307 replies to this topic

[Destructicus]

KraftySOT, on 17 September 2014 - 02:29 PM, said:

Its honestly a giant pile of unrealistic crap, even if you arent going for TT, as WELL as being a bad gameplay mechanic, that weapons are so accurate.

How does a medium laser firmly mounted in your torso, "converge" on anything? The entire laser has to actually move. Not just the fore lens, but the entire apparatus. An Autocannon is the same thing...and smooth bores? Those are going to be silly inaccurate. Rifling is why weapons are as accurate as they are and theyre still not THAT accurate. Alot of that is the shooting platform (a human being)

But none of you can deny that in MWO, even at a full run with your arms bouncing all over on the model...youre weapons still hit a pin point perfect target under your reticle...which is maddeningly stupid.

At least some amount of time ala WoT would work better, with a system more like any other FPS on the market would be better.

oh yes
I love the ****** "realism vs video game" argument
This is a game with giants robots shooting each other across the galaxy and suspension of belief ends with ballistics?
I keep on citing that lore explains everything you're complaining about, but you are incapable of understanding anything you don't want to.

[KraftySOT]

And if you actually apply logic to the TT...which rules are an extrapolation of whats happening...its pretty damned sure that the pilots of these mechs ARE aiming at the enemy mechs when they pull the trigger, just like we are.

What happens between the firing, and the hit...is where the problem is. In the TT you dont hit that often, in this you hit with near perfect accuracy.

This isnt because the MWs in BT are bad, and were great...its because its inherint in their system, that these weapons are flying all over the place and arent that accurate. It does seem to imply, that two mechs at a run, have a very hard time hitting each other.

So at the VERY least, you need to have that cursor you aim with, flying all over the place when you run. Arms too.

[pwnface]

KraftySOT, on 17 September 2014 - 02:23 PM, said:

They arent complicated:

http://docs.unity3d....cs.Raycast.html

Infact its one of the easiest parts of a shooter.

Scripts for this already exist, for free, for the Crysis engine. Infact its already IN the crysis engine package.



You also cant traverse a mounted weapon. Look at world war two figher planes. You had to set the covergence manually before flight, by physically moving the gun.

A battlemech is too cramped for all the weapons to be mounted with the ability to converge and in the rules, there are special cases made for mechs that have weapons that can do that.

Weapons that are mounted to something have no recoil really, but also cant traverse unless the mount does. Which they dont in a battlemech no mountin the weapon in a turret, swivel, or on an arm with a lower actuator.

Are you suggesting a mechanic where we need to manually adjust convergence distances for our weapons in the mechlab or something? I agree that fixed mounted weapons wouldn't be able to gimbal to adjust convergence in real life, but it doesn't make for a fun game. This would also not fix the issue with mechs that have their weapons loaded on one side such as RA/RT because an arm mounted weapon would be able to adjust independently of a torso to converge correctly.

KraftySOT, on 17 September 2014 - 02:23 PM, said:

But none of you can deny that in MWO, even at a full run with your arms bouncing all over on the model...youre weapons still hit a pin point perfect target under your reticle...which is maddeningly stupid.

Have you heard of gyros?

[Kaveman1371]

S13gtastic, on 17 September 2014 - 10:22 AM, said:

might as well bring in reactors being able to go critical and go super nova, or manualy be able to to hit the giant red button to start a self destruct.

YES!!!!!!!! PLEASE BRING THIS IN!!!!!! run in with a kit fox and self destruct sooooooo much fun

[KraftySOT]

Destructicus, on 17 September 2014 - 02:33 PM, said:

oh yes
I love the ****** "realism vs video game" argument
This is a game with giants robots shooting each other across the galaxy and suspension of belief ends with ballistics?
I keep on citing that lore explains everything you're complaining about, but you are incapable of understanding anything you don't want to.

They arent robots:

Theyre also not that much more complex than this:

http://3.bp.blogspot...ield+future.png

Almost all the technology in Btech, was "futuretech" in the 1980s. Everything they came up with in that is based on real world theoretical things that mostly have all now become practical. Titanium honeycombs? Got it. Myomer? Got it. Atomic lasers? Got it.

Now will we ever build these things? Of course not a single 15kg ATGM will take one of these bad boys down instantly and leak radiation all over the place. Its impractical and pointless. Its cool though.


