast and its too good. simply have the weapons always tarting a spot 20,000 meters away and then converge inwards to the target.

one thing that would be needed is a rate of change for the position of the targeting spot so that if your aiming at a target 200 meters away if you move off that spot to target something 250 meters away the 50 meter distance triggers a reset of the convergence point to max range and then convergence begins.

This way you are always either shooting almost parallel with the convergent spot behind the target not in front of it, thus you get damage spread and with time on target perfect convergent shots to the CT..

This can be represented by 2 parallel bars moving closer together over time to form a single line representing pin point accuracy/convergence. A clan targeting computer can make the convergent rate faster by 50%.

Sorry if this has been discussed or explained before,

[Mister Blastman]

How about no convergence at all? That'd make me super happy.

But, your idea of delayed convergence is good depending on how long you are talking about it taking... one second? two? three? five? The longer the better without a targeting computer and perhaps dramatically increase the time if your mech is moving.

[Bobzilla]

Well, then there's the drawback of a small fast light running circles around you up close and being completely unable to hit it as your wepons fire on either side of it because your arms are further apart then the size of the light and are shooting almost straight out to 20000m.

[Joseph Mallan]

Thats why I used to bring SRMs.. A Burst weapon that didn't to be pin point to hit.

[Tombstoner]

Mister Blastman, on 10 April 2014 - 06:38 AM, said:

How about no convergence at all? That'd make me super happy.

But, your idea of delayed convergence is good depending on how long you are talking about it taking... one second? two? three? five? The longer the better without a targeting computer and perhaps dramatically increase the time if your mech is moving.

how long needs to be determined by game play and how it feels. i would limit the effects of speed to a max 10-20% that scales with speed. standing still and its 0 moving at 175 kph and its 100% of the modifier. A small but notable effect on targeting one that is completely controlled by the player.

No reason different weapons couldn't be given different convergent speeds based on weapon tonnage thus making medium lasers very effective at converging.

So light mechs that get in close are handled by srms and medium lasers, mg's. but a mech out fitted as a sniper or heavy brawler 2x gauss vs. 2x ac-20 should have some issues with short range brawling a light.

Edited by Tombstoner, 10 April 2014 - 07:25 AM.

[Mister Blastman]

Bobzilla, on 10 April 2014 - 06:56 AM, said:

Well, then there's the drawback of a small fast light running circles around you up close and being completely unable to hit it as your wepons fire on either side of it because your arms are further apart then the size of the light and are shooting almost straight out to 20000m.

Oh, you can still hit a light mech up close. You learn how to account for your weapon on your side and adjust your aim accordingly while firing chain fire or have weapons grouped by location. It isn't hard.

Team Fortress 2 changed the soldier so the rocket launcher was on the right or left side. Up close or near walls, this made a huge difference. It even mattered for rocket jumping and shooting people in the air with rockets. You had to learn how to manually adjust your aim instantaneously to account for it. As one of the top soldiers (I must admit I wasn't the best) in the game for a long time playing at the highest league levels, I can tell you we did this just fine.

And so shall we in Mechwarrior if a mechanic like this were introduced.

[Tombstoner]

There should be a technical reason for this to not work and I'm wonder what? Otherwise its a fix for PGI's original design intent: skill based targeting that produces damage spread and or perfect shots.

Edited by Tombstoner, 10 April 2014 - 07:28 AM.

[Mister Blastman]

Tombstoner, on 10 April 2014 - 07:23 AM, said:

So light mechs that get in close are handled by srms and medium lasers, mg's. but a mech out fitted as a sniper or heavy brawler 2x gauss vs. 2x ac-20 should have some issues with short range brawling a light.

I like this, however, I don't think the AC 20 should be penalized up close like a Gauss or PPC 'mech. Perhaps there be a slight penalty to AC 40 and realistically speaking, it shouldn't be easy to hit with given how brutal the end result (another argument for damage over time AC 20 or burst fire), but Gauss + PPC @ 100 meters shouldn't be easy mode like it is right now versus a light. Of course, if we did do a change like this, I'd have to argue for remove of charge time on Gauss.

Another part of me still thinks recycle time for sniper weapons should be increased to 6 - 8 seconds as a further penalty.

I'd like to see convergence take several seconds. Say three to five if moving and one to two if standing still. A targeting computer would significantly decrease this to zero to a half if standing still and one to two seconds if moving. Targeting computers cost a lot of crits and tonnage. Might as well make them worthwhile. Then again, if it added in lead-computation sights to tell you where to put your crosshairs... might have to adjust this to be longer.

Tombstoner, on 10 April 2014 - 07:27 AM, said:

There should be a technical reason for this to not work and I'm wonder what? Otherwise its a fix for PGI's original design intent: skill based targeting that produces damage spread and or perfect shots.

I think the problem is PGI employs far more artists than they do coders. They want to pump out more pay assets. The hilarious thing is their plan is backfiring. By not having enough coders to fix and improve the actual gameplay, they are pissing off the userbase, alienating them and watching them leave the game.

[Tombstoner]

Mister Blastman, on 10 April 2014 - 07:32 AM, said:

I like this, however, I don't think the AC 20 should be penalized up close like a Gauss or PPC 'mech. Perhaps there be a slight penalty to AC 40 and realistically speaking, it shouldn't be easy to hit with given how brutal the end result (another argument for damage over time AC 20 or burst fire), but Gauss + PPC @ 100 meters shouldn't be easy mode like it is right now versus a light. Of course, if we did do a change like this, I'd have to argue for remove of charge time on Gauss.

Another part of me still thinks recycle time for sniper weapons should be increased to 6 - 8 seconds as a further penalty.

I'd like to see convergence take several seconds. Say three to five if moving and one to two if standing still. A targeting computer would significantly decrease this to zero to a half if standing still and one to two seconds if moving. Targeting computers cost a lot of crits and tonnage. Might as well make them worthwhile. Then again, if it added in lead-computation sights to tell you where to put your crosshairs... might have to adjust this to be longer.



I think the problem is PGI employs far more artists than they do coders. They want to pump out more pay assets. The hilarious thing is their plan is backfiring. By not having enough coders to fix and improve the actual gameplay, they are pissing off the userbase, alienating them and watching them leave the game.

Well the charge up on the gauss should be removed anyway.

I think the programers they do have split there time amongst multiple projects. MWO is not PGI's only project I'm sad to say.

I still regard the game as broken until bundled weapons are not functioning as one large weapon. many good idead have
gone unanswered so why not find a way to make PGI's ideas work.

[Demuder]

Unfortunately, I find it very unlikely that PGI will ever touch conversion again. They seem to either be completely oblivious to the problems instant conversion creates (rather unlikely with the myriads of posts describing them, providing insightful solutions to it, etc) or they just don't want to further aggravate people with mad aiming skillz after the reticule shake during jumpjetting. Honestly, why there is no circle of fire relative to your mech's speed or why is firing possible while a mech is airborne, is totally beyond my understaning.

They actually believe that ghost heat solved the problem, while in reality, it just shifted boating. To be fair, the snipefest and poptarting have been toned down a fair bit, but I am eagerly waiting to see the new horrors that will come with the Clan mechs and weaponry - unless of course they are so nerfed to the ground that they behave exactly like IS mechs and weapons.

Edited by dimstog, 14 April 2014 - 08:26 AM.