But not nessacarly from a realism stand point, but at least a science fiction one.

And I could say the same thing of you, youre completely ignoring that theres no real honest to god reason for us to blast 12 lasers into a single spot on a mech. You really have to reach to make that feasible.

Its just what they had in 1996, so its what we have now. Even though with technology most of the iterations of the series have tried to do something about it.

Now that were in 2014...I think its time to go ahead and push up into the 21st century and shore up alot of things that led to bad iterations in the past.

[KraftySOT]

pwnface, on 17 September 2014 - 02:35 PM, said:

Are you suggesting a mechanic where we need to manually adjust convergence distances for our weapons in the mechlab or something? I agree that fixed mounted weapons wouldn't be able to gimbal to adjust convergence in real life, but it doesn't make for a fun game. This would also not fix the issue with mechs that have their weapons loaded on one side such as RA/RT because an arm mounted weapon would be able to adjust independently of a torso to converge correctly.



Have you heard of gyros?

Which werent that good in 1988...should we update everything based on current technology? Maxtech seems to think so. Im not going to argue that one way or another. But still, an arm weighing 14 tons is a little different than that demonstration. And how accurate is that, can it do each degree? At 1,000 meters, 1 degree traverses may not let you actually hit a target at all.

And no im not nessarcily saying we should set our convergence in the mech lab, but im definitely saying that the current convergence is ridiculous.

At least torso mounted weapons should just fire forward. Everyone likes the Banshee because you can blast stuff with torso weapons and use your arms for cover. An advantage to arm weapons would make them more valauble.

[Destructicus]

KraftySOT, on 17 September 2014 - 02:37 PM, said:

They arent robots:

Theyre also not that much more complex than this:

http://3.bp.blogspot...ield+future.png

Almost all the technology in Btech, was "futuretech" in the 1980s. Everything they came up with in that is based on real world theoretical things that mostly have all now become practical. Titanium honeycombs? Got it. Myomer? Got it. Atomic lasers? Got it.

Now will we ever build these things? Of course not a single 15kg ATGM will take one of these bad boys down instantly and leak radiation all over the place. Its impractical and pointless. Its cool though.


But not nessacarly from a realism stand point, but at least a science fiction one.

And I could say the same thing of you, youre completely ignoring that theres no real honest to god reason for us to blast 12 lasers into a single spot on a mech. You really have to reach to make that feasible.

Its just what they had in 1996, so its what we have now. Even though with technology most of the iterations of the series have tried to do something about it.

Now that were in 2014...I think its time to go ahead and push up into the 21st century and shore up alot of things that led to bad iterations in the past.

so you have a fixation with TT and think this game should be based upon it but still want to "shore up" things that led to bad iterations?
Weren't you just telling me how it has to be either or?
You're cherry picking your own points

[KraftySOT]

Kaveman1371, on 17 September 2014 - 02:36 PM, said:

YES!!!!!!!! PLEASE BRING THIS IN!!!!!! run in with a kit fox and self destruct sooooooo much fun

Yeah I have no problem with that.

Blowing yourself up is hilarious, and might help your team win. Of course you might get killed or legged first, or not even blow up.

And yeah engine explosions should definitely be in the game so lights have something to worry about when theyre humping some Atlas in the ass.

You can totally do that in the TT i have no problem with a 1 on 1 locust taking down an Atlas...I do have a problem with him doing it risk free. Even if only about 1 in 10 destroyed engines actually blow up....they should blow up...and that light should pay for his decision to hump the back of your leg.

[101011]

Destructicus, on 17 September 2014 - 01:43 PM, said:

Oh my god
You're hilarious
How did you make these huge leaps in logic to reach this point?
You're stuck in this "either or" mindset.

[KraftySOT]

Destructicus, on 17 September 2014 - 02:41 PM, said:

so you have a fixation with TT and think this game should be based upon it but still want to "shore up" things that led to bad iterations?
Weren't you just telling me how it has to be either or?
You're cherry picking your own points

Shore up as in, the things that arent TT. I see how my wording could be confusing there. Im not about to break my consistent set of points now.

[Metus regem]

Kaveman1371, on 17 September 2014 - 02:36 PM, said:

YES!!!!!!!! PLEASE BRING THIS IN!!!!!! run in with a kit fox and self destruct sooooooo much fun

A new form of loust trolling? Or would it become LOLcust?

[Destructicus]

KraftySOT, on 17 September 2014 - 02:44 PM, said:

Shore up as in, the things that arent TT. I see how my wording could be confusing there. Im not about to break my consistent set of points now.

You haven't been making points, you've been talking in circles, TT is not the holy grail of balance you make it out to be.

[KraftySOT]

And since that got brought up again...screw the rebels. Youre going to murders tens of thousands of people just doing a job who dont give a rats ass one way or another, because some religious farm boy jihadist hears voices in his head?

The rebels are freaking ISIS with laser swords.

The sith had the right idea. Just no code of ethics.

[pwnface]

KraftySOT, on 17 September 2014 - 02:41 PM, said:

Which werent that good in 1988...should we update everything based on current technology? Maxtech seems to think so. Im not going to argue that one way or another. But still, an arm weighing 14 tons is a little different than that demonstration. And how accurate is that, can it do each degree? At 1,000 meters, 1 degree traverses may not let you actually hit a target at all.

And no im not nessarcily saying we should set our convergence in the mech lab, but im definitely saying that the current convergence is ridiculous.

At least torso mounted weapons should just fire forward. Everyone likes the Banshee because you can blast stuff with torso weapons and use your arms for cover. An advantage to arm weapons would make them more valauble.

You jump from "Which werent that good in 1988...should we update everything based on current technology?"

to

"Almost all the technology in Btech, was "futuretech" in the 1980s. Everything they came up with in that is based on real world theoretical things that mostly have all now become practical. Titanium honeycombs? Got it. Myomer? Got it. Atomic lasers? Got it."

Didn't you just say TT is based on "futuretech", how is a gyro that works the way convergence does in MWO unfeasible for the future? You keep changing your mind and are contradicting yourself.

It sounds like you have this grand vision of what MWO should be in your mind but can't adhere to any rules or basis for discussion besides everything should be like TT/Lore.

[KraftySOT]

Metus regem, on 17 September 2014 - 02:45 PM, said:

A new form of loust trolling? Or would it become LOLcust?

of course its also dependent on the size of your engine, so a locust probably wouldnt do but 30 or 40 damage to you in 5 point clusters.

So the chances of a locust actually killing you by running up and suiciding is pretty remote. Youd have to be goobered, or youd have to be in a small mech yourself and let him shut down and blow up right next to you.

[Destructicus]

KraftySOT, on 17 September 2014 - 02:47 PM, said:

And since that got brought up again...screw the rebels. Youre going to murders tens of thousands of people just doing a job who dont give a rats ass one way or another, because some religious farm boy jihadist hears voices in his head?

The rebels are freaking ISIS with laser swords.

The sith had the right idea. Just no code of ethics.

you're just full of unpopular opinions aren't you?

[KraftySOT]

pwnface, on 17 September 2014 - 02:48 PM, said:

You jump from "Which werent that good in 1988...should we update everything based on current technology?"

to

"Almost all the technology in Btech, was "futuretech" in the 1980s. Everything they came up with in that is based on real world theoretical things that mostly have all now become practical. Titanium honeycombs? Got it. Myomer? Got it. Atomic lasers? Got it."

Didn't you just say TT is based on "futuretech", how is a gyro that works the way convergence does in MWO unfeasible for the future? You keep changing your mind and are contradicting yourself.

It sounds like you have this grand vision of what MWO should be in your mind but can't adhere to any rules or basis for discussion besides everything should be like TT/Lore.

Futuretech in the 1980s, was technology that were passing today. Thats what I meant,

Destructicus, on 17 September 2014 - 02:48 PM, said:

you're just full of unpopular opinions aren't you?

And I liked New Coke *throws my hands in the air*

I thought Firefly was a horrible show, and David Cross isnt funny. Theres a plethora...

[Pyrrho]

Destructicus, on 17 September 2014 - 02:48 PM, said:

you're just full of unpopular opinions aren't you?

Actually, he may have just quoted Randall from the movie Clerks. I am 100% for quoting Clerks

[KraftySOT]

Yup. Randall. Sorry.

So was the New Coke thing. If you didnt catch that.

[Destructicus]

Pyrrho, on 17 September 2014 - 02:50 PM, said:

Actually, he may have just quoted Randall from the movie Clerks. I am 100% for quoting Clerks

those contractors were innocent I guess, but the empire had to go